n smikle wrote:The food without the knife fork and desert would have went down better without the patronizing comments, intentional or not.
Then tell me what it is that you want.
This is what it sounds like you want. It sounds like you want to play architect. It sounds like you don't want to put in the time and effort to become one. It sounds like you think you're too special to have to start with the basics. If that's the case, then just expect to be patronized. I can't help you.
Or is it that you actually want to be an architect? If that's already your goal, then, well, get a degree and a license. That's not patronizing, that's life.
Or is it that you want to learn about the profession so that you can decide whether it's really for you? Or maybe you want to work for an architect. Or maybe you're just curious. All very noble motives. If so, then read the first Ching book I listed. And if you're thinking about being an architect,
listen when I tell you that architecture is first and foremost an art. There is art to bricklaying and on a rare day even mechanical engineering, but you need to know that if you go to architecture school, you are going to art school. You'll take exactly two classes in basic structures, and apart from a few hours a day learning history, professional practice, etc., your ass is in studio. And the studio professors aren't talking about sizing beams or placing light switches conveniently. They're talking aesthetics and philosophy and psychology and critical theory, etc. It's not for everyone, just like engineering isn't for everyone. Most of what an architect learns in school is art, and most of what he learns of everything else comes after the degree, from years of apprenticing. I don't know what the requirements are where you live, but in the US, its 4 years of undergrad, three and a half graduate, and three years of internship. Then you take the test, 7 parts, 7 days.
Or, is it that you don't want to bother becoming an architect but want to design something that doesn't require a license? Fair enough, but at the very least you have to know a) what the building industry expects in terms of drawings, and b) what the law requires for whatever it is you're designing. Construction documents are a different animal than what engineers are typically used to. Contractors expect certain drawings, certain details, certain specifications, and they expect them to be presented in a certain way, in a certain order, etc. Throw them for a loop by drawing something at a non-standard scale, or put dimensions in a place they don't expect, and expect it to be built wrong. Draw something that's not a standard size, or that goes against common practice, and expect your builder to let your client know that they hired a moron. So read the second book I told you about.
And if you think there aren't a lot of building codes that apply to things that don't require a license to design, think again. If you draw a stair that doesn't work because it's too narrow, or the run is too long, or the risers are too high or the treads too shallow, etc. - and the builder isn't thorough enough to catch it until his framer is on site yelling that it doesn't work, then what do you think happens? Who pays to make the change? Who compensates the builder for time lost, or the owner for the delay? And what if you can't make it work with a reconfigured stair? Trust me, it happens.
And, if you do decide to design something that you think will be built, please remember that whatever you design, the rest of the world will have to look at it. Architecture isn't like taking up water color, where your less than stellar early work can be stuffed in the attic or tossed in the bin. There's a responsibility that comes with working in the public realm. If you wouldn't be comfortable forcing your neighbor to hang your latest painting over his mantle, then why on earth would you be comfortable forcing him to stare at your latest architectural creation day in day out? There's an awful lot of bad architecture out there, much of it by architects - but you don't want be part of the problem.
Look, no one is saying you can't do it. You might have a wonderful talent. You might not. What I'm saying that it's hard work, and that there's a lot to learn, and most importantly, that architecture is a different animal than what you're probably used to - it isn't a specialized field of engineering to which you will be able to apply much of what you've already learned. It's starting over, just as if you decided to become a lawyer or a doctor. Some of my favorite buildings were designed by people who were not architects. But they knew the profession and they knew good design. They cared. I encourage to explore, because you might well be one of them.
As for soil engineering. Architects don't do soil engineering. No one but geotechnical engineers do soil engineering. It's not something you dabble in. I wouldn't hire a structural engineer to do soils work any more than I'd hire a neurosurgeon to perform heart surgery. Even if he'd read a book.
