how to be a good architecte?? part 2

What does this mean for being a 'good' architecture student?

Put simply, architecture and architectural education are being forced towards a massive paradigm change (or at least a paradigm expansion) Ð and that might not be as negative as it sounds. In many ways it is a long-overdue opportunity for the discipline of architecture to go through a wake-up: from childish self-involvement, through adolescent awkwardness, towards a less marginal, more diverse engagement with wider social aims. But if this is going to happen, it is unlikely that the change will be lead by the establishment itself, but rather by an ambitious, socially-responsible generation of students, young designers and progressive tutors using their time in architecture school to come up with different ways of doing things. Don't change yourself to go into architecture. Go into architecture to change it. If being 'good' in the traditional way carries such little reward, I hope more and more students will have the confidence to be 'bad'. Not 'bad', as in lazy, thoughtless or arrogant, but bad in terms of a willingness to misbehave; to ask difficult questions, to be disobedient. Not to settle for unemployment or drudgery, but to look for other applications for architectural thinking, to focus much less on the design of art objects and assets, 'space' and 'form', and much more on the social, economic and environmental systems that shape them, on value and values, on social norms, on processes and production. Basically: on what architecture does. Here is a rough manual for the 'bad' architecture student - some suggested rules of thumb:

Question the question: It's almost always wrong.

Question the measures of success: Don't try too hard to get a first. They're nice for job interviews, but don't help as much as you might think, and the more fixated you get on high grades, the harder they come.

Trust your own judgement: Often the most important questions are the ones which are so obvious that no one dares ask them for fear of being branded na•ve or stupid.

Dare to face realities: Be they financial, technical, legal, social, environmental... This might begin simply by asking: 'Who pays for it?' or 'Why do we need it?'. Real problems are actually much more interesting than invented ones, even if they're harder to solve.

Seek uncoventional solutions to conventional problems: Not conventional solutions to unconventional problems.

Research rigorously: It's the best way to fend off ignorance.

Be less interested in the world of design, and more interested in the design of the world. (Thanks Bruce Mau)

Don't buy into jargon and BS: What does "materiality" actually mean?

Don't oversimplify: At the same time, don't pretend that non-thinking is a form of pragmatism. Grapple with complex ideas, find words to communicate them.

Don't worship empty idols: John Maynard Keynes shaped the future. Zaha just sells futuristic shapes.

Take your ideas to other audiences: Why produce ideas just for job interviews and exhibitions? If you have good ideas, publish them, show them to economists, politicians, farmers, investors, anyone who will listen. If you have a brilliant idea, start a business. Don't let architects be your only jury.

Inform yourself: Read the FT, New Scientist, Wired, Adbusters; watch TED talks, study anything that interests you. Be an amateur generalist.

Collaborate: If you work better with a friend, work together. Produce amazing work and dare your school to fail you.

Debate among your friends: Don't let your tutor lead the conversation. (The best ones will love not having to).

Focus less on object and more on outcome: "We should be less concerned with the design of bridges and more concerned with how to get to the other side." (Cedric Price)

Be self critical: There is no, single, 'correct' way to look at the world, there are lots of different ones, so try on different pairs of spectacles from time to time and see what your work looks like through multiple lenses.

Drop-out creatively: One of the most counter-productive symptoms of the linear education model is the negative stigma attached to changing one's mind. Since the purpose of education is to find what it is you're good at and make it your work (even if a job description doesn't exist for it yet), dropping-out is one of the more positive decisions anyone can make Ð it makes you much less a 'failure' than those who stay on their current course for lack of imagination.

how to be a good architecte

The Wrong Question It was probably the first thing I asked, and it is something that I have since been asked more times than I can remember. "What A-levels should I do if I want to be an architect?", or sometimes a variant of the same question: "What skills make a good architect? Do I need to able to draw? There are 'correct' answers to these questions. Normally something along the lines of "A mix of arts and sciences", and "No, you don't need to be able to draw, but it helps. You need to be able to think spatially." It's not that these answers are wrong (my slightly more direct advice might be: "Learn Chinese."); they are perfectly benign, well-intended answers Ð but to precisely the wrong question. The most obvious flaw in the question is that it assumes that there is such a thing as a 'good architect', or a 'good architecture student', and that the two are in some way connected. The second assumption inherent in the question is that whatever qualities might constitute a 'good architect' are established and unchanging. Neither of these assumptions are true. While we can say what made a 'good architect' in the 20th century, what constitutes a 'good architect' in the 21st century is very much up-for-debate.

Linear Education We can't predict the future. It's almost impossible to imagine what the world will be like in 7 years. Yet, if we think about it, that's precisely what our historical model of architectural education has claimed to do. Although we tend to think of architecture as an art, and architects as artists or intellectuals Ð it is not a 'subject' in the traditional sense. Unlike students who study physics for example, who don't necessarily study in order to ultimately become a professional 'Physicist', architecture students almost always study architecture in order to become an 'Architect'. Architectural education is historically aimed not at producing world-ready architectural knowledge but producing practice-ready architectural professionals. As much as the rhetoric it generates might shroud the fact, structurally that's what it's still designed to do. By laying out a linear route to 'becoming an architect', progressing through Parts I,II and III, (interspersed with periods of 'professional experience'), architectural education is effectively a prediction, made in the face of wild unpredictability, that things will stay more or less the same. It is, effectively, a 7-year-long tunnel and once you're in, there is usually very little room for flexibility (besides dropping out). The problem is things don't stay more or less the same. Some changes, even unpredicted ones, are sufficiently peripheral to the everyday commercial business of designing buildings that architectural education can ignore them, or simply absorb them. There has (as many heads-of-school will make clear in speeches) been a shift in education away from rote learning of a fixed core of knowledge, towards the more general ability 'to think' about problems as they arise, in order to be able to absorb some of the messy, unexpected change that can't be predicted 7 years into the future. But that tolerance is effectively a surface-effect on what is, under the bonnet, still a linear process. The recession has confronted architecture with an unpredicted change which it cannot absorb: the massive contraction of demand. The collapse of the credit-driven financial paradigm (upon which professional architecture has become dependent) and the forthcoming contraction of public spending has erased the market we have been aiming towards. There are hardly any jobs. In other words our 7-year education aimed us towards a world that no longer exists.

Architecture's Education Crisis But even as the business of architecture has failed so dramatically, the idea of architecture has, perversely, never been more successful. More students than ever are enrolling to study architecture at university. In the last decade, the number of architecture students graduating every year has risen from 1000 to 1400, and that number is still growing. Architecture finds itself in the bizarre situation of being culturally oversubscribed at the same moment as it is economically stranded. The result is a massive human surplus of architectural intelligence. More and more architecture graduates competing for fewer and fewer jobs. This is, in many ways, the architectural community's elephant-in-the-room, and there are many older architects who would rather ignore it and carry on as before. But students and graduates can't afford to. Whether we recognise it or not, by sheer weight of numbers, this generation of students is going to force a change in what we see as the end point of architectural education, because not all of us can be employed in the role traditionally defined for the architect, but none of us want to go and work behind a bar.

Great Escapism In order to picture how this crisis might change things, it is first important to make clear how deep this assumption - that the aim of architectural education is to get a job as a designer in the construction industry - goes. The answer is: much deeper than we realise. As students we are still set imaginary briefs to design imaginary buildings, at the service of our own 'original concept'. The ultimate destination for each project is the end of term 'crit' (a ten-minute pitch), followed by the end of year exhibition Ð each a sort of false finale at which point the merit of your effort is judged not by its social, economic, technical or even intellectual impact, but more by its internal cultural impact, conferred by the favour of the architectural establishment and potential employers. In other words, a 'good' architecture student is one whose portfolio is crammed with work which impresses other architects. The problem is that this audience has no real appetite for realism Ð the frustrations of everyday practice seem to create an almost unquenchable thirst for exquisite, escapist fantasies. The result is a bizarre, internalised currency of aesthetic innuendo, opaque, esoteric language and unimpeachably cool (often hand-drawn) drawings. Intelligent, ambitious, morally-aware students find themselves pinning their careers on beautiful drawings of a 'Retirement home for Amnesiac Wizards', desperately competing to impress the establishment on its own terms Ð for jobs which either don't exist or prove to be heart-breakingly, mind-numbingly uninventive by comparison. This is quite difficult to admit to: that all the outward noises of architectural education - seeming to be endlessly creative, fresh, radical - are in fact manifestations of the precise opposite. A kind of intrinsic conservatism that serves the status quo by gratifying its fetishes rather than challenging its assumptions. Wrapped in its own solipsistic media-cycle, insulated from reality and feeding a non-existent jobs market, architectural education is failing to recognise not only that it is doing its students a disservice, but also that beyond its walls, society is about to go through a period of massive, profound change, and that architectural and design thinking (beyond simply the design of new buildings) has a potentially massive contribution to make to a society in transition. Perhaps the greatest paradox of all is that while the architecture industry is (quite literally) redundant, it's obvious that society-at-large has never had such a pressing, urgent need for ambitious designers to really think about our future: about our relationship with resources, the topology of our industrial society, about economic systems, social inequality, climate change, technological game-changers, man made disasters... Hard to believe it, but now might actually turn out to be a very exciting time to be a designer.

Green building

US EPA Kansas City Science & Technology Center. This facility features the following green attributes:
*LEED 2.0 Gold certified
*Green Power
*Native Landscaping

It has been suggested that Green Building on College Campuses be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)

Green building (also known as green construction or sustainable building) is the practice of creating structures and using processes that are environmentally responsible and resource-efficient throughout a building's life-cycle: from siting to design, construction, operation, maintenance, renovation, and deconstruction. This practice expands and complements the classical building design concerns of economy, utility, durability, and comfort.^[1]

Although new technologies are constantly being developed to complement current practices in creating greener structures, the common objective is that green buildings are designed to reduce the overall impact of the built environment on human health and the natural environment by:

• Efficiently using energy, water, and other resources
• Protecting occupant health and improving employee productivity
• Reducing waste, pollution and environmental degradation^[1]

A similar concept is natural building, which is usually on a smaller scale and tends to focus on the use of natural materials that are available locally.^[2] Other related topics include sustainable design and green architecture. Green building does not specifically address the issue of the retrofiting existing homes such as the Epositivehome project.

Contents 1 Reducing environmental impact 2 Goals of green building 2.1 Siting and structure design efficiency 2.2 Energy efficiency 2.3 Water efficiency 2.4 Materials efficiency 2.5 Indoor environmental quality enhancement 2.6 Operations and maintenance optimization 2.7 Waste reduction 3 Cost 4 Regulation and operation 5 International frameworks and assessment tools 6 See also 7 References

Reducing environmental impact

Green building practices aim to reduce the environmental impact of new buildings. Buildings account for a large amount of land use, energy and water consumption, and air and atmosphere alteration. Considering the statistics, reducing the amount of natural resources buildings consume and the amount of pollution given off is seen as crucial for future sustainability, according to EPA. Green building does not typically include the concept of renovations although many of the 2050 homes are already built and UK homes account for 30% of UK Carbon Emissions ^[3] . Domestic energy improvement targets of 20% between now and 2010, and again by a further 20% between 2010 and 2020 have been suggested by the UK government ^[4]. The environmental impact of buildings is often underestimated, while the perceived costs of green buildings are overestimated. A recent survey by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development finds that green costs are overestimated by 300 percent, as key players in real estate and construction estimate the additional cost at 17 percent above conventional construction, more than triple the true average cost difference of about 5 percent.

Goals of green building

the Blu Homes mkSolaire, a green building designed by Michelle Kaufmann

The concept of sustainable development can be traced to the energy (especially fossil oil) crisis and the environment pollution concern in the 1970s.^[5] The green building movement in the U.S. originated from the need and desire for more energy efficient and environmentally friendly construction practices. There are a number of motives to building green, including environmental, economic, and social benefits. However, modern sustainability initiatives call for an integrated and synergistic design to both new construction and in the retrofitting of an existing structure. Also known as sustainable design, this approach integrates the building life-cycle with each green practice employed with a design-purpose to create a synergy amongst the practices used.

Green building brings together a vast array of practices and techniques to reduce and ultimately eliminate the impacts of new buildings on the environment and human health. It often emphasizes taking advantage of renewable resources, e.g., using sunlight through passive solar, active solar, and photovoltaic techniques and using plants and trees through green roofs, rain gardens, and for reduction of rainwater run-off. Many other techniques, such as using packed gravel or permeable concrete instead of conventional concrete or asphalt to enhance replenishment of ground water, are used as well.

While the practices, or technologies, employed in green building are constantly evolving and may differ from region to region, there are fundamental principles that persist from which the method is derived: Siting and Structure Design Efficiency, Energy Efficiency, Water Efficiency, Materials Efficiency, Indoor Environmental Quality Enhancement, Operations and Maintenance Optimization, and Waste and Toxics Reduction.^[6][7] The essence of green building is an optimization of one or more of these principles. Also, with the proper synergistic design, individual green building technologies may work together to produce a greater cumulative effect.

On the aesthetic side of green architecture or sustainable design is the philosophy of designing a building that is in harmony with the natural features and resources surrounding the site. There are several key steps in designing sustainable buildings: specify 'green' building materials from local sources, reduce loads, optimize systems, and generate on-site renewable energy.

Siting and structure design efficiency

See also: Sustainable design

The foundation of any construction project is rooted in the concept and design stages. The concept stage, in fact, is one of the major steps in a project life cycle, as it has the largest impact on cost and performance.^[8] In designing environmentally optimal buildings, the objective is to minimize the total environmental impact associated with all life-cycle stages of the building project. However, building as a process is not as streamlined as an industrial process, and varies from one building to the other, never repeating itself identically. In addition, buildings are much more complex products, composed of a multitude of materials and components each constituting various design variables to be decided at the design stage. A variation of every design variable may affect the environment during all the building's relevant life-cycle stages.^[9]

Energy efficiency

Main articles: Low-energy house and Zero-energy building

Green buildings often include measures to reduce energy use. To increase the efficiency of the building envelope, (the barrier between conditioned and unconditioned space), they may use high-efficiency windows and insulation in walls, ceilings, and floors. Another strategy, passive solar building design, is often implemented in low-energy homes. Designers orient windows and walls and place awnings, porches, and trees^[10] to shade windows and roofs during the summer while maximizing solar gain in the winter. In addition, effective window placement (daylighting) can provide more natural light and lessen the need for electric lighting during the day. Solar water heating further reduces energy loads.

Onsite generation of renewable energy through solar power, wind power, hydro power, or biomass can significantly reduce the environmental impact of the building. Power generation is generally the most expensive feature to add to a building.

Water efficiency

See also: Water Conservation

Reducing water consumption and protecting water quality are key objectives in sustainable building. One critical issue of water consumption is that in many areas, the demands on the supplying aquifer exceed its ability to replenish itself. To the maximum extent feasible, facilities should increase their dependence on water that is collected, used, purified, and reused on-site. The protection and conservation of water throughout the life of a building may be accomplished by designing for dual plumbing that recycles water in toilet flushing. Waste-water may be minimized by utilizing water conserving fixtures such as ultra-low flush toilets and low-flow shower heads. Bidets help eliminate the use of toilet paper, reducing sewer traffic and increasing possibilities of re-using water on-site. Point of use water treatment and heating improves both water quality and energy efficiency while reducing the amount of water in circulation. The use of non-sewage and greywater for on-site use such as site-irrigation will minimize demands on the local aquifer.^[11]

Materials efficiency

See also: Sustainable architecture

Building materials typically considered to be 'green' include rapidly renewable plant materials like bamboo (because bamboo grows quickly) and straw, lumber from forests certified to be sustainably managed, ecology blocks, dimension stone, recycled stone, recycled metal, and other products that are non-toxic, reusable, renewable, and/or recyclable (e.g. Trass, Linoleum, sheep wool, panels made from paper flakes, compressed earth block, adobe, baked earth, rammed earth, clay, vermiculite, flax linen, sisal, seagrass, cork, expanded clay grains, coconut, wood fibre plates, calcium sand stone, concrete (high and ultra high performance, roman self-healing concrete^[12]) , etc.^[13][14]) The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) also suggests using recycled industrial goods, such as coal combustion products, foundry sand, and demolition debris in construction projects ^[15] Building materials should be extracted and manufactured locally to the building site to minimize the energy embedded in their transportation. Where possible, building elements should be manufactured off-site and delivered to site, to maximise benefits of off-site manufacture including minimising waste, maximising recycling (because manufacture is in one location), high quality elements, better OHS management, less noise and dust.

Indoor environmental quality enhancement

See also: Indoor Air Quality

The Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) category in LEED standards, one of the five environmental categories, was created to provide comfort, well-being, and productivity of occupants. The LEED IEQ category addresses design and construction guidelines especially: indoor air quality (IAQ), thermal quality, and lighting quality.^[16]

Indoor Air Quality seeks to reduce volatile organic compounds, or VOC's, and other air impurities such as microbial contaminants. Buildings rely on a properly designed HVAC system to provide adequate ventilation and air filtration as well as isolate operations (kitchens, dry cleaners, etc.) from other occupancies. During the design and construction process choosing construction materials and interior finish products with zero or low emissions will improve IAQ. Many building materials and cleaning/maintenance products emit toxic gases, such as VOC's and formaldehyde. These gases can have a detrimental impact on occupants' health and productivity as well. Avoiding these products will increase a building's IEQ.

Personal temperature and airflow control over the HVAC system coupled with a properly designed building envelope will also aid in increasing a building's thermal quality. Creating a high performance luminous environment through the careful integration of natural and artificial light sources will improve on the lighting quality of a structure.^[11][17]

Operations and maintenance optimization

No matter how sustainable a building may have been in its design and construction, it can only remain so if it is operated responsibly and maintained properly. Ensuring operations and maintenance(O&M) personnel are part of the project's planning and development process will help retain the green criteria designed at the onset of the project.^[18] Every aspect of green building is integrated into the O&M phase of a building's life. The addition of new green technologies also falls on the O&M staff. Although the goal of waste reduction may be applied during the design, construction and demolition phases of a building's life-cycle, it is in the O&M phase that green practices such as recycling and air quality enhancement take place.

Waste reduction

Green architecture also seeks to reduce waste of energy, water and materials used during construction. For example, in California nearly 60% of the state's waste comes from commercial buildings^[19] During the construction phase, one goal should be to reduce the amount of material going to landfills. Well-designed buildings also help reduce the amount of waste generated by the occupants as well, by providing on-site solutions such as compost bins to reduce matter going to landfills.

To reduce the impact on wells or water treatment plants, several options exist. "Greywater", wastewater from sources such as dishwashing or washing machines, can be used for subsurface irrigation, or if treated, for non-potable purposes, e.g., to flush toilets and wash cars. Rainwater collectors are used for similar purposes.

Centralized wastewater treatment systems can be costly and use a lot of energy. An alternative to this process is converting waste and wastewater into fertilizer, which avoids these costs and shows other benefits. By collecting human waste at the source and running it to a semi-centralized biogas plant with other biological waste, liquid fertilizer can be produced. This concept was demonstrated by a settlement in Lubeck Germany in the late 1990s. Practices like these provide soil with organic nutrients and create carbon sinks that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, offsetting greenhouse gas emission. Producing artificial fertilizer is also more costly in energy than this process.^[20]

What is this job like?

Let Me Guess: You Must Be An Architect

HE has not had a run on them yet, but Robert Marc, a New York eyewear designer and retailer, would not be surprised to hear customers pleading, ''Make me a pair of glasses just like Daniel Libeskind wears.''
Mr. Libeskind, the Berlin architect, became the focus of attention last week when it was announced that his firm, Studio Daniel Libeskind, was one of two design teams with a project under consideration for the World Trade Center site. The other was the Think team, headed by the architects Frederic Schwartz, Rafael Viñoly and Ken Smith of New York and Shigeru Ban of Tokyo.
With their soaring towers and memorials, both concepts were the talk of the town. A few New Yorkers, however, seemed almost as impressed by the architects' eyewear. Mr. Viñoly appeared in photographs wearing two pairs of spectacles on his head -- something of a fashion signature. Mr. Smith wore his trademark dark spherical frames, and Mr. Libeskind had on a pair of heavy rectangular spectacles that highlighted his stern expression.

''Libeskind's glasses are out of control,'' said Brian Sawyer, a New York architect, his amusement mixed with admiration. He knows that for architects, signature glasses are a conscious attempt to trademark their faces, much as they trademark a building. Mr. Libeskind's frames are a particularly severe example of so-called statement glasses, meant to confer a degree of gravitas, but hinting all the while that he (or she) has raffishly artistic leanings.
Spectacles with a pronounced geometric shape are a natural style choice in a profession focused on structure and form, Mr. Sawyer pointed out. ''For me they are just like a watch,'' he said. ''I revel in all the miniature aspects of their mechanics, but they are also a beautiful thing.''
So prevalent are they as an insignia of the architect's profession that ordinary people often try to copy them.
''You never hear customers saying, 'Make me look like a lawyer,' '' Mr. Marc observed. ''It's always, 'Give me that architect type of look.' ''
At Alain Mikli or Selima Optique, among the brands professionals prefer, shoppers go in for eccentrically spherical or rhomboid shapes, some owlishly endearing, some as forbidding as Dr. Frankenstein, depending on one's point of view.
Joseph Lee, an architect with G Tects, a New York firm, favors Dolce & Gabbana glasses with a clear acrylic rim. Mr. Lee is perfectly aware that his glasses give him the aspect of a mad scientist. But their look is only fitting, he maintained. ''We think of ourselves as working in a research lab, where we like to explore different aspects of theory,'' Mr. Lee said.
It was Le Corbusier who first made owlish black spectacles a signature, thereby giving generations of followers permission to adopt a similarly geeky look. ''He made it safe to make a statement through eyewear,'' said Mayer Rus, the design editor of House & Garden magazine.
Indeed, Le Corbusier inspired Philip Johnson to design a similarly rounded pair of glasses for himself in 1934, which he had manufactured by Cartier. Ken Smith, the landscape architect, has adopted a contemporary version of Mr. Johnson's black-rimmed orbs -- the perfectly rigorous complement to his black-on-black attire.
Like Le Corbusier, architects today are often remarkably loyal to their chosen eyewear style.

''Just as you want to be identified with a particular design approach, you want to be known for your glasses,'' Mr. Sawyer said. ''Sometimes they are the only things that basically don't change about you.''
Often those glasses suggest a balance of weirdness and starchy conservatism. ''Of all the applied artists, the architect most often resembles a Wall Street banker,'' Mr. Rus said. ''They don't want clients to feel they are some sort of kook who is going to make them a crazy blob of a building.''
Determined to strike a sober note, a few fall back on glasses with a look that, sadly, verges on cliché. ''They rationalize their glasses as being some sort of minimalist style statement,'' Mr. Rus said, ''but they end up looking like something from an avant-garde German performance troupe.''
That kind of assessment does not faze eyewear obsessives, for whom glasses are often their only concession to style -- the ostentatiously understated equivalent of a nylon Prada coat.
Some also see them as marvels of invention. Gordon Kipping, who heads G Tects, is immoderately attached to his IC! Berlin stainless-steel sunglasses, stamped out of five sheets of metal, making their hingeless design as flexible as a hairpin.
''I just like the fact that they're an innovative technology,'' Mr. Kipping said. The architect, who spends between $250 and $350 on each pair of glasses he owns, is no less fixated on his Sandy Grendel glasses, Swiss made and designed especially for dentists.
''I like the all-titanium armature across the top, and that it comes with a visor and fiber optic light fixtures that snap on,'' he said.
Strangers quickly peg him as an architect, but that's all right, Mr. Kipping said. ''I just tell them, it's the glasses, right?''
Photos: SERIOUS WORK, SERIOUS EYEWEAR -- Architects need glasses as recognizable as a monument. From top, Le Corbusier, an early trendsetter; the landscape designer Ken Smith; the architect Daniel Libeskind with his wife, Nina; and Rafael Viñoly, double-decking. (Bill Cunningham/The New York Times); (Reuters); (Rebecca Cooney for The New York Times)(pg. 1); HERE'S LOOKING AT YOU -- Architects with recognizable eyewear include Gordon Kipping, above, in his Sandy Grendel's and, below left, Frederic Schwartz in his heavy frames. (Christopher Smith for The New York Times; below left, Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times)(pg. 6)

Know What you Want to be Famous for

 Know What you Want to be Famous for

As an experiment and in keeping in the spirit of New Year's wises, we are conducting an experiment in goal setting (wishes with deadlines). Much of what you will find here is based on "The Ultimate Success Formula" popularized by success coach Anthony Robbins. This is a simple sequence of actions for achieving a goal. They are as follows:

1. Know what you want
2. Take action toward it
3. Examine the results of your action
4. Adjust your approach

Over the next four weeks, starting today, we are challenging you to set a goal and follow through with these steps. You probably wont be famous in 4 weeks but don't be discouraged. You will probably be in better shape for the years to come. This week begins with the first step:

Know What You Want

Before you take off on your journey, you have to know where you want to end up.
What kind of results do you want?
You’ll find that the less wishy-washy you are about your destination, the better your chance of arriving there. You can’t just say things like, “I want to be a better”, “I want a nicer glasses”, “I want more exposure”, “I want a cool mystique”, or “I want to be a famous Architect”.
No, you have to be specific. “I want a Robert Marc custom design glasses”, or “I want my inside-outside house to be published in Metropolis Magazine”.
If you don’t have a good target, how can you possibly know when you’ve hit it?

Postmodern architecture

If, with the opening of the Seagram Building in 1957, western architecture once again achieved an international unity that had eluded it for two hundred years, that unity was short-lived. Critics could not long ignore the fact that this unity was achieved at a cost of the honesty of materials Mies and Wright had earlier championed. It was achieved only with other sacrifices, too. One was the sacrifice of the city: the great modern towers abandoned the city as much as their medieval prototype towers withdrew and dominated the Italian hill-towns. A second was the sacrifice of personal or local character: these office towers were so classical and elegant that they could be copied--not with the same creativity, to be sure--in the cookie-cutter rows that so deadened western cities. The third was the sacrifice of history: modern architecture believed for a good while that it had no past, only a future.
There have been several reactions to Modernism. Le Corbusier bridged the gap between abstract and expressive architecture, as well as between the tectonic and sculptural approach to building. Mies van der Rohe never wavered from his early design formulations, but other "early modern" architects did. Wright's last works were strange and highly personalized visions of history (Guggenheim Museum, Marin County Civic Center). Le Corbusier's chapel at Ronchamp went against a score of his early positions, and admitted history, representation, and eccentric use of materials where they had formerly been banished. Eero Saarinen's TWA terminal at JFK Airport caused Americans in particular to ask if there were not some alternatives to "classical" modernism (although elsewhere Saarinen was all corporate elegance, as in the CBS Building). Finally, Robert Venturi's Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture, written in Rome in 1962 and published by the Museum of Modern Art in New York in 1966, argued that the American city had a logic and a strength that should be frankly incorporated in contemporary style, rather than papered over. Venturi saw architectural history as far more quirky and eccentric than the "classic" and progressive view that had formerly been propagated. This opened the floodgates to new departures in architectural design, embracing history, populism, anthropomorphism, and vernacular design. The result--our contemporary expression in architecture--has been known since the mid 1970s as Post-Modern. Post-Modernism is effectively a pluralistic approach in which colorful, decorative, sometimes whimsical buildings mark a return to historicism. Vocabulary from the past, however, is abstracted in personal, expressive ways.

Key works:

1. LeCorbusier: Chapel at Ronchamp, France, 1950-55 [ 134 plan; 135 view; 137 interior]; figs. 866--868; colorplate 69.
2. Eero Saarinen, TWA Terminal, Kennedy International Airport, N.Y.C., 1962 [ 187 detail of facade]; fig. 876.
3. Robert Venturi, Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture, written 1962, published 1966.
4. Robert Venturi, Venturi House, Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia, 1962; fig. 897.
5. Piano and Rogers, Centre Pompidou (also called Centre Beaubourg), Paris, 1977 [ 313]; fig. 923.
6. Philip Johnson: AT&T Building, New York City, 1978-84 [ 314 model]; figs. 907--909.
7. Philip Johnson and John Burgee: PPG Place, Pittsburgh, PA 1979-84 [ 315].
8. Charles Moore, Piazza d'Italia, New Orleans, 1975-80 [ 316]; fig. 878.
9. Michael Graves, Portland Public Service Building, Portland, OR, 1977 [ 319]; colorplate 73
10. Peter Eisenman, Greater Columbus Convention Center, Columbus, Ohio, 1993 [ 318 interior view of lobby; 317 aerial view of rooftop] (see accompanying article in Sourcebook)
11. Frank O. Gehry: American Center, Paris, 1994 [ 320]

Architecture

Brunelleschi, in the building of the dome of Florence Cathedral, not only transformed the cathedral and the city of Florence, but also the role and status of the architect.

Section and elevation of Brunelleschi's dome

Architecture (Latin architectura, from the Greek ἀρχιτέκτων – arkhitekton, from ἀρχι- "chief" and τέκτων "builder, carpenter") can mean:

• The art and science of designing and erecting buildings and other physical structures.
• The practice of an architect, where architecture means to offer or render professional services in connection with the design and construction of a building, or group of buildings and the space within the site surrounding the buildings, that have as their principal purpose human occupancy or use.^[1]
• A general term to describe buildings and other structures.
• A style and method of design and construction of buildings and other physical structures.

A wider definition may comprise all design activity, from the macro-level (urban design, landscape architecture) to the micro-level (construction details and furniture). Architecture is both the process and product of planning, designing and constructing form, space and ambience that reflect functional, technical, social, and aesthetic considerations. It requires the creative manipulation and coordination of material, technology, light and shadow. Architecture also encompasses the pragmatic aspects of realising buildings and structures, including scheduling, cost estimating and construction administration. As documentation produced by architects, typically drawings, plans and technical specifications, architecture defines the structure and/or behavior of a building or any other kind of system that is to be or has been constructed.
Architectural works are often perceived as cultural and political symbols and as works of art. Historical civilizations are often identified with their surviving architectural achievements.
Architecture sometimes refers to the activity of designing any kind of system and the term is common in the information technology world.

Contents 1 The architect 2 Theory of architecture 2.1 Historic treatises 2.2 Contemporary concepts of architecture 3 History 3.1 Origins and the ancient world 3.2 The medieval builder 3.3 Renaissance and the architect 3.4 Early modern and the industrial age 3.5 Modernism and reaction of architecture 3.6 Architecture today 4 See also 5 Notes 6 References 7 External links

The architect

Main article: architect

Architects plan, design and review the construction of buildings and structures for the use of people. Architects also coordinate and integrate engineering design, which has as its primary objective the creative manipulation of materials and forms using mathematical and scientific principles.

Theory of architecture

Main article: Architectural theory

Historic treatises

Architectural drawings of details of the Palace of Persepolis, Persia (Iran)

The earliest surviving written work on the subject of architecture is De architectura, by the Roman architect Vitruvius in the early 1st century CE.^[2] According to Vitruvius, a good building should satisfy the three principles of firmitatis utilitatis venustatis,^[3][4] which translates roughly as -

• Durability - it should stand up robustly and remain in good condition.
• Utility - it should be useful and function well for the people using it.
• Beauty - it should delight people and raise their spirits.

According to Vitruvius, the architect should strive to fulfill each of these three attributes as well as possible. Leone Battista Alberti, who elaborates on the ideas of Vitruvius in his treatise, De Re Aedificatoria, saw beauty primarily as a matter of proportion, although ornament also played a part. For Alberti, the rules of proportion were those that governed the idealised human figure, the Golden mean. The most important aspect of beauty was therefore an inherent part of an object, rather than something applied superficially; and was based on universal, recognisable truths. The notion of style in the arts was not developed until the 16th century, with the writing of Vasari.^[5] The treatises, by the 18th century, had been translated into Italian, French, Spanish and English.

The Parthenon, Athens, Greece, "the supreme example among architectural sites." (Fletcher).^[6]

In the early nineteenth century, Augustus Welby Northmore Pugin wrote Contrasts (1836) that, as the titled suggested, contrasted the modern, industrial world, which he disparaged, with an idealized image of neo-medieval world. Gothic architecture, Pugin believed, was the only “true Christian form of architecture.”
The 19th century English art critic, John Ruskin, in his Seven Lamps of Architecture, published 1849,^[7] was much narrower in his view of what constituted architecture. Architecture was the "art which so disposes and adorns the edifices raised by men ... that the sight of them" contributes "to his mental health, power, and pleasure".
For Ruskin, the aesthetic was of overriding significance. His work goes on to state that a building is not truly a work of architecture unless it is in some way "adorned". For Ruskin, a well-constructed, well-proportioned, functional building needed string courses or rustication, at the very least.
On the difference between the ideals of "architecture" and mere "construction", the renowned 20th C. architect Le Corbusier wrote: "You employ stone, wood, and concrete, and with these materials you build houses and palaces: that is construction. Ingenuity is at work. But suddenly you touch my heart, you do me good. I am happy and I say: This is beautiful. That is Architecture".^[8]

The National Congress of Brazil, designed by Oscar Niemeyer.

[edit] Contemporary concepts of architecture

The great 19th century architect of skyscrapers, Louis Sullivan, promoted an overriding precept to architectural design: "Form follows function".
While the notion that structural and aesthetic considerations should be entirely subject to functionality was met with both popularity and skepticism, it had the effect of introducing the concept of "function" in place of Vitruvius' "utility". "Function" came to be seen as encompassing all criteria of the use, perception and enjoyment of a building, not only practical but also aesthetic, psychological and cultural.

Sydney Opera House, Australia designed by Utzon.

Nunzia Rondanini stated, "Through its aesthetic dimension architecture goes beyond the functional aspects that it has in common with other human sciences. Through its own particular way of expressing values, architecture can stimulate and influence social life without presuming that, in and of itself, it will promote social development.'
To restrict the meaning of (architectural) formalism to art for art's sake is not only reactionary; it can also be a purposeless quest for perfection or originality which degrades form into a mere instrumentality".^[9]
Among the philosophies that have influenced modern architects and their approach to building design are rationalism, empiricism, structuralism, poststructuralism, and phenomenology.
In the late 20th century a new concept was added to those included in the compass of both structure and function, the consideration of sustainability. To satisfy the contemporary ethos a building should be constructed in a manner which is environmentally friendly in terms of the production of its materials, its impact upon the natural and built environment of its surrounding area and the demands that it makes upon non-sustainable power sources for heating, cooling, water and waste management and lighting.

History

Main article: History of architecture

Vernacular architecture in Denmark.

Origins and the ancient world

Architecture first evolved out of the dynamics between needs (shelter, security, worship, etc.) and means (available building materials and attendant skills). As human cultures developed and knowledge began to be formalized through oral traditions and practices, architecture became a craft.
Here there is a process of trial and error, and later improvisation or replication of a successful trial. What is termed Vernacular architecture continues to be produced in many parts of the world. Indeed, vernacular buildings make up most of the built world that people experience every day.

Angkor, Cambodia.

Early human settlements were mostly rural. Due to a surplus in production the economy began to expand resulting in urbanization thus creating urban areas which grew and evolved very rapidly in some cases, such as that of Çatal Höyük in Anatolia and Mohenjo Daro in the Indian Subcontinent.
In many ancient civilizations, like the Egyptians' and Mesopotamians', architecture and urbanism reflected the constant engagement with the divine and the supernatural, while in other ancient cultures such as Persia architecture and urban planning was used to exemplify the power of the state.
The architecture and urbanism of the Classical civilizations such as the Greek and the Roman evolved from civic ideals rather than religious or empirical ones and new building types emerged. Architectural styles developed.
Texts on architecture began to be written in the reinassence period. These became canons to be followed in important works, especially religious architecture. Some examples of canons are found in the writings of Vitruvius, the Kao Gong Ji of ancient China^[10] and Vaastu Shastra of ancient India and Manjusri vasthu vidya sastra of Sri Lanka^[11] .
The architecture of different parts of Asia developed along different lines from that of Europe, Buddhist, Hindu and Sikh architecture each having different characteristics. Buddhist architecture, in particular, showed great regional diversity. In many Asian countries a pantheistic religion led to architectural forms that were designed specifically to enhance the natural landscape.

The medieval builder

The Taj Mahal, in India

Islamic architecture began in the 7th century CE, developing from a blend of architectural forms from the ancient Middle East and from Byzantium but also developing features to suit the religious and social needs of the society. Examples can be found throughout the Middle East, North Africa and Spain, and were to become a significant stylistic influence on European architecture during the Medieval period.

Wells Cathedral, Somerset, England, United Kingdom.

In Europe, in both the Classical and Medieval periods, buildings were not attributed to specific individuals and the names of the architects frequently unknown, despite the vast scale of the many religious buildings extant from this period.
During the Medieval period guilds were formed by craftsmen to organize their trade and written contracts have survived, particularly in relation to ecclesiastical buildings. The role of architect was usually one with that of master mason, or Magister lathomorum as they are sometimes described in contemporary documents.
Over time the complexity of buildings and their types increased. General civil construction such as roads and bridges began to be built. Many new building types such as schools, hospitals, and recreational facilities emerged.

Renaissance and the architect

La Rotonda, Italy by Palladio

With the Renaissance and its emphasis on the individual and humanity rather than religion, and with all its attendant progress and achievements, a new chapter began. Buildings were ascribed to specific architects - Brunelleschi, Alberti, Michelangelo, Palladio - and the cult of the individual had begun.
There was still no dividing line between artist, architect and engineer, or any of the related vocations, and the appellation was often one of regional preference. At this stage, it was still possible for an artist to design a bridge as the level of structural calculations involved was within the scope of the generalist.

Early modern and the industrial age

With the emerging knowledge in scientific fields and the rise of new materials and technology, architecture and engineering began to separate, and the architect began to concentrate on aesthetics and the humanist aspects, often at the expense of technical aspects of building design.

St Pancras Midland Hotel, London, United Kingdom

There was also the rise of the "gentleman architect" who usually dealt with wealthy clients and concentrated predominantly on visual qualities derived usually from historical prototypes, typified by the many country houses of Great Britain that were created in the Neo Gothic or Scottish Baronial styles.
Formal architectural training in the 19th century, for example at Ecole des Beaux Arts in France, gave much emphasis to the production of beautiful drawings and little to context and feasibility. Effective architects generally received their training in the offices of other architects, graduating to the role from draughtsmen or clerks.
Meanwhile, the Industrial Revolution laid open the door for mass production and consumption. Aesthetics became a criterion for the middle class as ornamented products, once within the province of expensive craftsmanship, became cheaper under machine production.
Vernacular architecture became increasingly ornamental. House builders could use current architectural design in their work by combining features found in pattern books and architectural journals.

[edit] Modernism and reaction of architecture

Main article: Modern architecture

The Bauhaus Dessau architecture department from 1925 by Walter Gropius

The dissatisfaction with such a general situation at the turn of the twentieth century gave rise to many new lines of thought that served as precursors to Modern Architecture. Notable among these is the Deutscher Werkbund, formed in 1907 to produce better quality machine made objects. The rise of the profession of industrial design is usually placed here.
Following this lead, the Bauhaus school, founded in Weimar, Germany in 1919, redefined the architectural bounds prior set throughout history, viewing the creation of a building as the ultimate synthesis—the apex—of art, craft, and technology.
When Modern architecture was first practiced, it was an avant-garde movement with moral, philosophical, and aesthetic underpinnings. Immediately after World War I, pioneering modernist architects sought to develop a completely new style appropriate for a new post-war social and economic order, focused on meeting the needs of the middle and working classes. They rejected the architectural practice of the academic refinement of historical styles which served the rapidly declining aristocratic order.

Fallingwater by Frank Lloyd Wright.

The approach of the Modernist architects was to reduce buildings to pure forms, removing historical references and ornament in favor of functionalist details. Buildings that displayed their construction and structure, exposing steel beams and concrete surfaces instead of hiding them behind traditional forms, were seen as beautiful in their own right.
Architects such as Mies van der Rohe, Philip Johnson and Marcel Breuer worked to create beauty based on the inherent qualities of building materials and modern construction techniques, trading traditional historic forms for simplified geometric forms, celebrating the new means and methods made possible by the Industrial Revolution, including steel-frame construction, which gave birth to high-rise superstructures. By mid-century, Modernism had morphed into the International Style, an aesthetic epitomized in many ways by the Twin Towers of New York's World Trade Center.
Many architects resisted Modernism, finding it devoid of the decorative richness of ornamented styles. Yet as the founders of that movement lost influence in the late 1970s, Postmodernism developed as a reaction against the austerity of Modernism. Robert Venturi's contention that a "decorated shed" (an ordinary building which is functionally designed inside and embellished on the outside) was better than a "duck" (a building in which the whole form and its function are tied together) gives an idea of this approach.

Architecture today

Main article: Contemporary architecture

Postmodern design at Gare do Oriente, Lisbon, Portugal, by Santiago Calatrava.

Part of the architectural profession, and also some non-architects, responded to Modernism and Postmodernism by going to what they considered the root of the problem. They felt that architecture was not a personal philosophical or aesthetic pursuit by individualists; rather it had to consider everyday needs of people and use technology to give a livable environment.
The Design Methodology Movement involving people such as Christopher Alexander started searching for more people-oriented designs. Extensive studies on areas such as behavioral, environmental, and social sciences were done and started informing the design process.
As the complexity of buildings began to increase (in terms of structural systems, services, energy and technologies), architecture started becoming more multi-disciplinary. Architecture today usually requires a team of specialist professionals, with the architect being one of many, although usually the team leader.

Chicago City Hall was one of the earliest green roofs.

During the last two decades of the twentieth century and into the new millennium, the field of architecture saw the rise of specializations by project type, technological expertise or project delivery methods. In addition, there has been an increased separation of the 'design' architect ^[a] from the 'project' architect.^[b]
Moving the issues of environmental sustainability into the mainstream is a significant development in the architecture profession. Sustainability in architecture was pioneered in the 1960s by architects such as Sim Van der Ryn, in the 1970s Ian McHarg in the US and Brenda and Robert Vale in the UK and New Zealand. There has been an acceleration in the number of buildings which seek to meet green building sustainable design principles. Sustainable practices that were at the core of vernacular architecture increasingly provide inspiration for environmentally and socially sustainable contemporary techniques ^[12]. The U.S. Green Building Council's LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system has been instrumental in this.^[13] An example of an architecturally innovative green building is the Dynamic Tower which will be powered by wind turbines and solar panels.^[14]