It has to do with humility and excellence. I have worked with architects
that were annoyed that I expected dimensioned rooms to fit in their scaled
drawings or more recently, ignored all steam and drain pipes when specifying
cabinets. More often though I find I learn plenty. The best is true
collaboration. Am building now an architects personal dream house with some
things that dismay me, zero projection of roof over walls, corrugated roof
some how bent over an arched roof. but drawings are good details clear and
the first time the sun came out in the cold morning it was just as
described- glorious
    seateabee
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gabriel Orgrease" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 8:05 AM
Subject: [BP] Archtects & Their Education


> Becker, Dan wrote:
>
>> How to manage people and provide professional services in the client's
>> best interest, including educating the client in the design process
>> and the implication of their decisions
>
> Yeah, this is it. And I suspect that since this is not seen as a
> consciously educable part of becoming an architect that by default
> clients, or contractors, may not, in general, perceive that there is a
> distinct design process that needs to be negotiated with informed
> guidance -- as opposed to often misinformed or self-serving guidance. I
> would go to the extent to say that I believe it is a role that
> architects should be more forthright to claim as their own, leastways,
> from the contracting end of things I would much prefer that someone who
> has developed the skill set of helping clients make up their minds being
> doing that rather than the contractor/craftsperson getting sucked into
> the process without an adequate knowledge of alternatives, and their
> further implications (such as an a/c guy not being sensitive to load on
> inadequate roof structures), or for those who have them to use their
> communication skills to an optimal outcome for all team members.
>
> This is not exactly a trivial inquiry on my part. As chair of the PTN
> Education Committee I will point out a few developments that are
> occurring towards what is shaping up to be a fairly concentrated vortex
> of  intensive focus... 1) that traditional trades communities are
> beginning to develop education curriculum (in point the Timber Framers
> Guild has developed a quite comprehensive curriculum that is currently
> in an advanced phase of review) and 2) there is a substantial and
> increased interest in traditional trades education models (international
> scope)... and the multiple roles of the architect/engineer in a
> conservation project I sense needs to be communicated through a
> traditional trades curriculum, leastways an awareness of the importance
> and value of the architect/engineer, but same cannot be through the
> perspective necessarily of what the architectural/engineering programs
> teach internally regarding their own professions, but from a perspective
> that makes sense to the traditional trades and that, in fact, may very
> well bring in expectations from the trades as to standards of the
> ethical behavior for architects and engineers.
>
> Just as it is often difficult for design professionals to distinguish
> between competent and ethical contractors and/or traditional trades, a
> reverse distinction can be made that traditional trades are not always
> clear on the distinction between competent and ethical design
> professionals. As there are really lousy contractors, there are also
> really lousy architects and in both fields the abuses do not speak well
> to the mythology or the public perception of either, and often, I feel,
> becomes an added burden for those who are not lousy in either field.
>
> I do not mean to present this trades oriented perspective as hubris, but
> if the architectural profession in their education process has neglected
> what Dan characterizes as, "...that no sense was conveyed of how huge a
> part of professional practice it really is." then I see the need for a
> traditional trades initiated distinction as to "good" design
> professionals as taking up the default created by a vacume of
> non-education not only out of a need for the survival of the
> craftspersons, but for the sake of the heritage fabric itself.
>
> Lest anyone feel that I am getting personal and pointing fingers, I do
> not associate with, do business with, or consider as a friend any design
> professionals who are not, in my estimation, good. What does bother me
> though, and PTN has put a great deal of energy into working this
> through, is when I meet craftspeople who have been so terribly burnt by
> lousy design professionals that they cannot for the life of them see the
> good.
>
> ][<
>
> --
> To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
> <http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
>

--
To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>