Architecture Addiction, The Official Blog of

I’v been following the thread “Let’s see what people think about us in terms of how much money we, architects, make!” on LinkedIn.

A member of the group had stated that “Art + Building Science = Architecture”

Chris Currie had an interesting response that I wanted to share with you.

[Emphasis mine.]

When I first saw this comment I couldn’t stop laughing. This is so wrong I don’t know where to start. Art is subjective to personal taste science isn’t. This is another reason why architectural services are looked upon by the public as optional and the architects income is minuscule. Science is closer to math than it is art. Numbers are factual data. Science is based on facts and numbers. Now looking at who is typically liable for that in the process of a design of any project should have been a big red flag for everyone. I’ll give you a hint, it’s not the architect. Considering the stark contrast between the two subjects and the very few architects that know any science at all, let alone how the building goes together, you can’t even begin to sell me on the idea that architects are scientific. The probability of that, is like winning the lottery or finding love in a whore house because we all know they are not learning it in their design only curriculum in college. After all it’s so much easier to draw a pretty picture, making it into a reality is always someone else’s problem in today’s world. That’s why there are engineers. I’m not going to go into specifics but I have seen quite a few architectural abortions in my day to support this train of thought.

Thank you, Chris. This issue remains my largest grip with most architecture schools. Students learn how to make pretty pictures on their computer screens.

Do students learn how to build? NO.

Do students learn how buildings are actually put together? NO.

Do students get to go outside to look at real buildings? Only if they can squeeze in the time between their requisit twenty credits, all of thier class work, studio, and their precious few hours of sleep.

As a student, I overheard my classmates bemoan the ridiculousness of the spaces they were designing.

Of course they were ridiculous. We were trying to satisfy ridiculous critics. We designed in a vacuum. We had zero experience with building materials or how they fit together. We learned a number of software programs. We became proficient with the laser cutter and the 3D printer.

Save our occaisional bouts of volunteerism with Habitat for Humanity, we knew nothing about building.

What is it that possesses a school of architecture to write its curricula in such a way so as to exclude any of the building arts? Upon graduation we are like sheep sent to slaughter.