12th
The Architect’s Subculture
Now that I’ve had my first class with architects, I find their subculture totally hilarious. Going to a liberal arts college with no architecture program, I haven’t had much exposure to it, but I get a full dose in my European Urban Design Theories class. As a sociologist in training, I find the ways they project and express themselves through documents and websites the most interesting. By the way, if you’re not an architect or don’t know one, then you might not understand the humor—sorry about that.
Here’s a comparison of two assignments, one from European Urban Design Theories, taught by two young people from an prominent Danish architecture & planning firm, and one from Copenhagen: History and Contemporary Urban Issues, taught with a liberal arts approach.
Let’s start with the title. The architect’s title first of all has to have a cool font. Architects LOVE cool fonts. The fonts absolutely cannot have serifs, which apparently are very uncool. There’s also a subtitle, but it’s not below the title, instead it’s on top. Along the left side is a list of categories, each accompanied by a visual representation in the form of an icon. All are in caps, and the appropriate category for this document is of course highlighted.
The liberal arts assignment doesn’t bother with a title, but instead makes the title the description and function of the document: “ASSIGNMENT 3: INSTRUCTIONS”. The urban planning class calls the assignment “Assignment_01_EUDT”. Underscores… interesting.
The guidelines of how to actually complete the assignments are pretty similar, so I won’t bother with that.
The bottom of the urban planning assignment sheet really gets me. Architects love to show a random scene with a person or multiple people to show that humans actually interact with their work. The firm where my teachers work actually creates great spaces for people, so this use is 100% legitimate, but so many architects design such abstract buildings and spaces where people don’t actually like to spend time. Below the cyclist (highlighted in orange) is a random chunk of an abstract map/spacial diagram, another feature architects love. It’s certainly abstract, with cut-off text and a little pictoral off to the left. They use neat key words like “NODE”, “OPENED”, “EDGE”, and “OPEN SPACE” overlayed on the map instead of a caption. How snazzy.
Are these aspects of the architecture subculture unique to that field, or do they apply to artists generally? I’d also love to have an architect point out some of the oddities of liberal arts fields.
Oh, and the websites! Here is an example of a “star-chitect” firm in Denmark: http://www.big.dk/. Common themes: more cool fonts, flash animation to the max, bright colors. BIG’s website is absolutely rediculuous. First of all, the main page is some kind of abstract art show, which you’re supposed to click on to get to the real site. I dare you to try to understand what’s going on. Once you’re through that neon fiesta of abstractness, you’re given a set of about a zillion little icons with three-letter labels. If you look really hard, there are some links you can click on to move the blocks around into categories. Click on a block and you get some more flash, bright colors and clicking.
The architects at DIS are also really nasty to each other. We mix 4-year students receiving a BA or BS with 5-year students receiving a BArch, and there’s a great deal of animosity between these two types of students. It seems silly to me, because I’m sure they’re all around equal in intelligence and ability, but many 5-year students put down the 4-years for not being “real architects” or something like that. It’s pretty sad. Architects, embrace your little common cultural quirks and get along!
