|
Home > Archive > Architecture > October 2005 > Thoughtd on architectural theory (was Re: Arquitektuur versus Architecture)
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Thoughtd on architectural theory (was Re: Arquitektuur versus Architecture)
|
|
| cegan@egan-martinez.com 2005-10-16, 3:21 am |
| Adam...
Thanks for the kind words. I think you have raised a real issue that
deserves thoughtful replies....I hope others will jump in.
Adam Weiss wrote:
> It has been a while. And I am happy to read a response from you, Mr.
> Egan. I have all the respect in the world for practicing, licensed
> architects like yourself who teach in architecture schools.
so...here goes....
> cegan@egan-martinez.com wrote:
> <<snipped>>
>
(to which Mr. Weiss replied)
[color=darkred]
> If I might expand on your themes, what use is a window if one does not
> know how to open the blinds? What good is a door if one doesn't have
> the key?
Adam....I think you have raised a fair and important question...and it
cuts deeply into the current state of architectural education in the
USA. Sadly... for some time now, maybe as far back as the 19th century,
some professors of architecture have felt the need to make themselves
seem important by belittling and mystifying the students. The easiest
way to do this is to use a "secret code" of theoretical jargon....not
to elucidate, but to obfuscate (I expect tips for my use of big words!)
In other words, far too many professors of architecture are more
concerned with themselves and their status than they are for the
learning of their students.
As you rightly suggest...theory is not much of a window if the blinds
are closed, and a door is only a tease if it is locked and the student
has no key. When this happens....and it happens all too often....it
shows that the teacher is actually insecure and makes up for it by
building a barricade of words....the longer and more exotic the better.
This way the student feels small and insecure, so the teacher can feel
like a little god!
Such teachers are pathetic little wimps, cluttering the rich and deep
legacy of architecture.
Now....I want to add a note that may seem to contradict what I said
above.
Sometimes, the best teachers will present a theoretical idea, clothed
in language that is not immediately obvious, in order to push the
student's understanding and further the intellectual growth.
Naturally, the student may wonder whether his/her "guru" is full of
wisdom or full of hot air. I think that one way of answering this
question is as follows.... If a teacher stretches your brains by using
"sophisticated" language....and that teacher then works hard with the
students to help them understand the ideas presented.....then that
teacher is trying to push the students forward. However, if the teacher
simply enjoys mystifying the students and is reluctant to help them
understand....then that teacher is not profound.....merely a pompous
insecure jerk.
Now then, Adam.... to get back to your current situation.
I think I am hearing you give voice to a frustration and disappointment
with the more "academic" professors you had at Rice. Such a response
is normal....but you will be better served when you move past it. The
simple fact is that...... surprise, surprise,..... academic settings
are.....,well, .....academic. So it is not helpful to resent the fact
that many architectural professors are not practitioners....because
they are in fact academics.
Instead, you and every young architect/intern ....anywhere in the world
.....should stop and evaluate your current position. What are your
professional strengths....and which issues would you like to improve.
Once you can formulate a clear idea of what you feel you would like to
learn....you will be better able to chart the next step in your course.
So, for instance, if someone feels they are not getting enough
experience on construction sites..... they should consider moving to a
firm, or even a city or country.... where construction is everywhere
and where the intern can spend a lot of time learning.
The real trick is simple....and extremely difficult. You must stop
whining about the past and start plotting a path towards YOUR future.
I hope this helps a little bit....
Christopher
(Adam wrote(
> My argument isn't against the component of architectural education that
> is purely academic. My argument is against the (absurd) predominance
> that academic component has in architecture schools. Academic
> architecture - the three branches of theory astutely noted by Marcello -
> has a place in architecture school. But at too many schools today,
> academic architecture is taught at the expense of more "practical"
> things. And it shouldn't be.
>
> The practical is what allows theory to affect architecture. All the
> architectural theory in the world will never make it into a building if
> architects aren't able to translate it. How many great ideas, grown
> from sound theory, have been thrown out the window because it was
> difficult to make them meet code or budget, or because the architect
> couldn't convince the client?
>
> And the argument doesn't just stem from frustration - though I am
> frustrated. Over a few weekends this past summer I wrote on the reason
> why the practical is so important. I termed it "post deconstructivism".
> http://postdecon.blogspot.com/ The diagrams in the post I made titled
> "Disassembly and Reassembly" are particularly pertinent here.
>
> <<snipped>>
>
> But let me close by thanking you again, Mr. Egan, for your response.
> They always make me think, and they always
| |
|
| the Professor!> wrote
> building a barricade of words....
~holy kow~
| |
| Pierre Levesque, AIA 2005-10-17, 12:21 am |
| "Adam Weiss" <aw722@blockspam.org> wrote in message
news:43530B98.2020703@blockspam.org...
> cegan@egan-martinez.com wrote:
>
> <<snipped for brevity>>
>
>
> <<snipped>>
>
>
>
> I'm less concerned with the big words than I am with a fundamental lack of
> knowledge in the field. If I might go back to the distinction I made
> between "arquitektuur" and architecture. A great architect knows both.
>
> Bernard Tschumi, who was the dean at the Columbia university School of
> Architecture for a time, uses huge words in his books and articles - words
> like "palimpsest". In fact, Tschumi was perhaps the only
> "deconstructivist" architect to actually understand most of what Derrida
> wrote about Deconstruction. But Tschumi has a long portfolio of BUILT
> WORKS. Damned bad-assed built works I might add. That is an architect
> worthy of teaching it.
>
> Unfortunately, and you said it before, too many professors at Rice and at
> other schools are experts in "arquitektuur" and yet know little or
> nothing about architecture. I had one professor who has has just one
> building in his portfolio - a house from the 1980s. A year after I
> finished, they hired a lady to the faculty who had been a fellow student
> of mine in the M-Arch I program. No built works in her portfolio. Not
> even a license to practice architecture. That, in a nutshell, is what I
> wish would change.
>
> <<snipped>>
>
>
> I evaluate myself and my work every day, but I also pray that in 10 or 20
> years students coming out of architecture schools are better prepared to
> enter the profession than ones who graduated in the last 5 years.
>
> You see, it's not an either-or proposition. If architecture schools are
> going to be improved, and they should be, more people are going to have to
> question them the way I am. This is -in addition to- self-improvement and
> advancement in the profession.
>
> <<snipped>>
>
> It's more than a little frustrating when I attempt to outline the problems
> with architecture education and am essentially told "you're right, but
> don't worry about it - move on."
>
> Maybe it's that I'm idealistic, but I dream of a world maybe 15 or 20
> years from now when architecture schools have been fixed. There are small
> things that could be done and would, over time, go a very long way to fix
> the schools.
>
>
>
> Well, not really, :-), but your points are well taken.
>
All words spoken like a future self-employed-almost-always broke future
self-employed architect...
| |
|
|
"Pierre Levesque, AIA" <pierrelevesqueNOSPAM@connarch.com> wrote in message
news:l3E4f.3750$Gt2.2195@trndny01...
> "Adam Weiss" <aw722@blockspam.org> wrote in message
> news:43530B98.2020703@blockspam.org...
>
> All words spoken like a future self-employed-almost-always broke future
> self-employed architect...
But when he finally lays his weary head he will do so with a clean
conscience.
THAT is worth diamonds.
| |
|
| "Adam Weiss"> wrote
> It's more than a little frustrating when I attempt to outline the problems
> with architecture education and am essentially told "you're right, but
> don't worry about it - move on."
There's an invisible yets structurally sound connection between academia and
where the rubber hits the road.
Your boss only considers your academic merits because the law requires him
to.
YOU cannot become an architect without *benefit* of law, you have to be
licensed.
YOU can only aquire a license after academia.
Your boss is stuck in a very narrow market.
He can't hire a bloke off the street and *train* him to be an architect.
He has to hire a bloke that has been through academia and all of its
baggage.
This is so wrong.
ALL of society, maybe even history itself, suffers because of this.
*You cannot shackle creativity.*
--gs, 2005
| |
|
| "Adam Weiss"> wrote
> Pierre Levesque, AIA wrote:
>
> I dream of that. I dream of having my own firm and maybe, someday and
> somehow, having a few (or a dozen or so) fellow members of the firm.
>
> And I also dream of, perhaps, taking over an architecture school. A non
> violent coup d'etat if you will. Boy things would change. I just hope
> none of the redundant theorists hires a hit-man to off me before I can
> accomplish my goals.... :-)
Even now you could be striving for that which you know to be right.
Apprenticship.
Mentor - Prodigy.
It worked in the old days (less than 100 years ago) so why wouldn't it work
today?
The best schooling is one on one.
Then one day you could look over your flock and know that you had taught
them well, as they peel off one by one to start their own successful
business's and mentoring others.
| |
|
| "Edgar"> wrote
> I'm not sure about elsewhere, but in California, you CAN hire some bloke
> off the street. He must work for 8 years total, as opposed to 5 years of
> academia, and 3 years of work (still 8 years total). Then he takes the
> tests like everyone else, and he or she I should say, can be a gul durn
> architect.
That stuff stopped about 15-20 years ago round here.
Now, academia has no competition and thus the quality suffers.
Sometimes the old ways were the better ways.
| |
|
| > I'm not sure about elsewhere, but in California, you CAN hire some bloke
> off the street
<fuzzy forgetful reply> I think that Cali may be the last holdout and that
it may not last.
Hey, why is it that Cali is the last place letting this happen? You'd think
they'd be the first ones to stomp it out.
| |
| Kris Krieger 2005-10-17, 4:21 pm |
| "Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in
news:vxP4f.15643$vw6.2164@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net:
> "Edgar"> wrote
>
> That stuff stopped about 15-20 years ago round here.
> Now, academia has no competition and thus the quality suffers.
> Sometimes the old ways were the better ways.
Looking on from the outside, and merely IMO, the apprenticeship route makes
a certain amount of sense to me. There are a lot of people who go through
academia (various fields nmot associated with architecture) and come out
knowing what they were taught - but without much at all (if anything) in
the way of original thinking, creative intelligence, or even the
desire/ability to be a life-long learner. OTOH, just because someone
hasn't been through academia, or has been through one part of it only,
doesn't mean that person is a dolt or incompetent to rapidly learn
something else and be a life-long learner in that field. OK, it's damn
rare, but so what? Just because someone doesn't want to go through the
fluff parts of academia (or go back through it, after having been through
it once), it shouldn't close off certain opportunities, if you get what I
mean (and if it makes any sense =:-o )
| |
| Kris Krieger 2005-10-17, 4:21 pm |
| "gruhn" <spam@hwb.com> wrote in news:qKP4f.9131$gj1.1687@fed1read05:
>
> <fuzzy forgetful reply> I think that Cali may be the last holdout and
> that it may not last.
>
>
> Hey, why is it that Cali is the last place letting this happen? You'd
> think they'd be the first ones to stomp it out.
Why would one think that? There are still at least a *few* open-minded
people in CA who realize that bureaucracy is not the end-all and be-all of
life and learning. Although CA *is* being rapidly homogenized and
"normalized"...
| |
|
| > Why would one think that? There are still at least a *few* open-minded
> people in CA who realize that bureaucracy is not the end-all and be-all of
Because it doesn't seem like people like that run governments.
| |
| Kris Krieger 2005-10-17, 9:21 pm |
| "gruhn" <gruhn@deletehwb.com> wrote in
news:GDU4f.30$71.1455@news.uswest.net:
>
> Because it doesn't seem like people like that run governments.
Ture. I had a momentary mental lapse and forgot that 85% of all people are
herd animals. One falls over the cliff, they all choose to follow while
calling it fate or the will/desire of some higher being which in turn makes
it really strange that so many people think pot is bad...
At any rate, it'd be interesting if there were a couple different ways of
becoming proficient/license-eligible in architecture (and/or any number of
other professions).
| |
|
|
Adam Weiss wrote:
> Edgar wrote:
>
> In Texas they've made a rule that you are allowed to take the ARE while
> you're working for IDP. But in my view they really ought to put the ARE
> -before- IDP. It should be an exit exam for architecture school.
>
> That'd force the schools to change their ways - and fast. It'd force
> them to bring reality back into their curriculi. And that'd be a good
> thing.
I know it would have keep me from going back and digging through my
Structures notes to refresh my memory. ;-)
| |
| cegan@egan-martinez.com 2005-10-19, 1:21 am |
|
Adam Weiss wrote:
(snipped interesting comments by Edgar)
>
> In Texas they've made a rule that you are allowed to take the ARE while
> you're working for IDP. But in my view they really ought to put the ARE
> -before- IDP. It should be an exit exam for architecture school.
>
> That'd force the schools to change their ways - and fast. It'd force
> them to bring reality back into their curriculi. And that'd be a good
> thing.
Adam....
I appreciate your thoughts, but I think you're missing something.
While I understand your frustration with some academics in
architecture, the fact is that there are some aspects of architectural
learning that are better done in school, and others that are better
done in a real-world environment. If you really think everything could
be learned in school, then you would be saying that no one needs to
learn from real experience. That would be disastrous for architects!
In school I want to learn the things best learned there....questions of
theory, history, design methodology, structural and environmental
systems, etc. Then I want to go into the real world to see how all
this stuff is applied in making real buildings. Only after all that is
finished is someone ready to take the exam to practice as a licensed
architect.
Please stop thinking that the entire problem and solution is in the
schools.... Yes the schools need to improve, but so does the IDP
program and the commitment by offices to their interns.
After a few days I will reply to your earlier post about your fantasy
"coup d'etat" to take over an architectural school. Right now I'm too
busy being a practitioner.... using the combination of academic and
professional experience I acquired over the years (HINT, HINT!!!!)
Right now, ....you should be focused on growing your professional
skills as an architect ....fixing the schools can wait a while.
Adam.... please feel free to write to my e-mail me if you want to vent
or explore your situation. As I have offered before.... if you come to
San Antonio and bribe me with a GOOD margarita (no pre-mixed junk...and
good tequila!) I will show you the city and we can talk about your
chosen profession and your place in it.
Later....
christopher
cegan@egan-martinez.com
|
|
|
|
|