|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
zekai
Joined: 10 May 2007
Posts: 7
|
 Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 1:36 pm Post subject: Why we need Archtects while....? |
    |
|
Hello everyone,
Are you interested in this?" Why do we need architects while we have engineers to build the buildings for us?" Ok, it's a question for us to think for the quiz in Theory and Concept class. We have to mention what is the responsibility of an architect and how it is different from engineers.
I know to express but I don't know how to express with the right and good words to be more in architectural language.
Please share with me as it would be very useful in exploring the idea for me and everyone. Thank you very much.
Zekai 
http://archizen.24buddy.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
AP
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 580
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sure we have engineers. But someone's got to tell them what to build.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Architorture
millennium club
Joined: 31 Jul 2004
Posts: 1380
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| without architects there would be a diffuser, light and sprinkler trying to inhabit the same ceiling tile |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atmaweapon
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 23
Location: Urbana-Champaign Illinois
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Architorture Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 7:56 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
without architects there would be a diffuser, light and sprinkler trying to inhabit the same ceiling tile
|
Even with architects around I have seen that happen.
Regarding the original question;
Personally I think it is a very deep question, difficult to answer to the full satisfaction of all the parties involved. Interestingly enough, it is one that I find my self trying to answer very often as I hold degrees in both engineering and architecture and the general public does not see a difference. My answer to them, tailored to their experience, is: “The architect sells the client the vision, and the engineer keeps the vision from killing the client”. That seems to drive the message home although many of my architecture classmates condemn me for oversimplifying their professional description.
I could go on all day about what I think on the subject, but I will end with these facts:
1. Buildings have become and are becoming more and more complicated undertakings, requiring at least WORKING knowledge in areas more diverse than can be accumulated normally by a human being thus requiring specialists. The romantic idea of the architect as the omni sapient master builder is dead. And no, taking a course in statics does not make you an engineer…
2. The fact we are even having this discussion demonstrate that both professions are distinct enough and necessary enough.
_________________
"If your structure is only holding your building up, it is not doing enough." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RWL
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 399
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Heartily agree with last post. Just some added thoughts--
DEFINITION OF “ARCHITECT”
Definitions of architect on the Web:
Someone who creates plans to be used in making something (such as buildings)
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
An architect is a person involved in the art of planning, designing and overseeing the construction of buildings, or more generally, the designer of a scheme or plan.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architect
The Architect is a fictional character appearing in the last two films of the Matrix trilogy, created by the Wachowski brothers. The character is played by Helmut Bakaitis.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architect_(Matrix_character)
One who designs and supervises the construction of buildings or large structures.
www.ecoselect.net.au/glossary
A person who normally functions as a creator, coordinator, author of the drawings and specifications and the general administrator of construction.
www.officespacefinder.co.uk/officespaceglossary.html
A tradesman who designs and produces plans for buildings, often overseeing the building process.
www.nachi.org/glossary.htm
A designation reserved, usually by law, for a person or organization professionally qualified and duly licensed to perform architectural services.
www.aiadelaware.org/homedel4.html
One who has completed a course of study in building and design, and is licensed by the state as an architect. One who draws up plans.
www.duluthtrading.com/store/construction_glossary.asp
A licensed professional who designs homes, buildings and other structures.
kansas.realestatemate.com/Content/glossary/
Architect derives from the greek arkhos (meaning chief) and tekhne (meaning the art of doing something).
www.gardenvisit.com/glossary/glossary.htm
Someone who designs and lays out plans for buildings and then sees that the plans are followed by the workers who construct the buildings.
www.artsconnected.org/artsnetmn/spaces/vocabulary.html
A licensed building designer with tertiary qualifications.
www.homesite.com.au/renovate/tips_and_guides/glossary_of_building_terms/
A person whose profession is designing houses, buildings, and bridges chronological: items arranged in order of occurrence.
www.hudsonvalley.org/education/Background/Vocabulary/vocabulary.html
The "agent" of the building, property owners or managers who draws plans, writes specifications and follows through all phases of a building project with the general contractors and subcontractors working on that project.
www.armstrong.com/commflooringna/glossary.html
(sub)system author.
gee.cs.oswego.edu/dl/WISR93WG/WISR93WG/node1.html
A person or team who defines how the environment for the data warehouse, analytics application, or operational system is built.
it.csumb.edu/departments/data/glossary.html
Any registered architect who designs all or a part of the Building Structural System and/or who produces all or part of the Building Structural System Design Documents.
www.woodtruss.com/terminology.php
Means a member or licensee of the Ontario Association of Architects under the Architects Act. (Ontario Fire Code 1996)
www.iprr.org/defs/DEFINABC.html
"Architect" means the person or firm retained by the contracting agency to design the project to which the 1% provision of this chapter applies. [1979, c. 525 (new).]
janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/27/title27sec452.html
One who designs buildings.
www.canequity.com/mortgage-resources/
Participant in the construction process; may oversee quality of subcontractors' work and issue lien waivers.
www.swlearning.com/blaw/jennings/realestate7e/glossary.html
One who has completed a course of study in building and design, served an internship, and is licensed as an architect. The architect is normally the prime design professional in the construction of buildings. The architect generally contracts with the owner or with a "turnkey" contractor. The architect usually obtains the services of civil, structural, electrical engineers as well as landscape architects. ...
www.claimrep.com/constTerms_A.htm
A person who plans buildings and oversees their construction.
www.aje.com.au/glossary/a.htm
_________________
"An Architect's 2 most important tools are the erasing shield at the drafting board & the wrecking bar at the job site." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tomek
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
Posts: 173
Location: England
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dont try & scare us you muppet. Le corbusiers 'towards a new engineer....woops, architecture' covered this 100years ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AP
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 580
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 2:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Of course, in many countries there's no need to emply architects at all. Even in the UK they are entirely optional. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Architorture
millennium club
Joined: 31 Jul 2004
Posts: 1380
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
how about why do we need engineers... there is certainly architects out there with the depth of experience to do it all themselves...
the thing is that engineers tend to be specialists who have very deep knowledge of one particular thing... architects are almost generalists by rule... they need to be able to orchestrate, analyze, and synthesize vastly different pieces of information into a single building... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arnearch
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:50 am Post subject: Space and building |
|
|
I believe the answer lies in the role of the architect; while the engineer creates buildings, the architects main task is to design space.
The 20th century historian Nikolaus Pevsner famously said that “A bicycle shed is a building, Lincoln Cathedral is a piece of architecture”, supporting and argument of architecture being something than just a building. Architecture is not a building, neither is it brick, a Doric column or a man with a bowtie, smoking a pipe. These are all physical attributes often found in relation to architecture.
Often present in buildings, architecture can be said to be ”the other” thing, the determining factor that result in a bicycle shed in its absence. A contemporary understanding of architecture, as many architects see themselves as designing space more than structure, could be explained through Heidegger’s understanding of how a thing,2 for instance a jug, differs from an object. The thinglyness of the jug is its ability to hold liquid. It is this quality, being a vessel for holding liquid, that makes it a jug. The clay or plastic features constituting the object, is merely containing its ability to hold fluids; the jug would cease to be a jug without it, but they are still two separate things.
The same relation exists between building and architecture. A heap of bricks or a rock decorated to look like a Victorian townhouse may very well be considered a building, but would hardly be characterized as architecture. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AP
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 580
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Shepheard wrote an excellent little book "What is Architecture", which may help with exploring that line of thought
Manifesto 47 also explores it quite a bit. It's translated, but an interesting piece of writing. It got posted in this thread, but there's a website for it somewhere. Concludes architecture is the "experience" component, that which is orchestrated, rather than something of bricks and mortar.
Last edited by AP on Fri Jun 08, 2007 1:31 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arnearch
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 4:38 am Post subject: What architecture is not |
|
|
Paul Shepheard´s book, as well as manifest 47, gives a description of what architecture isn’t in the search for what it is.
In addition to being entertaining and quite thorough in its architectural labelling, the book provides an exhaustive description of the extent of the term architecture and explains that not everything is architecture, as opposed to a general understanding.
I always refer to it when people confuse architecture theory with the Blue Book. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atmaweapon
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 23
Location: Urbana-Champaign Illinois
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 7:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
The problem with the original posted question is that is a seemingly simple question with a “complicated” (some may say convoluted) answer. In order to answer the question one must begin by defining the professions.
Such a definition for engineering is simple: the application of physics to solve problems. And while specializations exists (mechanical, electrical, structural), they are all based on very similar physical principles.
Architecture is devoid of such definition because it is a synthetic area of knowledge, child of art and science. And like many kids, the discussion to which of the parents they most resemble begins. The problem is further compounded by the fact that architecture in academics and the practice of architecture (by which I mean that you get PAID) are totally worlds apart (actual real world practice and the realities of it are superficially treated in school). And thus “definitions” abound, just like the six blind men and the elephant (http://www.uiowa.edu/~cyberlaw/csl03/blindmen.html) everyone describes the same thing from different directions.
_________________
"If your structure is only holding your building up, it is not doing enough." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RLArchitecture
Joined: 12 Jun 2007
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
engineers lead (like a map - all information and logic... )
architects direct (like a wind at our backs - all sensitivity...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Architorture
millennium club
Joined: 31 Jul 2004
Posts: 1380
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
i think a good example to explain this might be known by anyone involved in a project requiring an emergency generator...
it has to potential to involve pretty much every discipline of engineer on the project but it seems as though they themselves can never get it all coordinated without some help from the architect who has the overall vision of the issue and control of the issue to settle the differences |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
