The author gives short shrift to her architect of which she recounts: "So when we drew up the floor plans to send to our architect for our Harlem brownstone renovation, most of our decisions–except the surprisingly contentious bathrooms–were pretty straightforward. "
It bothers me that she does not credit her architect in the story, especially since she includes the floor plans for reference.
One issue you will find in residential construction is that the Architect is looked at as the tool to facilitate the owners' design very often. You will hear things like, "We laid it out and had an Architect draw it " or "The architect put our ideas to paper". From their perspective, it's their vision, which is often little more than a stack of disjointed design photos taken from Southern Living or Architectural Digest that the Architect must hammer into a livable, legal and buildable plan. But in the end they write the check, and you do work for them.
Its not too snarky. You know everything you need to know about the author of the article from her statement -
"What if we decide to get an au pair to take care of the kids when they are older?"
Do you really expect a self absorbed c#%t to offer credit for anything to anyone other than herself? That's how she gets through her day. Well that and a glass of white zinfandel + valium.
hi dsc, and no snarkiness traced from your post; i think your observation was a fair one to make. i would also add that 2step hit the nail on the head regarding the relationship between clients seeking high-end residential work and the architect. while there are fantastic clients out there that don't fall under this umbrella (they do exist; i promise), in many cases it's purely a patron-servant relationship. from my own experience having worked in both high-end residential as well as commercial/institutional realms, you don't have remotely this same experience in the latter.
the real question is: how do we, as the involved professional, veer off this course? or, after 200 years of architects designing private residences, is it even possible at this point?
i also think it is difficult to have this conversation without involving economics, the culture of design, and that good design (architecture) is only affordable by so few.
I am more irked that she, as a journalist, did not give credit to who her architect was nor did she give copyright credit for the plans she posted on the web site. However, the staff photographer got a credit for the interior pictures.
that said, i like where this is going and would like to follow on ess's comment...
The editor of Residential Architect lamented three years ago that she could not afford an architect for her own house. I find that a travesty.
Every firm can find an economic model that works for them. Architects can be affordable. It is all in the scope.
For us , we have designed for high end clients and received a high end fee. However, we have designed modest homes for under $2,500. Both projects were profitable.
I was once given credit for tearing down a house designed by a biggie....and the interior decorator took care of everything else.
Well it was an Architectural Digest article so I laughed it off.
i think "a travesty" is a little harsh considering we know absolutely nothing of the editor's financial situation. she may have a $1500 a month fine dining budget or sending 4 children to private schools or had to take a pay cut because "advertising sales aren't what they used to be".
i do believe that architecture can be had by all for reasonable fees. its all about the scope of services, not the scope of products provided. often the general public thinks we architects only provide drawings, and really only for single family houses. since most of my entire career is centered on public agencies, i see everyday their great appreciation for the services that architects provide. the clients for the single family homes i've designed recognize the service an architect provides. it's the general, uninformed public that recognizes the products (drawings) the architect provides.
in my opinion, it's the distinction between service and product that the profession needs to concentrate on. the cost (therefore fee) question will always be there without a resolution in this dichotomy. once there is a cultural shift toward the "value" of architecture, only then will we not have to compete on price.
Mar 22, 10 3:52 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.
Not to get too snarky....
I was saddened and amused to read the WSJ article/ blog about remodeling their brownstone in Harlem.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704131404575118142302290562.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_realestate#articleTabs%3Darticle
& http://www.facebook.com/BrownstoneDiary
The author gives short shrift to her architect of which she recounts: "So when we drew up the floor plans to send to our architect for our Harlem brownstone renovation, most of our decisions–except the surprisingly contentious bathrooms–were pretty straightforward. "
It bothers me that she does not credit her architect in the story, especially since she includes the floor plans for reference.
Your thoughts?
One issue you will find in residential construction is that the Architect is looked at as the tool to facilitate the owners' design very often. You will hear things like, "We laid it out and had an Architect draw it " or "The architect put our ideas to paper". From their perspective, it's their vision, which is often little more than a stack of disjointed design photos taken from Southern Living or Architectural Digest that the Architect must hammer into a livable, legal and buildable plan. But in the end they write the check, and you do work for them.
Its not too snarky. You know everything you need to know about the author of the article from her statement -
"What if we decide to get an au pair to take care of the kids when they are older?"
Do you really expect a self absorbed c#%t to offer credit for anything to anyone other than herself? That's how she gets through her day. Well that and a glass of white zinfandel + valium.
hi dsc, and no snarkiness traced from your post; i think your observation was a fair one to make. i would also add that 2step hit the nail on the head regarding the relationship between clients seeking high-end residential work and the architect. while there are fantastic clients out there that don't fall under this umbrella (they do exist; i promise), in many cases it's purely a patron-servant relationship. from my own experience having worked in both high-end residential as well as commercial/institutional realms, you don't have remotely this same experience in the latter.
the real question is: how do we, as the involved professional, veer off this course? or, after 200 years of architects designing private residences, is it even possible at this point?
i also think it is difficult to have this conversation without involving economics, the culture of design, and that good design (architecture) is only affordable by so few.
thoughts?
I am more irked that she, as a journalist, did not give credit to who her architect was nor did she give copyright credit for the plans she posted on the web site. However, the staff photographer got a credit for the interior pictures.
that said, i like where this is going and would like to follow on ess's comment...
The editor of Residential Architect lamented three years ago that she could not afford an architect for her own house. I find that a travesty.
Every firm can find an economic model that works for them. Architects can be affordable. It is all in the scope.
For us , we have designed for high end clients and received a high end fee. However, we have designed modest homes for under $2,500. Both projects were profitable.
I was once given credit for tearing down a house designed by a biggie....and the interior decorator took care of everything else.
Well it was an Architectural Digest article so I laughed it off.
i think "a travesty" is a little harsh considering we know absolutely nothing of the editor's financial situation. she may have a $1500 a month fine dining budget or sending 4 children to private schools or had to take a pay cut because "advertising sales aren't what they used to be".
i do believe that architecture can be had by all for reasonable fees. its all about the scope of services, not the scope of products provided. often the general public thinks we architects only provide drawings, and really only for single family houses. since most of my entire career is centered on public agencies, i see everyday their great appreciation for the services that architects provide. the clients for the single family homes i've designed recognize the service an architect provides. it's the general, uninformed public that recognizes the products (drawings) the architect provides.
in my opinion, it's the distinction between service and product that the profession needs to concentrate on. the cost (therefore fee) question will always be there without a resolution in this dichotomy. once there is a cultural shift toward the "value" of architecture, only then will we not have to compete on price.
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.