By the Architect, for the Architect
I began my college career studying the technical aspect of
architecture: concrete and steel design calculations, building codes, hydrodynamics,
and how to design a practical, functional building. Interestingly, our master’s
degree education merely scrapes the surface on these topics, barely educating
people without former experience enough to carry on a conversation about
drainage on a site. While the literal and technical interpretation of
architecture can and will be learned through work experience, as is the
argument of everyone in the theoretical architecture world, I believe that
those topics contribute greatly to the WHO and WHY of architecture; arguably,
the most important part. Only in our final semester are we asked to care about
egress distances, ADA clearances, and structural stability. If we are designing
for the people and not for ourselves, why is this?
I think when it comes to architecture, the technical things are obviously very important. Code, egress, FAR, and all that stuff are vital in real world architecture but its also a set of rules that anyone can follow. Anyone can be an architect if they just understand those rules and design within them but the reason that not everyone can be an architect is the theoretical aspect. As students, we learn to design spatially and programmatically because that is what we can control. We cant control whether or not to include safety measures, we need to do that no matter what but we can make buildings a better experience for the people through design.
ReplyDeleteAs someone with zero prior experience before this program, it can feel overwhelming to try and make sense of all of the technical elements that go into architecture. But I didn't know what a section was when I started grad school. I could write and research and do philosophy, but I literally didn't know how to use a scale. I had to literally learn how to think like an architect. It took a lot of work to reorient myself in the world spatially rather than theoretically. But I think designing for people starts there. I can learn zoning and codes in an office.
ReplyDeleteAt my undergraduate school for interior design, I was pretty much taught to be practically in interior space planning, codes, lighting, etc. I was quite disoriented when starting grad school here and everything went the opposite direction. I was not mad at that. I feel that being creative was what I was looking for going into design schools. I guess I don’t really feel the way you feel because I’ve been thinking of codes, structures, etc. while trying to be creative in the projects at Clemson anyway. For others that did not have a design background coming into this degree, I think final semester would be enough to start switching on the code-mode. It’s something we should know to reference and follow. It’s not something that we need to know by heart because it’s different from place to place, and changing ever so frequently.
ReplyDelete