Stupid Studio
I know I talked about not coming back, but I should vent. I didn't have such a hot day, today. In fact, it sucked quite a bit, and studio will forever set my bad mood.
Okay, so I consider myself to be a competent person when it comes to architecture. Albeit, I have not had a significant amount of invested interest in architecture before starting school, but I'm a smart, capable guy, and I think I can hold my own. Well, we had a guest instructor in our section doing desk crits, namely, Valery (my first semester instructor). After having explained my parti and scheme, he basically looked at me and said he had no idea what I was trying to do. Punch in the gut. I really did invest a lot of time and effort into this, and he just shoots it down with no other reason than "[he] doesn't get it." So then I have to ask him a series of other questions in an effort to weasel or generate some kind of constructive feedback. I get no such help. He just points at things and says he doesn't like this or that. It's one thing not to like something with just reason, but he didn't even bother explaining what was wrong with it so I could fix it. I explained to him why I did things the way I did and that it was deliberate and how it logically fit into my design. It didn't so much as elicit a nod or signal of acknowledgement. I finally asked him where I should go from there, and he just said he didn't know. What the hell do you know, idiot?
I've become so numb and so cynical towards the entire education system. It is absolutlely ridiculous. They want us to be creative or think outside the box or be original; how the hell do I do that when there are so many things restraining me from doing just that. No diagonal lines! Precedent! Typologies! There's no outlet or impetus to really inspire creative thought. It's the biggest catch-22. They want us to be creative, sculpt magnificent statues and monuments, but then take away the hammer and chisel. I can't work like this.
I know architecture is subjective, that there are no absolutes in architecture, or most anything for that matter. But, to be flatly rejected like that really bugs me. I felt like I was trying to convince Valery why my project was good. Architecture should not be a thing of circumstances, it should just be. I don't ever want to have to explain my projects again. Let it be what it is. If you don't get it, that's your fault. Architecture is too often judged by repuation. It's a damn shame. If I ever make it to the top, I'll do it honestly. I don't want my work to be a gimmick. Done.
Okay, so I consider myself to be a competent person when it comes to architecture. Albeit, I have not had a significant amount of invested interest in architecture before starting school, but I'm a smart, capable guy, and I think I can hold my own. Well, we had a guest instructor in our section doing desk crits, namely, Valery (my first semester instructor). After having explained my parti and scheme, he basically looked at me and said he had no idea what I was trying to do. Punch in the gut. I really did invest a lot of time and effort into this, and he just shoots it down with no other reason than "[he] doesn't get it." So then I have to ask him a series of other questions in an effort to weasel or generate some kind of constructive feedback. I get no such help. He just points at things and says he doesn't like this or that. It's one thing not to like something with just reason, but he didn't even bother explaining what was wrong with it so I could fix it. I explained to him why I did things the way I did and that it was deliberate and how it logically fit into my design. It didn't so much as elicit a nod or signal of acknowledgement. I finally asked him where I should go from there, and he just said he didn't know. What the hell do you know, idiot?
I've become so numb and so cynical towards the entire education system. It is absolutlely ridiculous. They want us to be creative or think outside the box or be original; how the hell do I do that when there are so many things restraining me from doing just that. No diagonal lines! Precedent! Typologies! There's no outlet or impetus to really inspire creative thought. It's the biggest catch-22. They want us to be creative, sculpt magnificent statues and monuments, but then take away the hammer and chisel. I can't work like this.
I know architecture is subjective, that there are no absolutes in architecture, or most anything for that matter. But, to be flatly rejected like that really bugs me. I felt like I was trying to convince Valery why my project was good. Architecture should not be a thing of circumstances, it should just be. I don't ever want to have to explain my projects again. Let it be what it is. If you don't get it, that's your fault. Architecture is too often judged by repuation. It's a damn shame. If I ever make it to the top, I'll do it honestly. I don't want my work to be a gimmick. Done.