Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Interpreting Architecture

Expand Messages
  • big1fat1one
    ... sociology), my big worry lies in the science part. I know architects NEED to have basic knowledge on building science in drawing design, but to what ...
    Message 1 of 4 , Jul 27, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In talkinaboutarchitecture@yahoogroups.com, "CReATIVE utopia"
      <creativeutopia@h...> wrote:
      > Hi all,
      > I am currently an economics student thinking of switching to
      > architecture.I actually surprise myself that after a big merrr-go-
      > round, i come to consider architecture. Here are some doubts which i
      > wish to gather response from all angles:
      >
      > >>1. Architecture as Knowledge
      > So far as i know, architecture is such a rare breed of discipline
      > combining all major "paradigms" of academic world: it is science (it
      > is physical building at the fundamental core); it is also social
      > science (Ropponghi Hill cultural city, urban design, space theory
      > etc, historical representation of an era...); It MUST be Art
      > (aesthetic value in addition to idioic engineering) and lastly,
      > computer visual graphic.
      >
      > While i am interested to pick up all necessary graphic tools, and
      > totally passionate in art and social sciences (especially
      sociology), my big worry lies in the science part. I know architects NEED to
      have basic knowledge on building science in drawing design, but to what
      > extent science and physics in important in architecture as a
      > knowledge?
      >
      > When i see Guggenheim, as much as i was amazed by Genhry's
      > imagination, i solute more to the engineers that materialize his wild
      > imagination. So, in this case, science or art make guggenheim bilbao
      > great? it is easy to answer both....but really.....;-] comment on it.


      One of my first professors of architecture taught that architects
      must know everything about everything. It is one thing to see one of
      Gehry's blobs from the exterior and quite another to try to
      understand how it met the client's criteria. The architect must
      understand everything about how the client will use the structure.
      while managing budgets, schedules, and people, and understanding
      methods and materials of construction, while complying with the ADA,
      building codes, and any other criteria applicable to the structure.


      > >> 2. Architecture as a Study
      >
      > Related to the worry above, can a student like me, whose passion
      are totally in the arts and social science able to cope well in teh
      maths and enginerring courses necessary in the degree? I have quited
      > economics because i hate a graphical depiction or i should
      > say "reduction" of the random social world, i dont think there are
      > many "start again" in life u know.....times flies....i dont want to
      > hit the wrong thing again.
      >
      > Will the passion to art adn social science ultimately MOTIVATE one
      in acquiring the knowledge of "How to do it"? Comment from ur experience
      > of studying architecture and the students u met.


      Study of architecture is almost all theoretical. Most good schools of
      architecture do provide tangible applications of theory, but the
      theory is the "thing." Good schools will also employ instructors and
      professors who bring different approaches to the theory and who are
      passionate about their approach. My college dean beamed with delite
      whenever he heard professors arguing during a jury presentation.


      > >> 3. Architecture as an Industry
      > I do understand that architecture can take many forms of orientation
      > in practice: the techinical building path; the theoretical academic
      > path; the art path; the MPSP-building-swimming pool and toilet
      > part......but i wonder if a person with a little "artist
      > stubbornness" be able to enjoy the working culture of architecture,
      > which FUNDAMNETALLY is an process of creating art with compromise:
      > the client demand and taste; the constructors concern; the
      > scienctific constraint; etc......


      "Compromise" is an unfortunate word choice. The greatest satisfaction
      to me is the ability to balance client needs and wants with
      regulatory compliance, budget, schedule, management, profit,
      constructability, durability, efficiency, and beauty. And, sometimes,
      the client really doesn't know what he wants. Let me tell you a
      parable about needs and wants.

      A local office of a national utility needed a new office building.
      The request for qualifications detailed the program, including
      budget, spaces, location, relationships, etc. Two firms on the short
      list of three presented concepts of similar sized buildings with the
      same number of floors and site coverage. Both plans were just big
      enough for the slow planned growth for 15 years and presented an
      image of solidity and timeliness. The third firm, through the good
      old boy system, found out that the outgoing local manager wanted this
      building to be his swansong. He had just returned from a visit to
      Williamburg, PA, where he fell in love with the governor's mansion.

      You guessed it. The third firm proposed the Williamsburg's governor's
      mansion, but 10 times bigger, and with angular ends. With all the
      expemse of custom shaped bricks, three feet deep crown moldings, and
      ornate door hardware, the governor's mansion turned into a
      Frankenstein. It was too large for the utility, and within three
      years the company moved out to rented space in a spec office
      building, where they remain today, some twenty years later. Although
      the outgoing manager thought he knew what he wanted, he wound up with
      a boondogle, and that is his real swansong. The architect of record,
      in his zeal to obtain big bucks, failed miserably.


      > Ur comment is important in my current decision making, a crucial
      > stage at this cross road....;-]
      > Hope to hear from u,
      > Hooi Lee
    • juno
      As an arthimaphobe and one who loves the big picture in the sciences, but not the dam boring details, I had many of the same questions. I did find an answer
      Message 2 of 4 , Aug 5, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        As an arthimaphobe and one who loves the big picture in the
        sciences, but not the dam boring details, I had many of the same
        questions. I did find an answer that works for me. The green
        architecture that is going on right now is allowing a lot of
        artistic freedoms for the designer and builder alike. It does have a
        lot of science that goes into it, and yes, there is about twice as
        much to think about, but the final product is a true work of art,
        each on unique as the land and the designer.

        I think one of the great things that I love about this branch, is
        there is so much new ground, many homes are built outside the codes.
        That eliminates a lot of stupid rules that some old fuddy put in
        place because he didn't understand, like it, whatever. Everything
        you do is done for a reason, and it has to work. And be lovly to
        look at, and speak to the soul.
        Now if you want to make gobs of money, this is not your thing, but
        for the rest.. check it out.

        Loci
      • mona higazy
        just wanna say that from your e-mail i can see how much you are worried but all i can say to you take it easy it is not that big deal, if you got a good taste
        Message 3 of 4 , Aug 8, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          just wanna say that from your e-mail i can see how much you are worried but all i can say to you take it easy it is not that big deal, if you got a good taste and organized and know how to form the masses , and the relationships between the different usages of the areas such as the relation between the kitchen and the restaurant and so on,it is important to got a good taste to choose which material to use in flooring patter and elevations and so on, and about architects must know everything i think that to difficult just try to start easy and every thing will be cool with you as long as you like architecture , and see many catalogs and pictures for may buildings and try to know the materials in use, that will help you so much, and if you want to learn more you must go in sites in any project under construction to see every piece of information you need to know about structure systems.
          but if you like arts more than structure so you have to see catalogs and try to know the programs that architects can't live without such as auto cad, archicad,photo shop,3d max and many other and be sure that with those programs you will save your effort and time.
          I'm a fresh graduate and I'm still learning every day in my work, so there is no limitation in architecture or any other branch in science. am i right?


          big1fat1one <big1fat1one@...> wrote:
          --- In talkinaboutarchitecture@yahoogroups.com, "CReATIVE utopia"
          <creativeutopia@h...> wrote:
          > Hi all,
          > I am currently an economics student thinking of switching to
          > architecture.I actually surprise myself that after a big merrr-go-
          > round, i come to consider architecture. Here are some doubts which i
          > wish to gather response from all angles:
          >
          > >>1. Architecture as Knowledge
          > So far as i know, architecture is such a rare breed of discipline
          > combining all major "paradigms" of academic world: it is science (it
          > is physical building at the fundamental core); it is also social
          > science (Ropponghi Hill cultural city, urban design, space theory
          > etc, historical representation of an era...); It MUST be Art
          > (aesthetic value in addition to idioic engineering) and lastly,
          > computer visual graphic.
          >
          > While i am interested to pick up all necessary graphic tools, and
          > totally passionate in art and social sciences (especially
          sociology), my big worry lies in the science part. I know architects NEED to
          have basic knowledge on building science in drawing design, but to what
          > extent science and physics in important in architecture as a
          > knowledge?
          >
          > When i see Guggenheim, as much as i was amazed by Genhry's
          > imagination, i solute more to the engineers that materialize his wild
          > imagination. So, in this case, science or art make guggenheim bilbao
          > great? it is easy to answer both....but really.....;-] comment on it.


          One of my first professors of architecture taught that architects
          must know everything about everything. It is one thing to see one of
          Gehry's blobs from the exterior and quite another to try to
          understand how it met the client's criteria. The architect must
          understand everything about how the client will use the structure.
          while managing budgets, schedules, and people, and understanding
          methods and materials of construction, while complying with the ADA,
          building codes, and any other criteria applicable to the structure.


          > >> 2. Architecture as a Study
          >
          > Related to the worry above, can a student like me, whose passion
          are totally in the arts and social science able to cope well in teh
          maths and enginerring courses necessary in the degree? I have quited
          > economics because i hate a graphical depiction or i should
          > say "reduction" of the random social world, i dont think there are
          > many "start again" in life u know.....times flies....i dont want to
          > hit the wrong thing again.
          >
          > Will the passion to art adn social science ultimately MOTIVATE one
          in acquiring the knowledge of "How to do it"? Comment from ur experience
          > of studying architecture and the students u met.


          Study of architecture is almost all theoretical. Most good schools of
          architecture do provide tangible applications of theory, but the
          theory is the "thing." Good schools will also employ instructors and
          professors who bring different approaches to the theory and who are
          passionate about their approach. My college dean beamed with delite
          whenever he heard professors arguing during a jury presentation.


          > >> 3. Architecture as an Industry
          > I do understand that architecture can take many forms of orientation
          > in practice: the techinical building path; the theoretical academic
          > path; the art path; the MPSP-building-swimming pool and toilet
          > part......but i wonder if a person with a little "artist
          > stubbornness" be able to enjoy the working culture of architecture,
          > which FUNDAMNETALLY is an process of creating art with compromise:
          > the client demand and taste; the constructors concern; the
          > scienctific constraint; etc......


          "Compromise" is an unfortunate word choice. The greatest satisfaction
          to me is the ability to balance client needs and wants with
          regulatory compliance, budget, schedule, management, profit,
          constructability, durability, efficiency, and beauty. And, sometimes,
          the client really doesn't know what he wants. Let me tell you a
          parable about needs and wants.

          A local office of a national utility needed a new office building.
          The request for qualifications detailed the program, including
          budget, spaces, location, relationships, etc. Two firms on the short
          list of three presented concepts of similar sized buildings with the
          same number of floors and site coverage. Both plans were just big
          enough for the slow planned growth for 15 years and presented an
          image of solidity and timeliness. The third firm, through the good
          old boy system, found out that the outgoing local manager wanted this
          building to be his swansong. He had just returned from a visit to
          Williamburg, PA, where he fell in love with the governor's mansion.

          You guessed it. The third firm proposed the Williamsburg's governor's
          mansion, but 10 times bigger, and with angular ends. With all the
          expemse of custom shaped bricks, three feet deep crown moldings, and
          ornate door hardware, the governor's mansion turned into a
          Frankenstein. It was too large for the utility, and within three
          years the company moved out to rented space in a spec office
          building, where they remain today, some twenty years later. Although
          the outgoing manager thought he knew what he wanted, he wound up with
          a boondogle, and that is his real swansong. The architect of record,
          in his zeal to obtain big bucks, failed miserably.


          > Ur comment is important in my current decision making, a crucial
          > stage at this cross road....;-]
          > Hope to hear from u,
          > Hooi Lee
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.