The past discussions have indeed stirred the cement needed to mold the cast of our future design operations. I realised a lot of our thought processes are centred around architectural education (i.e. nus department of architecture, umbau school of architecture, Royal Institute of British Architects, faculty of architecture at Melbourne Uni, RMIT school of architecture and design, faculty of architecture at TU Delft etc); a discourse started from early in the 1800s, revolving around École des Beaux-Arts (which founded the Beaux Arts architectural movement from Europe to America) carried all the way to the 21st century and probably beyond before we can finally sit down with a sigh of relief and go, 'wow, that was a long discussioon'.
Several notions of how architectural schools operate have not been resting comfortably with many many many many people, including our forefathers and generations before us (and hopefully after us, such that we can remain critical and not become lazy) and I believe (as well as hope) that we can never come to a general acceptance. Its easy for us to pinpoint something that's wrong. I mean, its mother horrible to have students get employed help to build their structures, but I'm sure the brief was thought up by one who is not senseless/ brainless. Perhaps we may wonder next why most architectural firms are not builder firms? Yes in school we should be taught the ways of construction and the design language that can be delivered from this knowledge. Why then, can't be bring this knowledge past school and become architects and builders?
This brings back the discourse of specialized knowledge and education. For Qiaos' history of western architecture module, dee proposed that I write my paper with regards to how the specialization of knowledges in educational institutions (namely the above-mentioned École des Beaux-Arts, still surviving) have affected architectural practice and movements. The Da Vinci man would appreciate his informed mind, not just on art, but also on crafting (an innate portion of architecture back then), music, the human anotomy, machines, etc. We never hear of anyone relating the word "profession" with Leonardo DaVinci, do we? Also, we all know the first chapter of Vitruvius Book I ('The Education of the Architect') says, "The architect's expertise is enhanced by many disciplines and various sorts of specialized knowledge.."
One thing I'm thankful for is the electives programme in nus. For instance, I once took a class on the history of Premodern Japan, and can now appreciate the Shinto temples built during the Heian period. I also took a Geography module on cultural landscapes, and learnt how people create their own landscapes overtime from their geographical situation giving brith to their culture. If you think these are unrelated to 'architecture', think again.
There are so many issues at hand which I can't spare the time and energy (something you don't have when you're working, ironic huh!) to discuss but as a starting point I just wanted to bring to attention the larger discourses at hand.
~
on a separate note, I would like to spend a minute talking about hurricane katrina and rita. Perhaps I can relate a personal story of a good friend of my sister's, who lived in New Orleans with her mother and granny. They ran from hurricane katrina, towards texas, only to be faced with hurricane rite. They are now on the run again. They are not alone, many residents from New Orleans have run to Texas. Let us all wish them well, and not forget, architecture aside, there is a world out there which we can actually help, even if its in the future.
9 comments:
hehz...ur qiaoz western history essay wor i remember...
we did something for qiaoz abt the history of universities preceding the ecoles school...that my conclusion was education became institutionalised into structured and rigid forms as much as their sombre mood to house knowledge in colleges...
hmm interesting to note that prior to colleges universities were free roaming, semi public speaking, free number of years of canditure and students choose their masters whom travelled freely from paris sorbornne to anywhere, that the masters in universities cld veto teaching, threaten the papal authorities, and jitao zabot away from the teaching cities of sorbornne. paris became DESOLATED for a period of time in history becoz of the mass exodus... how fun~
so u see, education became mundane and intended as a commodity for mass consumption, to create 10 1/10ths of da vincis is better than the hope of nurturing one.
wow, this is a really interesting discussion going on here. gee... boh jio?
i'd wager that everything sio and chez have mentioned seems to be either part cause or part effect of one another.
my primary contention is that there's way too much knowledge or information (breadth) and far more intensity (depth) to each division of information/ knowledge for anyone person to fully grapple with without compromising on either aspect. we'd all love to be da vinci, but let's face it, the magnitude of information one way or another was simply not as massive as what we face today.
therefore, the aspiration to be the renaissance man has to be carefully considered and defined, otherwise we'd literally be renaissance people -- archaic, terribly old-fashioned, and better off dead.
btw, i secretly enjoyed the liberalisation of aki school too. hehehe... but only because i'm a typical gemini, incapable of a prolonged attention on a single subject. u*p and my other UEs were a pain due only to the fact that they entailed assessments.
if you ask me, it shouldn't so much be "teach less, learn more" but "test less, learn more".
forgot to say that i really appreciate the sentiment of hoping we "never come to a general acceptance [agreement]" on what aki schools should teach. though that doesn't preclude the possibility that some options are downright erroneous.
deyi's brought out a point about the difference between the context in the 1800s and the context of say 2000s; a point i was trying to make when i urged to question why architectural firms are not builder firms. Even zihao has mentioned that to 'create 10 1/10ths of a vinci is better than the hope of nurturing one'. Except that he seems to mean it negatively whilst i see it more fitting for our information age.
If i were a tutor one reason why i'd get employed help (not just the 'marginalised foreign workers' but also perhaps engineers or artists) is so that they can push their design input and not just have 'safe self-buildable designs'.
I'd also think students have as much to learn from the builders (who possess their own specialised knowledge) and perhaps even more as opposed to them building it by themselves. Of cos with this attitude the hope is for them to not authoritatively command but instead be respectful apprentices.
apologise for the bad language. had a real long day (mummy's birthday!) and am half asleep but just needed to make my point.
more thoughts:
i think why we'd cringe at the thought of the year 2s having employed help is not by fact the fault of the tutor/school but more the consequence of whole building industry in Singapore. We're standing on a thin line between politics, racism, economics, history etc etc instead of just architectural education.
another way to view this, which i hope can lessen the hate you guys have thrown towards the brief, is by comparing to the d.school in Stamford, which operates by having "multidisciplinary teams that have a cross-section of students drawn from engineering, education, humanities, business and/or medicine".
arghhh i'm too tired to go further (i apologise...forgive the weak-bodied)hope you guys know what i mean!
personally, i think there's too much noise/ grey area to demystify for each line of discussion -- age of education, and the employment of hired help, before i'd comment on one in relation to the other in this particular context; i'd try to find some time to flesh it all out a bit so that we can really grapple with what is and isn't implied.
though what i'd say for now is that my bottomline view, which doesn't necessitate spite towards the school, on the matter of hired help is that something precious is definitely lost. (not discounting that there're two sides of a coin, hence something is definitely gained as well; even the likelihood of more sleep, fewer blisters, less stress and a nicer end product is positive.) surely, there is a good reason for the like of qiaos (at year 2) and kheng soon (at year 4) to promote building life-size serviceable spatial objects from scratch. in fact, i've never seen a school's annual review feature any project that involves employed help for real-life construction.
if anyone knows of any example, please raise; it's likely my exposure to the literature just isn't wide enough.
yea i understand where everyone is coming from and was just hoping to bring another point of view into the discussion. personally, i have no standpoint as i don't full understand the brief and its intentions; just a bad habit i have developed to question and question and question.
one question being how we can see architectural education in relation to architectural practice; inspired by the spark constrast in the working environment.
actually i have some pressing views on how some firms operate which i will try to lodge in this weekend!
hehz sioz raises points that the paradigm for teaching and learning is totally different and the romantic old way of education is merely defunct romanticism.
that i had to agree totally with. however the context of singapore in a neocolonialist paradigm meant the subservience to a culture of west imperialism, our societal behaviour and cultural mindsets are part of a bigger inevitability which a few of us cannot change.
so, whilst singapore building industry uses foreign labour extensively with repeated cases of abuse and such, it is unwise to base an ethnocentric reason to why is this happening, nor to take a romantic view that o'the poor banglas are so tortured we shd help them. this issue has merely been painted by cultural stereotypes which i am guilty of dramatising the whole affair, but my point of displeasure lies elsewere:
the onset of building something you want to call your own ought to excite prospective architectural students to be, the willingness to stay around, help out, sweat it out, should mean something to them. i've said it based on the experience of erecting a whole movable structure with jansen for rag and flag 2002 and enjoyed the thrill of it coming into actualisation from our drawings. as a yr 2 designer to lie back and EXPECT someone else to do it for u is unbecoming spoiltness. possibly for "safe working conditions", i am sure the guys (at least 50 of them, mostly officers and specialists) experienced tougher times of physical labour than building this no? there is no issue of racism here pls do not continue to decipher meanings into my blunt talkingness.
i do recognise the greater and better worksmanship of the bangalas and believe the students should step behind for their safety and incompetence. and how irritating for the bangalas if they were to stand ard and question the "this and thats" of every nail hammered. i do recognise the frustration of possibly communicating nicely between them and conflicts invariably arise from that. I am no dumb frumpy romanticist.
i just question the moral courage of allowing the whole endeavour be so nicely geared to product then process. of students showing obvious ire wkg at the project. if rationalisation of aesthetics is what the school wants, then they are not even interested in the pursuit of romantically creating 10 1/10th da vincis, they are creating 10 1/10th pseudo ones, much less to say the school (NUS here) is creating masters of datascapes for the information age, even if they do, it is purely coincidental but they will claim the prize because they are the "top 20 ranked universities" of the world.
however a point to conclude abt NUS education: because i know from what i learnt is that there is so much more to continue to learn, it still creates impetus for knowledge.
haha this discussion is getting too complicated for me to try comprehend all issues from all angles. i'm the sort who writes papers based on comparitive research instead of a 'fight for' or 'fight against' haha. you guys with the stamina carry on; i shall keep to being a watcher.
i suggest dee and chez to write books for easy reference!
also, chez, you're no dumb frumpy romanticist - that's me!
....
this is one of the many cases whereby i feel like the more i know, the less i know. know what i mean?
Post a Comment