I have been hesitating for a long time to write here but finally decide to share my obstacles with the topic and maybe somehow you could help me.
I am now in the first steps of doing a research, creating a problem for my thesis. For the last 6 months i co assist at the academia at the Theory Department and with professors we work on intersections of cinema, art, moving image , architecture and urban space. That is why i decided to push my thesis in this department.
But the problem occurs here- i can not find any problematic or a hypothesis to argue with.
Actually i wanted to focus on the structure of those two disciplines and compare them vice versa. But there is still no problematic and i can not ask any questions concerning those two media. I just „compare „ based on the case studies and literature.
I wanted to compare „space” and time, movement and montage as well as screen as surface for architecture and film. ( maybe also the medium of light and colour). BUt it is only comparison that i can include case studies from architecture and film industry and that is all.
I feel bad because i can not point any problem and for now i just do a genral comparison with history and case studies examples. Could you somehow help me how to understand the problematic in theory department?
Could you advise me anything on writing the problem based thesis? How i can find a problem BUT for now i can list examples, compare them, dig into history but cant find a problem ?
One of the ideas was to create some path and do what students in our workshops do- based on filmic theory they recreate given space in the city. But it requiers me to find some place and do the research and real project. my supervisor told me that it can be only theory based that i dont need to „design” any urban space or architectural form. But im not sure and still floating with my idea.
Thank you so much in advance. Im just not sure if the „intersection or the structure of those two disciplines” are enough for the thesis and the problematiic area.
Thank you!
Non Sequitur
Nov 4, 22 8:33 am
First, ignore Jawknee above... he's a delusional wack-job and does not, or ever has, gone to architecture school or worked in the profession.
Second, you're going about the thesis the wrong way, which is something any half-decent advisor would tell you. Point is, you're stuck on the end goal's sex appeal of "cinema and architecture" without ever bothering to find something interesting to argue. There are certainly many popular & overbeaten horses out there to pick from tho if you want the low-hanging fruit. Forced perspective set designs for one; Stylistic choices representing evil vs good as another; Trompe-oeils, mannerism, post-mo... etc. All stylistic approaches common to both film and architecture... but there is no edge. No new discussion to have since all this is is pointing out the obvious.
You need to reconsider your approach and find something you're interested in that has tangible conflicts then use film/arch as the medium to investigate your hypothesis... not shoe-horn in something after the fact. School is challenging, at times, but it's not difficult. Don't make it harder than it needs to be by forcing a weak thesis into a box. That is your challenge as a student and it is not something you should crowd-source.
Besides that, not all thesis end up with design projects... some are just well written arguments in book form. Some universities do require a project tho regardless, so that usually means students cheap out and take the easy urban-design approach and try to solve social problems with weak installations just because it's the only thing they could think of in the last month of their M.arch. Don't fall victim to that.
apple_pie_21
Nov 4, 22 8:47 am
hello, thank you so much for the answer. It if what i feel inside but can not admit. My approach is very general. I have been given the information from other professors to narrow it down and create the problematic. My supervisor on the other hand told me that i can write something as a 'book' without any problem, being only a theory. For me it is very weird approoach. Secondly I will highlight my decisions why I chose this area of research. I have always been ( it is very general i know) fascinated with film , i also worked in a film industry for quite some time in the past during during my bArch and Gap Years. First idea of mine was connected with sight and illusion , screen BUt supervisor told me that it needs to have the psychological approach that he cant help me with. Then we decided that i dont need another supervisor whi is psychologist. I am floating around trying many things, also the second thing was creating a landscape using filmic methods - as frames, montage, sth like discovering the landscape again and maybe doing some form. It is what our students do now - they investigate the site using filmic methods ( as a tool and as a strategy). It is what i wanted to include to my thesis but the more i think about it, the more chaotic it gets because i dont have the first clue and problem. It is what bothers me the most. A few years back in 2017 with my student friends we did a workshop on art and architecture called Seeing. It was also something that pushed me to again think about this sight, illusional , way of seeing, frames- side of thing..
apple_pie_21
Nov 4, 22 9:02 am
PS i didnt mention this. in film industry i was working as a set designer and assistant set designer. that time what interested me was catching my design of space quickly in a frame and also quickly re-changing it. I also told my supervisor that i was interested in spatial relations which occur between arch and film. But still its not a problem , it is just general view :D
Hello, everyone,
I have been hesitating for a long time to write here but finally decide to share my obstacles with the topic and maybe somehow you could help me.
I am now in the first steps of doing a research, creating a problem for my thesis. For the last 6 months i co assist at the academia at the Theory Department and with professors we work on intersections of cinema, art, moving image , architecture and urban space. That is why i decided to push my thesis in this department.
But the problem occurs here- i can not find any problematic or a hypothesis to argue with.
Actually i wanted to focus on the structure of those two disciplines and compare them vice versa. But there is still no problematic and i can not ask any questions concerning those two media. I just „compare „ based on the case studies and literature.
I wanted to compare „space” and time, movement and montage as well as screen as surface for architecture and film. ( maybe also the medium of light and colour). BUt it is only comparison that i can include case studies from architecture and film industry and that is all.
I feel bad because i can not point any problem and for now i just do a genral comparison with history and case studies examples. Could you somehow help me how to understand the problematic in theory department?
Could you advise me anything on writing the problem based thesis? How i can find a problem BUT for now i can list examples, compare them, dig into history but cant find a problem ?
One of the ideas was to create some path and do what students in our workshops do- based on filmic theory they recreate given space in the city. But it requiers me to find some place and do the research and real project. my supervisor told me that it can be only theory based that i dont need to „design” any urban space or architectural form. But im not sure and still floating with my idea.
Thank you so much in advance. Im just not sure if the „intersection or the structure of those two disciplines” are enough for the thesis and the problematiic area.
Thank you!
First, ignore Jawknee above... he's a delusional wack-job and does not, or ever has, gone to architecture school or worked in the profession.
Second, you're going about the thesis the wrong way, which is something any half-decent advisor would tell you. Point is, you're stuck on the end goal's sex appeal of "cinema and architecture" without ever bothering to find something interesting to argue. There are certainly many popular & overbeaten horses out there to pick from tho if you want the low-hanging fruit. Forced perspective set designs for one; Stylistic choices representing evil vs good as another; Trompe-oeils, mannerism, post-mo... etc. All stylistic approaches common to both film and architecture... but there is no edge. No new discussion to have since all this is is pointing out the obvious.
You need to reconsider your approach and find something you're interested in that has tangible conflicts then use film/arch as the medium to investigate your hypothesis... not shoe-horn in something after the fact. School is challenging, at times, but it's not difficult. Don't make it harder than it needs to be by forcing a weak thesis into a box. That is your challenge as a student and it is not something you should crowd-source.
Besides that, not all thesis end up with design projects... some are just well written arguments in book form. Some universities do require a project tho regardless, so that usually means students cheap out and take the easy urban-design approach and try to solve social problems with weak installations just because it's the only thing they could think of in the last month of their M.arch. Don't fall victim to that.
hello, thank you so much for the answer. It if what i feel inside but can not admit. My approach is very general. I have been given the information from other professors to narrow it down and create the problematic. My supervisor on the other hand told me that i can write something as a 'book' without any problem, being only a theory. For me it is very weird approoach. Secondly I will highlight my decisions why I chose this area of research. I have always been ( it is very general i know) fascinated with film , i also worked in a film industry for quite some time in the past during during my bArch and Gap Years. First idea of mine was connected with sight and illusion , screen BUt supervisor told me that it needs to have the psychological approach that he cant help me with. Then we decided that i dont need another supervisor whi is psychologist. I am floating around trying many things, also the second thing was creating a landscape using filmic methods - as frames, montage, sth like discovering the landscape again and maybe doing some form. It is what our students do now - they investigate the site using filmic methods ( as a tool and as a strategy). It is what i wanted to include to my thesis but the more i think about it, the more chaotic it gets because i dont have the first clue and problem. It is what bothers me the most. A few years back in 2017 with my student friends we did a workshop on art and architecture called Seeing. It was also something that pushed me to again think about this sight, illusional , way of seeing, frames- side of thing..
PS i didnt mention this. in film industry i was working as a set designer and assistant set designer. that time what interested me was catching my design of space quickly in a frame and also quickly re-changing it. I also told my supervisor that i was interested in spatial relations which occur between arch and film. But still its not a problem , it is just general view :D