After a few months of being a regular of this forum, I found a similar trend and I asked the question of whether the opinions on this forum are representative of the profession in the states as a whole. I don't remember any good answer and came to my own conclusion that it's not. This forum, like many others, is like a sample questionnarie, but the subjects (those answering the questions) are not randomly picked.

I also believe it's the norm for the more negatively biased users of ANY forum to speak out.

I'm in the M.Arch program and everyone loves what they're doing, each to varying degrees of intensity of course. But then again, if you're in the M.Arch program, you better know that you love it.

Yes, the squeaky wheel gets the grease in anonymous public forums: those with an axe to grind are inherently likelier to post than those who are sanguine. Archinect's discussion board posts do not constitute anything like a random sampling of views.

The negativity about various aspects of architecture found here is the intersection of this "glass half full" tendency and the specialized topic of the site itself.

Plenty of people have good things to say about our field. You'll meet more of them out in the real world.

i love my job. run own office in tokyo after time in london and education in canada (where i was born and raised)...

pay is not great but if we can survive economy i expect it will become good. you will not, however, ever make as much as your clients unless you become partner and/or go into developer-ing. architects simply are not compensated particularly well.

Architecture sucks.

Nice post, citizen.

Zahu, there are a lot of regulars here who both love the profession AND love the ridiculousness of the profession. I've said it so often I worry everyone is sick of hearing it: I wake up every morning eager and happy to do what I get to do all day. I've felt this way since undergrad, too. When I'm having a bad day or frustrated, I rant a bit here to blow off steam, but that tiny electronic tantrum is always more than enough to get me back to work and back to enjoying it.

No, I'm not wealthy, but I'm comfortable, my 15-year-old car is customized and cool, and I'm happy.

BTW, do be sensitive about your gender-specifics around here: In my case, I'm the architect, but I'm also the "hot wife". Women are architects, too.

right on Bell!

cool thanks for the comments guys, I would imagine there are draw backs in any field but this site seems to make things a little over whelming. Especially for a new member. These aren't the greatest of times either so I understand where all the negativity is coming from but it is awesome to know there are resourceful positive members on this forum. I do really enjoy architecture and I am ready for the challenges of school, I think I am anyway. I try to stay positive.

bell, I was really only to referring to one local architect and his wife. I am needless to say envious of the guy LOL but sorry if it came off as offensive .

Please give this forum a second chance. After you read a few threads a day for a number of months, you will learn who to listen to and who to avoid. There are a number of regular posters who have great insight into this profession, and I personally have learned a great deal from them.

Find a thread about something you think is cool, then post something relevant in it. You'll probably get positive feeback in appreciation.

oops... concurrent posts, Zahu.

Hey George, the world doesn't owe you diddlysquat because you are studying architecture. If you think the kitchen is hot, there are other forums to feel "happy". And take your accusations and fast judgments with you.

No offense taken, Zahu. Also, if you have a few more years in school hopefully the economy will be better by the time you get out!

negativity always seems to be a theme in architecture (probably due to the heavy criticism based education - which i don't particular mind), but recently, as seen on the threads in the forum, the economy has taken us down to a new level...so i am glad that it's recognized, and i hope that this can be turning point for some of us to practice active positivity...my office has gone through a 70% staff reduction, and i am my hours have been cut to 24hrs/week and I've never tried so hard to make jokes, cumpliment people, and make positive comments on other people's (including competitor's) work...

our profession needs positivity...so hang around!!!

i lied...64% staff reduction...see, things are not so bad!!!

the beauty with archinect is you can state whatever you want without anyone holding a grudge (similar to a critique, i suppose, as simples noted). and you're sharing with many like-minded individuals who can somewhat relate to whatever the hell it is you bitch or rant about.

if we all agreed on how everything aligned and discussed how we loved architecture all the time - that would just be plain effing boring.

the (archinect) school blogs and features are somewhat more positive in tone than the discussions, i think - if you're looking for inspiration.

thats great news for that 6% simples! haha

morality degree zero.... you have this all twisted, We are not talking about the world here we are talking about a forum, which doesn't owe me anything. This thread was just a sample to see where all the hate is coming from. If everyone left the kitchen because of a little heat there would be no great chefs ;)

alignment sucks

hell, i'm currently unemployed and i still stay up all night working on personal projects because i love what i do.

i do not however like having to gather an unemployment check.

as for the state of the forum, i can honestly say i have been far to busy over the past 4 years to give a damn. i do love reading the interesting threads when they are around. some of them can range from the jaw dropping and infuriating, to the uplifting or downright inspiring.

when it comes to the profession itself, not so sure i am in love with it. not in its current state anyway, not as a whole. not here in the u.s.a. i try not to let that affect me too much though, as i believe we all have the ability to go our own route and succeed with enough perseverence.

i hope that's lucid, as i am just now going to sleep at 6am. pillow, here i come.

School is nothing like the profession... Don't fall in love with it, cause a soon as you do, they pull the rug out from under ya.

momentum actually raises an interesting distinction, one about which we could nuerote all day: I love the practice, but I also in many ways dislike the profession. i do worry about our relevance in the coming decades, as we don't seem to be able to position ourselves as important players in the totality of the built world. See the commenter here, for example, who obviously thinks architects just get in the way of the far more important work being done by those in his/her sustainability specialization. We very often get the same attitude from traffic engineers, mobility consultants, lighting designers, etc. not to mention from developer s- our clients, who only seem to bring us in under duress - and code/permit officials. We definitely suffer from a lack of understanding about what exactly our role is.

But, as momentum also says, within the profession one can forge their own satisfying way of practice - I'd say I'm generally happier doing small scale remodel work than I was doing institutional master plans five years ago.

Zahu - remember that right now is not a good time in our profession. There's a lot of unemployment and a general bad mood out there. I see it in the office amongst "non-archinect" people too. When you're worrying if you will be the next one cut it's hard to be optimistic.

Trust me that this profession has it's rewards, and all in all, even if I were to leave the profession tomorrow, I'd still be happy that I was a part of it. There have been some very rewarding moments, even if the rewards wasn't exactly monetary.

And...an Architecture degree is very versatile with lots of options outside of "Architecture." Even if you don't ever plan to go into traditional practice, I'd still suggest you stick it out and get the degree. Hands down I had more fun and made better friends in college than most of my friends in different programs.

funny thing happened on the way out of my Body Pump class yesterday. this guy comes over to me and asks; what's the deal with the Architecture Sucks shirt that you sometimes wear? - i had worn my Bauhaus concert t yesterday. so, i asked him a question; what do you do for a living? he's a broker. i asked if there were things about his job that he hated, or things that he thought he'd be doing, but was prevented from doing because of the "realities" that exist. he said of course. i told him i was tending to stop wearing the shirt, because i thought it would give the wrong impression, but we both agreed that it was a great conversation starter. i told him i preferred a shirt with a bit more tude and less whine something along the lines of YOUR Architect Sucks or YOUR Architecture Sucks.

point is; i love architecture, i hate convincing the non-initiated that my passion should be their passion. it's not fun and it's even less fun talking to a group of people and then have them question my love. it's like trying to explain why you love your child, spouse or parents to a group of strangers and having them ask why.

Expectations - everything comes down to your expectations. If you can manage these and align them with what is reality, or at least most likely, and you are content with that then architecture has tons to offer.

Architecture is an amazing thing, the profession is not, in most cases.


Again, though, it depends on your expectations. Personally, I knew I would not be content with the traditional career path, both in compensation, opportunities and flexibility.


So, I love architecture and would not trade my education for anything. My expectations were not in line with reality and required readjusting my career path (as I could not, realistically, readjust my expectations).


There's plenty of things for everyone, you just need to make sure you align your expectations with the reality you pursue, or change what you pursue to match your expectations.

I love architecture. It is the profession of architecture that I can't stand.

What I think is interesting is that the majority of folks in firms don't like the way the profession works...I wonder if it's similar to how doctors must feel about the health insurance industry/hospital politics at times...

Is it feasible to consider some other model for arch. practice?? Would there be any way to do better business and design work while still meeting the client'$ bottom line?

There are A LOT of really smart people on this forum...maybe we should consider starting some sort of guerrilla movement based on radical ideals generated from a collective understanding and discussion about what should/could be vs. what is in architectural practice. Does theory really have to stop, or can we apply our theory to the practice?

....or we could just keep bitching. Personally, I'm with option 1.

the problem is that most architecture students go on to work at commercial offices, where much of what they thought was important is treated as inane and un-useful.

if you work for oma or similar you will have no problems with expectations. pay will be low, which many cannot afford, but if you are good and can speak well and deal with financing and all the rest then maybe you get to be ole sheeren. however, the number of people i know who worked for oma and then went on to obscurity is now in double digits.

in my office we do theory on daily basis. it is very impt to us. that is because i have phd (urban planning) and biz partner also went through phd program. we like that sort of shit. biz partner however left dissertation writing to become developer, so much of what we do in terms of theory is related to economics and sociology and other things most architects don't talk about or deal with.

i guess our ongoing project right now is working out a way to connect the concepts that lead to highest yield for investors with the concepts that lead to great architecture. it seems best way to move forward right now, but is not something taught in school. it is very interesting however and is i think the thing that keeps my job quite interesting lately. its architecture but with wider scope.

not sure if that is interesting for most people or not, but works for me...

I used to post a lot of anrgy posts when I was salary, because A I was bored at work, B pay sucked, and C the projects were for someone else.

I hardly post these days unless drunk and not working, I have been so busy in last 6 weeks not a beer, this is coming from a 12 beer a weekend guy...

this profession has a lot to do with your personality, I personally LOVE negativity and harsh critism, I tell people don't tell me I did a good job and give me hug, that will just make me lazy..I want the confrontation and the frustration.

If anyone tells you to not get into the profession it is because deep down they want to minimize the competition for great jobs, this is why design work is low pay and technical production work is high...everyone wants to be a designer, which is not what an architect should soley be anyway.

As far as role in society, thank your politicians and state laws for making you forever required.

During the boom due to overstressed building departments anyone who could open CAD was designing real projects, HGTV makes it look easy...but now a firm I consult for is keeping me alive, because they actually know more about construction than contractors and right now a lot of badly designed and badly built buldings are causing lawsuits...illegal shit is not getting by...you can make anywhere from 2k to 4k a day as an expert witness architect. You can make a lot of money fixing inadequate designer and architect screw ups.

Profession can be just like academia if you like. For instance if you make enough 40 hrs to pay the bills spend te other 20 developing your theory or your future firm.

You make a lot of money on your own if you truly know what you are doing. By truly I mean_ if you are good at it it shouldn't take you long to solve the task at hand.

Most designers aren't very good designers, but they want to be, so they stick with it no matter how long it takes thus decreasing their hourly rate...same goes with anything. At first you won't make much because you don't know what you are doing, but It if you stick it out and I have found that the number is roughly 7 years, even without a license 6 digits is def. Attainable.
By the way the firm tha

This is the best damn profession period...

I was at this pary once and I asked another architect who is that old guy opening a beer bottle with his teeth with a sweat shirt hood on, who let the homeless guy in...well that was a member of one the finalist for the world trade center towers...find me a doctor or lawyer who can publicly behave that way and still get awesome comissions.

If that story about the guy at the party is true, then there's hope for me yet :D

Yes very true and I would name him but he is that big. Later he and his wife got up on the kitchen counter and went nutts dancing.

it was richard meier wasn't it?!?!
i knew that modernista uniform had to come off sometime!!!

The anonymity of the internet makes it ideal for venting of frustration and ignoring of social grace. And our profession is rife with cynicism and seems to have a culture of commiseration.

If you (pl) want to do a great thing for this profession, make it your mission to drop cynicism and communicate with passion and eager interest about the things that you really care about and are excited to accomplish, change, and improve!

I actually enjoy what I do - even the boring day-to-day stuff... There's always something new to learn, and even if I'm doing something for the 100th time, I always seem to discover that I knew less than I thought.

The negativity or criticism in my posts usually reflect the fact that I dislike how most firms (at least the ones I've worked for) are managed, and how we teach/train young architects in both firms and academia.

I think more people would enjoy this field if we spent less time circling the wagons to protect our so-called "expertise" and more time educating each other and the public.

Architects, even top architects, are not artistic enough and also not scientific enough comparing with other professions like painters, scientist, and engineers.
Thus, nobody take architects’ profession seriously.
Even most of architects aren’t take architecture seriously.
Even competitions are becoming a “business”.

More seriously, building a building costs too much and makes rich some other people than the architect. So construction is someone else’s business, but not architects. All of these are why architects are losing their position in their profession.

Probably, we need a new philosophy for architecture itself, not the one we borrowed from arts and sciences.

"So on a real person to person level here, whats the deal with this site? and why is there so much hate for this profession?"

I disagree with what you say here, I have found this site to be very helpful (thanks Archinect!). It's not so much as hate for the profession, maybe it's a small sample size of the state of the profession.

not sure if i understand/agree. if you will please elaborate...

"The soft structure would never function, would never cause a circulation, without the hard machinic element that presides over inscriptions."
Anti-Oedipus, Deleuze&Guattari


We, architects, are losing something solid in architecture.
That is, I think, because of our lack of intelligence. We need to re-build the way of thinking architecture.

In favor of the philosophy that architects have borrowed from neo-materislists like Deleuze and Foucault, architects nowadays tend to deal with everything in a “political” way. However, for me, architects’ politics seems not in the level of philiosophy, but seems just a snobbish business.

In the excuse of their “politics” or snobbish business, architects are doing everything in a shallow level and selling everything in “political ways” or business ways just for their own “group” to get previliages. Even books and competitions are becoming a way for them to build their own “territory” and they are saying that’s a “politics”, but I would say that’s a business.

Isn’t that any different from “Oedipalization” that Deleuze had warned? Let’s say “oedipalization” is an inevitable process. But aren't they making the terriroty smaller and smaller in their own “little comfortable couch”?

It's really sad that we cannot trust any more what top architects are talking about and we alway have to suspect if or not they are saying a "lie".

I cannot but help admitting our "stars" or "idols" are not that profound professionals any more and we need to re-build our own way of thinking architecture with our own efforts.

Syp, you obviously have a strong notion of what architecture SHOULD be. If you don't trust today's top architects that means there are architects of the past that you do trust. Who are they?

I think you just have to sift through a lot harder to find a "top" architect with merit. Like most markets of today, it has become saturated.

or is it Architecture hates Archinect?

Basically, of modern architects, I admire every frontier like Courb., Ventury, Also Rossi, and Rem Koolhaas who had opened up or introduced a new view point.

I think contemporary architectural intelligence havn't developed much after early Rem Koolhass had introduced neo-materialism into architecture. If or not his interpretation is correct, I admire what he had worked.

But I think for the next generation we need a new thought.

syp i admire your knowledge, a rare and to the point understanding of philosophy vs. architecture....i love Deleuze but never in my life have found much use for it in architecture design...but i find space for Deleuze in practice, but on a very ontological level, so not really a philosophy that can be tied to practical applications of architecture.

what essentially happened, thanks to a recession in the 70's and a pompous overzealous intellectual named Peter Eisenman...note this is only 50% Eisenman's fault, the other half was the economy...that all really really smart potential architects went off into lala land...then in the early 90's when the economy went to shit again, your young superstars of the recent boom were off in lala land as well, because there was no real work and they could afford to survive in academica or on bullshit or on daddy's money...

so get ready for a new breed of very intelligent people who will make a mark in the intellectual artistic world of practically no use to society unless society is livingin in overabundance.

in most states, the architect can stamp all engineering aspects of a building...

HAD WE USED ALL OUR INTELLECT THAT DOVE INTO PHILOSOPHY FOR PRACTICAL ENGINEERING ASPECTS OF ARCHITECTURES, ENGINEERS WOULD BE NOTHING MORE THAN CALCULATION MONKEES AND ARCHITECTS WOULD HAVE REMAINED MASTER BUILDERS.

"In the excuse of their “politics” or snobbish business, architects are doing everything in a shallow level and selling everything in “political ways” or business ways just for their own “group” to get previliages. Even books and competitions are becoming a way for them to build their own “territory” and they are saying that’s a “politics”, but I would say that’s a business."

well said by Syp..

clearly the work of architects these days should be to find a good reason why they should still exist.

and i am about to begin my m.arch with that as my major intention

famous architects are a bunch of inbreds.

i heard that these famous guys do graphic representations on their competition entry boards that their inbred colleques reconginize, thus when a famous architect is a juror he can still hook-up with his cousin.

its hard not to sound pompous when you say anything serious on the internet

architecture is a business, and in this world if we want a place at the table we are going to have to be better at it than anyone else.

so fuck the archi-babble and step up to the trough and start learning to eat like the rest of the pigs.

out of curiosity for the times i have not been allowed to enjoy, in what era were architects master builders? and when, while we are at it, was an architect ever important?

Jump, I would like to posit or add to your point this idea.

Were individuals that are considered master builders architects?

With the advent of modern licensure, anyone can become an architect. From a historical perspective, I'd argue that you generally didn't earn the title architect until after you had built something. To add further to this point, how often was the term "architect" used in a common vernacular before the advent of mass publication?

The AIA formed in 1857 in part to "elevate the standing of the profession."

Now... to me... it seems like this has been a continual "problem" for over a 150 years.

However, the problem is not the same. Now, this is my art history (not architecture) background talking. Judging by style and the level of ornamentation of buildings in the 1850s, buildings were terribly expensive.

It wasn't the structure or the engineering but the vast amounts of artisans and crafters working continuously around the clock to produce what was "architecture" that made it expensive.

Molders, stone carvers, plastercasters, blacksmiths, metalsmiths, masons, plumbers (if you were that fancy), locksmiths, glass blowers, pipe fitters, brickmakers... I think you get the drift.

There were no Home Depots.

So, in a sense, the problems of old architecture for which recent technology has be invented to solve is now obsolete because standards and styles have changed.

The architecture from the 1850s can be easily made today and could be almost cost competitive to "common building styles." Reusable molds, routers, CNC machines, laser cutters, power chisels, electric kilns and so on.

I'd go even further to say it's probably easier for a 12 year old to operate a computer and a CNC machine to reproduce the Venus De Milo than it is to reproduce the Cloud Gate.

Largely because the statue is technically much simpler.

But both of these are excesses. That's where i was tying this all into is I find architecture now to not be as "fancy" as it use to despite it using the latest available "technologies."

But business is business. Process plays a bigger role and the architectural hurdles of the past are now the subjects of scoffing today. Why was FLW's glass work so impressive? Because float glass wasn't invented til 2 years before he died.

Materials have gotten cheaper, processes have simplified tremendously... so, why hasn't architecture gotten any cheaper? Because architects complicate things... sometimes good, sometimes bad.

"so, why hasn't architecture gotten any cheaper?"
because architects get a % of the budget as salary(big budget big salary) or work on an hourly basis maybe?(more time(to complicate things)more $)

You can make that argument about anything, really. It is not limited to architecture, but rather applies to any product.

As can be seen by many things out there, just because it can be made in a factory, cnc'd or whatever, does not mean it is less expensive to create or produce. Efficiency only comes on very, very large scale runs, which buildings will never be part of (although with so much generic crap out there, you'd think otherwise).

You could also make the argument that materials cost more now. Things like solid wood anything costs. The expectations of products has increased, and hence there is more attention paid to performance.



Look at cars - they continue to get more expensive as there are more and more expectations.

i don't actually have an idea.

just wondering aloud that maybe we are talking about something that isn't really real.

if we talked to clients like this, or to bankers/developers, etc, would they wonder what kind of drug we were taking?

my feeling is that architects are part of the culture we live in - in some ways we can exert an influence, but not ever as outsiders (unless we are self-funded) so if we want to be relevant we need to understand what is going on.

that is a hard haul. but i still like my job ;-)