Hi to all, this being my first post here. I'd be glad of some advice, if one can categorize forum posts from strangers as advice. Brace yourselves because this may be lengthy. Also, I apologize in advance for my tortured syntax. I am a recovering academic.
1) I have a B.A. and an advanced master's degree in philosophical theology, with particular emphasis on cultural phenomenology and aesthetics.
2) In the natural order of things, people with degrees in the above tend to go into a) academia, which was MY plan until it foundered on the rocks of no funding and zero job prospects at the end of a Ph.D., b) religious vocation, or c) abysmal depression and general financial ruin. B appears to be my only short-term option, at least until funding for A materializes, if it ever does.
3) That B is my only short-term option is not to say that B is a solution. On the contrary, personal experience has taught me that churches and other religious organizations tend to view employees (and let's be honest, that's what I would be) as worthy of a salary roughly equivalent of a fry-cook's. In short, I do not trust my prospective employers to pay me adequately, and would like to diversify so as to ensure that I don't end up an indentured servant to a group of well-meaning mouth breathers whose mission it is to "keep me poor and humble," as the saying goes.
4) I have at least SOME notion that I would find architecture agreeable and appropriate to my natural talents. I submit; I have worked in construction since age 12; I was remarkably good at high-school geometry, yet remarkably bad at algebra/calculus; I am comfortable with, and adept at moving between highly conceptual and highly practical modes of thinking (in fact, my ideal career would involve just that sort of constant shifting); I love the act of design in general, and I am fascinated by residential design in particular; being a natural teacher, I have the "people skills" that many architects apparently lack.
5) On the other hand, I have some question as to whether or not my notion is correct. I submit; though I love art in general, I am not an artist, nor can I draw anything much more complex than stick men; I have no talent as a mathematician or a physicist.
6) I have access to two state programs (North Carolina State and Virginia Tech) that are both dirt cheap, and I have no family and no other serious financial obligations, not even student loans. Obviously, I would be taking a 3 year M.Arch.
Now, with all that being said, here are my questions.
1) I am considering this degree with a view to obtaining a DEGREE of financial independence that B does not afford me. In other words, I would divide my time between the two. Is it reasonable to expect that I would be able to do so, or should I find some other instrument of independence?
2) As I mentioned above, I love residential design. Is it reasonable to expect that I will be able to work almost exclusively in that sector, to the extent that I will have a source of income reliable enough to allow me to extend a middle finger, should that become necessary? Also, is the M.Arch. the way to go if this is the sector in which I want to work?
Any answers, general thoughts, snorts of derision, etc. would be greatly appreciated. Finally, I would just like to say that I find it very surreal to be considering architecture as a quasi-career option, since I have met so many engineering/architecture refugees in the course of my education. Have they been whipped and driven out, tables overturned?
If you are looking for financial independence as a major reason for pursuing architecture, then you should look elsewhere. Architects make very low salaries (compared to other professionals), and the profession is very cyclical, meaning that you could find yourself unemployed at the next economic recession.
The vast majority of homes (~99%) in the US are not designed by architects.
Architecture is, to evoke a religious metaphor, a calling. The rewards are often more ethereal than material.
I have found my architectural education totally different then what I expected when I entered school.
Any program worth the $$$ will expose you to different ideas/ issues/ problems that you may have never been exposed to otherwise. New passion will arise as a result.
Wanting to work strictly in housing now does not mean you will want to work strictly in housing by the end of your education.
The thought process and problem solving skills you get form your arch education will cause you to ask challenging questions about everything you encounter in the built environment.
If you are thinking of going to school to satisfy a specific ends, then you should go for the shortest, easiest, and cheapest path possible. But if you think this may be a field that you could fall in love with, you should keep an open mind and understand that your thought process will change because of your education.
It sounds like you are pretty set on pursuing a career in architecture. You have a solid accademic background so you should have no problem in grad school. I've been working in the field for three years and could honestly think of nothing I'd rather do. We put up with a lot of headaches, a plenty of heartaches, and bullshit so extensive and so thick that it hurts just thinking about it. But we all love it and have accepted that as simply the nature of the beast.
If you are looking for "financial independence" you need to go into architecture school knowing that you will get paid mediocre (at best) as a young architect but it's good enough to live off of if you manage your recources well. Dispense with any notion that you will make anything even remotely close to 6-figures when start off. It just isn't the case. But this is a profession where you work your way up and prove yourself down the stretch.
Thanks for the responses. Perhaps I should clarify what I mean by "financial independence." I do not mean that I see architecture as a cash cow that will make me independently wealthy. Both from personal observation and second-hand accounts, I have come to realize that most people in religious work are, as I said, indentured servants. Because of the fact that they have no other viable source of income, no qualification to work in any field other than the one they currently do, they make decisions on the basis of what will please whoever is in charge of the finances of their church/organization. Should they have more integrity than that? Yes. Do they have a gun to their heads, or worse still, to the heads of whatever family members might be dependent on them? Also, yes.
For me, that kind of situation is intolerable, so "financial independence" as I use it means the ability to say to the implicit tyranny of a deacon board (or similar governmental instrument), "I'm sorry, but I can't go along with your silliness. If that makes you unusually enraged and tempts you to fire me, that's fine. I have a way to provide for myself and my family." I realize that most archinect posters/readers are not going to be familiar with this context, but I think there's a note somewhere in what I've said that can resonate with a group of people who are largely dependent for subsistence on the whims of other people (here I am thinking of clients) who can often be boorish and obtuse. I have seen too many good men and women make poor decisions because they knew that to do otherwise would mean termination and a lengthy job search. I don't care to have that happen to me.
I also wanted to re-emphasize my first question. Am I going to be able to keep my feet planted in both worlds, or is one going to dominate the other to the extent that the other wastes away?
It is hard to be a 'casual architect', at least starting off. You will, most likely, be working long hours with low pay as you 'pay your dues'.
I took things from the opposite side as you - I wanted something that would pay an income and allow me to dabble as I wanted to in architecture. You gotta have some foundation of stability to be flexible and choose what you want to do.
That said, your background would probably help you in the archi-babble circles (your post is quite entertaining and I enjoyed your cynicism - you'll fit right in!). So, you could possibly move into a teaching position quickly, which would enable some flexibility. You might find the ramblings in the over-intellectualized circles fulfilling and engaging.
You can dabble in architecture as your sort of secondary thing but don't tell your bosses that. In this day in age int he profession it seams as if they are looking for any excuse to can people.
Jun 22, 09 3:40 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Yet another aspiring architect
Hi to all, this being my first post here. I'd be glad of some advice, if one can categorize forum posts from strangers as advice. Brace yourselves because this may be lengthy. Also, I apologize in advance for my tortured syntax. I am a recovering academic.
1) I have a B.A. and an advanced master's degree in philosophical theology, with particular emphasis on cultural phenomenology and aesthetics.
2) In the natural order of things, people with degrees in the above tend to go into a) academia, which was MY plan until it foundered on the rocks of no funding and zero job prospects at the end of a Ph.D., b) religious vocation, or c) abysmal depression and general financial ruin. B appears to be my only short-term option, at least until funding for A materializes, if it ever does.
3) That B is my only short-term option is not to say that B is a solution. On the contrary, personal experience has taught me that churches and other religious organizations tend to view employees (and let's be honest, that's what I would be) as worthy of a salary roughly equivalent of a fry-cook's. In short, I do not trust my prospective employers to pay me adequately, and would like to diversify so as to ensure that I don't end up an indentured servant to a group of well-meaning mouth breathers whose mission it is to "keep me poor and humble," as the saying goes.
4) I have at least SOME notion that I would find architecture agreeable and appropriate to my natural talents. I submit; I have worked in construction since age 12; I was remarkably good at high-school geometry, yet remarkably bad at algebra/calculus; I am comfortable with, and adept at moving between highly conceptual and highly practical modes of thinking (in fact, my ideal career would involve just that sort of constant shifting); I love the act of design in general, and I am fascinated by residential design in particular; being a natural teacher, I have the "people skills" that many architects apparently lack.
5) On the other hand, I have some question as to whether or not my notion is correct. I submit; though I love art in general, I am not an artist, nor can I draw anything much more complex than stick men; I have no talent as a mathematician or a physicist.
6) I have access to two state programs (North Carolina State and Virginia Tech) that are both dirt cheap, and I have no family and no other serious financial obligations, not even student loans. Obviously, I would be taking a 3 year M.Arch.
Now, with all that being said, here are my questions.
1) I am considering this degree with a view to obtaining a DEGREE of financial independence that B does not afford me. In other words, I would divide my time between the two. Is it reasonable to expect that I would be able to do so, or should I find some other instrument of independence?
2) As I mentioned above, I love residential design. Is it reasonable to expect that I will be able to work almost exclusively in that sector, to the extent that I will have a source of income reliable enough to allow me to extend a middle finger, should that become necessary? Also, is the M.Arch. the way to go if this is the sector in which I want to work?
Any answers, general thoughts, snorts of derision, etc. would be greatly appreciated. Finally, I would just like to say that I find it very surreal to be considering architecture as a quasi-career option, since I have met so many engineering/architecture refugees in the course of my education. Have they been whipped and driven out, tables overturned?
If you are looking for financial independence as a major reason for pursuing architecture, then you should look elsewhere. Architects make very low salaries (compared to other professionals), and the profession is very cyclical, meaning that you could find yourself unemployed at the next economic recession.
The vast majority of homes (~99%) in the US are not designed by architects.
Architecture is, to evoke a religious metaphor, a calling. The rewards are often more ethereal than material.
I have found my architectural education totally different then what I expected when I entered school.
Any program worth the $$$ will expose you to different ideas/ issues/ problems that you may have never been exposed to otherwise. New passion will arise as a result.
Wanting to work strictly in housing now does not mean you will want to work strictly in housing by the end of your education.
The thought process and problem solving skills you get form your arch education will cause you to ask challenging questions about everything you encounter in the built environment.
If you are thinking of going to school to satisfy a specific ends, then you should go for the shortest, easiest, and cheapest path possible. But if you think this may be a field that you could fall in love with, you should keep an open mind and understand that your thought process will change because of your education.
It sounds like you are pretty set on pursuing a career in architecture. You have a solid accademic background so you should have no problem in grad school. I've been working in the field for three years and could honestly think of nothing I'd rather do. We put up with a lot of headaches, a plenty of heartaches, and bullshit so extensive and so thick that it hurts just thinking about it. But we all love it and have accepted that as simply the nature of the beast.
If you are looking for "financial independence" you need to go into architecture school knowing that you will get paid mediocre (at best) as a young architect but it's good enough to live off of if you manage your recources well. Dispense with any notion that you will make anything even remotely close to 6-figures when start off. It just isn't the case. But this is a profession where you work your way up and prove yourself down the stretch.
Thanks for the responses. Perhaps I should clarify what I mean by "financial independence." I do not mean that I see architecture as a cash cow that will make me independently wealthy. Both from personal observation and second-hand accounts, I have come to realize that most people in religious work are, as I said, indentured servants. Because of the fact that they have no other viable source of income, no qualification to work in any field other than the one they currently do, they make decisions on the basis of what will please whoever is in charge of the finances of their church/organization. Should they have more integrity than that? Yes. Do they have a gun to their heads, or worse still, to the heads of whatever family members might be dependent on them? Also, yes.
For me, that kind of situation is intolerable, so "financial independence" as I use it means the ability to say to the implicit tyranny of a deacon board (or similar governmental instrument), "I'm sorry, but I can't go along with your silliness. If that makes you unusually enraged and tempts you to fire me, that's fine. I have a way to provide for myself and my family." I realize that most archinect posters/readers are not going to be familiar with this context, but I think there's a note somewhere in what I've said that can resonate with a group of people who are largely dependent for subsistence on the whims of other people (here I am thinking of clients) who can often be boorish and obtuse. I have seen too many good men and women make poor decisions because they knew that to do otherwise would mean termination and a lengthy job search. I don't care to have that happen to me.
I also wanted to re-emphasize my first question. Am I going to be able to keep my feet planted in both worlds, or is one going to dominate the other to the extent that the other wastes away?
It is hard to be a 'casual architect', at least starting off. You will, most likely, be working long hours with low pay as you 'pay your dues'.
I took things from the opposite side as you - I wanted something that would pay an income and allow me to dabble as I wanted to in architecture. You gotta have some foundation of stability to be flexible and choose what you want to do.
That said, your background would probably help you in the archi-babble circles (your post is quite entertaining and I enjoyed your cynicism - you'll fit right in!). So, you could possibly move into a teaching position quickly, which would enable some flexibility. You might find the ramblings in the over-intellectualized circles fulfilling and engaging.
You can dabble in architecture as your sort of secondary thing but don't tell your bosses that. In this day in age int he profession it seams as if they are looking for any excuse to can people.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.