Ideology or Fairy Tales? Some Complaints about the Architecture Education I have taken

What is the aim of architecture education? Of course, to hatch and raise up new architects. What do architects do? A designer and a design controller. What we need is not only design skills specified in an architectural area but also the ability to corporate with tons of practical problems and adjust it.

But in school, our concentration is on the design itself and lack of corporation with other majors. We always build our hanging garden. I think it not only happens to the design majors but also happens on the engineers. Besides the part we are unable to do, the architecture design itself is the lack of practical limitation, especially in the US and some European countries. There is no universal gravity, no economic control, no law restriction, no general circulation. Some studio project even can be seen as an anarchy of the real world.

For me, architecture designer should have a better sense of aesthetics than the civil engineer; should be more conventional than an industrial designer; should be more professional than an art designer. Architects can design any physical artificial things but should learn how to design real buildings first. Don't let architect be pronoun of model maker.

Aesthetic of architecture must base on a lot of limitations. The restrictions go first than creativity. And this priority must be emphasized at the beginning of the architecture education and follow it.