(BTW, from the beginning I want to say sorry, I’m just a teenager, and I don’t want to mock, or offend anyone with this post, I’m sorry if this post was a little bit aggresive, and i’m also sorry that I didn’t do research before posting this post, I respect architects, and I find architecture to be interesting)
So, first of all, architects study many years, and they study things like math, and science, and architecture is considered to be an art by many people, So, what kind of creativity, and knowledge of sciences does building a rectangle(cube) need?
Like, how, architecture can be related to creativity, and now i’m not talking about rectangles, and cubes, i’m talking about building that are usually considered to be an art, like creating a crappy sketch of a strange curvy thing, or round thing, or big thing, or maybe thing with a lot of cubes is considered to be creative, and architects aren’t engineering who will blow their minds out to comprehend how to build that thing, and as i know architects have nothing to do with things like colors, plumbing, air systems, electricity systems, ceiling design, furniture, materials, and etc of a building.
Like they don’t go there and say “this room will be blue, this room will be red, and that room will be yellow, electricity system will be like that, air system will be like that, sofas, and chair will be like that, doors, and stair will be like that, colors will be like that, chandeliers will be like that, toilets, and tiles will be like that, carpets, and curtains will be like that” and etc, they don’t do it(as i know, or is it the opposite, and architect is the one who does all of that?)
and so if everything thing is like that, then why do architects study so many years, and they study things like math, and science, and architecture is considered to be a creative thing(art) and is considered to be very hard? (thanks, for reading my post)
In: 0
Architects study for many years and learn math and science because architecture requires creative problem-solving and a deep understanding of structural principles
Their role goes beyond just designing shapes; they also consider factors like functionality, aesthetics, and building regulations
So, while it may not involve personally selecting colors or furniture, architecture demands a blend of creativity and technical knowledge to create visually appealing and functional structures.
Architecture is a field of design, which is the intersection of science and art. Design, whether it be architecture, or interfaces for software, and everything in between, involves gathering information about the users of what you’re creating, so that you can build something that’s serves the needs of those people appropriately.
In order to design anything effectively, you need to have a basis of knowledge for all the other professions that will end up building what you’re designing. For an architect, that means having a medium-level knowledge of plumbing, electricity, engineering, material sciences, and other trade professions. For a UX designer who designs software interfaces, this means having a knowledge in different types of code like JavaScript, Python, or HTML. This is so the designer knows what’s possible, and so they’ll have a basis on how to handle some of the inevitable conflicts that will arise in the building process. With all this science and user data in mind, they can now try to *artfully* design something that’s appealing.
So if you’re designing a children’s daycare, the architect needs to be aware of all the needs of the staff of the daycare, how best to layout the daycare, the ways in which children play at a daycare, what materials aren’t child-friendly, and all those other things. From there, she can start designing: this is the multi-colored children’s playroom where all the power outlets are up high, and this is the staff breakroom built for adults, here’s the child-friendly bathroom that requires special plumbing fixtures, etc.
I’m an engineer that worked with a number of award winning architects.
First of all, as the other people say, you’re misunderstanding what architects do. Sure they come up with the design but more importantly they are the mastermind that makes sure everything comes together and make their vision into reality. They exist to make sure builders know exactly what needs to be built, how it will be built and where it will be built, plus everything in between so we engineers can work together to make it happen. And when we encounter engineering problems, they are there to negotiate between different engineers and their designs to find solutions that helps us make it work.
As much as we engineers tell people that our job is to “solve problems”, architects mostly create said problems. We joke about architects not understanding how physics and real world works and they joke about us engineers have no soul and only want to build cubes. The truth is, if over the project they don’t piss me off at least once, they’re bad, and if I don’t put them in a stressful situation at least once, I’m not doing my job right. We do this coz we both truly care about what we’re building. We push each other’s boundaries and ask for every last inch of space, and yes, that’s how the magic and sometimes hilarious shit happens.
In short, have you ever felt the difference between rooms with 2.6m ceiling and 3m ceiling? Ever felt that some seats in the library have really bad lighting like your head casts a huge shadow on your books but some seats don’t? That’s the difference between an architect that cares and those who doesn’t. Their job is not to make the building function, that’s our job as engineers, they are there to create the space for the people using the space.
A lot of creativity comes from the constraints you have to work under (like Haiku). Architects have to become experts on construction, materials, engineering, building codes, human behaviors, human psychology, and then take that expertise and design a solution to a problem. The *art* comes not just from how the result looks and what feelings it evokes, but from how well they express the design intent into a solution that fits the constraints.
Doctors, lawyers, computer programmers, baristas, most any job can have an element of art to it.
Architects are responsible for designing a “good” building, which includes being safe, cost effective, functional, comfortable, and beautiful. There are tradeoffs between these parameters and so whoever is planning needs to understand these to some minimum depth. A safe and cost effective building is the realm of engineering, so architects work with civil engineers and coordinate their efforts on that aspect. They need enough understanding to interpret their concerns or sensitivity to changes, but not enough to actually design the individual system. The functionality of a building is perhaps the real of production design, can the office people get to the printers, and is there enough room for cables and desks and all that. There is also mechanical engineer, room for HVAC ducts and heat flow in atriums and fire safety in stairwells. There is also ergonomics, people dont feel comfortable in “enclosed spaces”, and they don’t want to sit right next to the bathroom. When they jump they don’t want the floor to noticeably flex. Comfort and beauty is important, the color of lighting and walls can influence your mood, and the number of small or large meeting rooms affects if you can have the right level of collaboration. The architect sits at the top of this web and needs to tie it all together, integrate the work of the different disciplines and deliver a building that finds the right optimum for the client.
Latest Answers