Responding to msg by rma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ("Robert M.
McAnulty") on
>IMHO, the profession has the responsibility for teach
>this sort of mundane administrative bureaucracy during
>the intern period prior to licensing. If the schools
>devoted more time to thoughtful design, the profesion
>would be better off. It is those who are being made to
>tolerate boring classes on contract terminology and
>sequencing who are being shortchanged--that sort of
>stuff can be handled by any office manager...
Mr. McNulty makes a good point about the relative prestige of
design and administration.
Design holds sway in the field up to the point that
adminstration (and nuts and bolts) begin. This bias is
advanced by unstimulating teaching of administration so that
sharp students and some practitioners never learn that good
design can be extended to all parts of architectural education
and practice.
An even stronger emphasis on design might be supported if it
could be shown that all aspects of the field are receptive to
what is now too often limited only to the visual and morphic.
In other, less stolid, fields like art, performance art,
theater, industrial and graphic design, there is more
recognition that the entire process needs design attention for
a successful outcome.
Creative, well-designed construction drawings and
specifications, as well as administrative procedures and
documents, are needed as much as initial design and development
documents. Too often the current practices and documents of
the AIA hegemony are used because designers refuse to give up
their studied prejudice in favor of an entrenched Beaux Artism
that disdains the gritty side of the field.
Imaginative modes of behavior during meetings and construction
can convey as much of the architect's intentions as
conventional documents and models, especially for those
constituencies not accustomed to traditional architectural
media.
No part of the architectural process should be boring or beyond
the interest of truly able designers if they want to see their
best work come to pass in spite of over-bearing clients,
managing partners, project leaders, job captains, office
managers, CD wizards, specifiers, consultants, attorneys,
municipal agencies, funding sources, envious colleagues,
PR-driven competitors and a few others who want the designer to
cower to "the way things are done in the real world".
John
John
McAnulty") on
>IMHO, the profession has the responsibility for teach
>this sort of mundane administrative bureaucracy during
>the intern period prior to licensing. If the schools
>devoted more time to thoughtful design, the profesion
>would be better off. It is those who are being made to
>tolerate boring classes on contract terminology and
>sequencing who are being shortchanged--that sort of
>stuff can be handled by any office manager...
Mr. McNulty makes a good point about the relative prestige of
design and administration.
Design holds sway in the field up to the point that
adminstration (and nuts and bolts) begin. This bias is
advanced by unstimulating teaching of administration so that
sharp students and some practitioners never learn that good
design can be extended to all parts of architectural education
and practice.
An even stronger emphasis on design might be supported if it
could be shown that all aspects of the field are receptive to
what is now too often limited only to the visual and morphic.
In other, less stolid, fields like art, performance art,
theater, industrial and graphic design, there is more
recognition that the entire process needs design attention for
a successful outcome.
Creative, well-designed construction drawings and
specifications, as well as administrative procedures and
documents, are needed as much as initial design and development
documents. Too often the current practices and documents of
the AIA hegemony are used because designers refuse to give up
their studied prejudice in favor of an entrenched Beaux Artism
that disdains the gritty side of the field.
Imaginative modes of behavior during meetings and construction
can convey as much of the architect's intentions as
conventional documents and models, especially for those
constituencies not accustomed to traditional architectural
media.
No part of the architectural process should be boring or beyond
the interest of truly able designers if they want to see their
best work come to pass in spite of over-bearing clients,
managing partners, project leaders, job captains, office
managers, CD wizards, specifiers, consultants, attorneys,
municipal agencies, funding sources, envious colleagues,
PR-driven competitors and a few others who want the designer to
cower to "the way things are done in the real world".
John
John