This is generally true. Of course, there are exceptions. For instance, there are some people who are naturally talented in arts and design yet who majored in humanities or sciences instead of arts or architecture. Depending on the school, these people can be attractive because they provide diversity and also demonstrate natural relevant capabilities in the intended field of architecture.

i've heard of situations where people get in with lackluster portfolios but who are stellar in other regions (e.g. they have a PhD, MD). and like hankd said, there are people who may have majored in the sciences/humanities but are very talented in the arts. since the portfolio is a visual element of the app, i suppose generally speaking people with a background in the arts have an edge, in terms of the number of work they can just put into the portfolio. that said, there are many art majors in this world who have mediocre work and a horrible eye for design...

I've been wondering the same thing. I am a 3-yr applicant with a humanities bachelor and no art/design background, either formal or informal. I've been taking art classes for the last year, but I don't think my portfolio will be competitive. I'm just not at that level yet.

As hankd suggested, I'm hoping schools will view my application holistically. That is to say, they will accept me based on the sum of my application, realizing that I have other skills and qualifications that will allow me to succeed in a grad program. I can continue to grow as an artist, but I'm ready now to begin school.

Just my thoughts. Should have used that last line in my SoP!

All schools judge based on the sum of the application, but factors are weighed differently between each school. The vast majority of architecture graduate schools give much more weight to one's artistic/design prowess than to the amount of diversity that they would add to the school.

We have to realise that good architects need not have to be good artists. I recall reading a post on this forum that says that architecture students are not training to be draw and paint, which artists, by definition of their profession, have to know how to do so.

smile of fury, don't get discouraged. I share your view that schools should view the application as one whole, rather than focus narrowly on the portfolio and ignore the other qualities that an applicant may bring to the school. There have been many instances of applicants with non-arts backgrd being admitted into the top arch programs, so dont discount your own abilities! Architects need not have to be very creative ( and I know some of them are not ), but to succeed, you gotta have the confidence and will power to grow and develop your skills.

hankd, yes it's true that artistic/design prowess as demonstrated thru the portfolio is given substantial consideration. But bear in mind that schs will not want to have a classroom full of students with a design backgrd. Sometimes, artists may lack the ability to appreciate technical and quantitative issues - an edge that applicants with science background have.

"There have been many instances of applicants with non-arts backgrd being admitted into the top arch programs, so dont discount your own abilities!"

non-arts background =/= lack of art/design skills

Or, to put it more accurately:

lack of non-MAJOR-ACADEMIC arts background =/= lack of significant art/design skills

*Or, to put it more accurately:

lack of MAJOR-ACADEMIC arts background =/= lack of significant art/design skills

Indeed, there are instances (I wouldn't say many) of people with mediocre art/design skills enrolling in top arch programs, but these cases are rare.

And rare is just how I like my steak.

i don't think anyone without a flair for art/design will be interested in architecture in any case! It's just that at the application stage, those with a major in arts will have an advantage, simply because they have spent a precious few years of their lives doing arts to build up that portfolio.
From my observation, there's no strong correlation between great artists and good architects. Architecture is more than just having an eye for design.

enjoy your steak : )

I would say a economics bachelors would be more profitable [pun intended] than an arts background.


I so so so sick of the aesthetic bullshit.

it's a good thing i majored in finance and economics yet also have the art skills and genius of leonardo da vinci x100

at the school I attended, which is a ranked school and considered a great program, there were those with art backgrounds, but there were also history, accounting, physics, religion, finance, construction, sociology, english, and other majors...it was truly a diverse population. Yes, many people had amazing artistic abilities, but many did not and were able to flourish in other ways. As for the portfolio, I know many people who submitted portfolios of their written works with no art work submitted at all. Just be creative with what you submit and how you submit it. But if you feel like you don't have the best artistic ability, know that they are also looking at your interpretations of how you see the world. That can come through a wide variety of medias. As an architect, yes, we use pictures/renderings to show our ideas, but it is also the spoken word and our interpretations of things that complete the presentation. And make sure you have an outstanding essay that speaks to what you want to accomplish in school.

I don't think so, because architecture is more about function then art, especially when economy is bad. So I think while an artist can create a prettier portfolio it might not necessary be functional one.

I am applying this year from a non-arts background, and have been considering including writing in my portfolio. One aspect of my background is in philosophy coursework for which I was able to focus on aesthetics and the philosophy of architecture, both in terms formal academic papers and less formal essays on finding place or placemaking. My dilemma is if this is applicable or if the content would need to be creative writing in the form of poetry, short stories, etc. Thoughts?

I knew there was a good reason for being a dangblasted Econ major.

i think you should use whatever BEST represents you and your ideas.

Personally I think it depends on the person's own talent regardless of undergrad. Where I went to school for Fine Arts seemed like I learned nothing. They weren't really into "teaching", they were more into "figure it out on your own" kind of thing, then we'll sit around in a circle and b.s. about it. like in drawing 2, from the first day of class to the last day, it consisted of the prof hiring a model then us drawing from it, no instructions. in painting we weren't taught techniques on how to use binders or mix colors, just paint.

So if you don't have the natural talent to be able to draw or paint for instance, you'd probably end up producing substandard work similar to what you'd produce if you weren't in art school . but you can always go into something else like video or performance art. That's just my school though. I paid 4 years for time and studio space, not so much instruction on how to make good stuff. I suppose having more time to be able to produce stuff for a portfolio is an advantage, but if it's all crap anyways then there's no point. And believe me a lot of people in art school produce stuff that would probably not help with an acceptance to m.arch.

I wished i did another degree than fine arts to be honest. like business, or land arch. or science or engineering even. just to feel like i've learned something about how the real world works.

......cause i would probably end up producing the same quality of work to put in a portfolio had i not done art school.

passerby1ice, sorry to hear that your arts school didnt do much for you. I honestly think that having a business/Landscape arch/engineering etc background will be a big boost to your career as an architect. At the very least, you will have a better grasp of various concepts (e.g business administration) that an architecture sch does not teach. Of course, if you are motivated enough, you will be able to obtain the same knowledge through self study and improvement.

I would most definitely have to agree with passerby1ce about art school. If you don't already know what your doing, they're not going to teach you a thing. I wanted to yell at half the people in my program because they were just making a mockery of the discipline in general. Half the time I'd find myself leading the crits instead of the prof because they didn't know how to actually be critical.
So yeah, art school probably won't help you unless you already know what you're doing; Graphic Design on the other hand is very useful, most informative creative classes I took during my entire undergrad.

Anyways, all I can say to the original post is that no, it doesn't help, and might even be a hindrance. 80% of the ppl in my class could never even dream of getting into arch school.

Gawd I'm so bitter just thinking about....

Architecture is not all about the visual arts, although it is helpful, only to a degree. On the other hand architecture is more about the built form. If you can express yourself three dimensionally, and it shows in the application portfolio, then you are set. In an instance where you have a background in the Fine Arts, I would assume that the applicant with a sculpture degree would have an edge over the one with a painting degree. Remember, beyond all the fancy graphics, architecture is about an exquisite three dimensional form which will eventually be built, if you are lucky.

Architecture schools in general need more science-minded students. How can you not like math and still want to be an architect. That baffles me.

okay, okay

(the first "okay" above refers to the username "okay" two posts above me. the second "okay" denotes normal use of the word "okay")

What does liking math have to do with being science-minded?

you can not like math because you have other interests, or you can not like math because no one you had for a math class was an interesting person. Nine out of ten dentists say that you don't need math to be an architect, and two out of three NAAB graduate programs agree.*


*that's me, a scientist, using math.

"I so so so sick of the aesthetic bullshit." - jplourde

Amen.

On the other hand,I think an architect or a designer should at least have decent knowledge of the Adobe Creative Suit (generally mastered by graphic artists) to represent and market their works better.