This question can even be framed as…how do you judge people in architecture?
Moving on from the third year of architecture in my college, I’ve seen friends circles get formed and broken, in my studio as well as throughout the college. I’ve seen also the general stereotyping that goes around in every studio – there are roughly three groups of people:
1. The A-grader – The person (or group of people) who consistently score high marks, turn their assignments in on time, attend every class in time, and generally have a spotless academic record. They are also the ones who keep their design professors happy, by adhering to whatever code of requirements or standards that have been set, and produce safe(?) designs. This is also the group generally regarded as not being able to design well, both by seniors and the faculty. (No kidding – I’ve had teachers ask the class in general – “Who are the ones who generally get A grades; not the ones who do design well, but get A grades?”) These people will be well known in college, although it might be for all the wrong reasons.
2. The average Joe (or Jane) – This group of people don’t do anyone any harm – neither the first group nor the third, which I’ll mention below. They are also largely invisible, because the kind of work they do doesn’t stir up the design gods for spoiling the sanctity(?) of design, nor does it stir up anything else, either. Less fastidious in design submissions, for them architecture is any other course – they are here to get a degree as quickly as possible and with as much less noise as possible.
3. The design demi-gods (or so they think of themselves) – The select few in each class, who would like to think of themselves as being responsible for raising the standard of the college as a whole, or at least their class; they usually do not turn in their designs on time, waiting for the perfect moment of inspiration to strike – they might be known outside their class for being the non-conformists (and that is a good thing, right?) Their designs might be lauded for their ingenuity or teared down for its absurdity – whatever it is, they’ll do a good job of keeping themselves noticed (whether intentional or not).
For anyone waiting with hatchets to tear this post down – if you didn’t get the irony, read it again.
What categories of people are there in your studio (or college?) Does this kind of categorisation happen in your college, in the first place?
Which brings me to the initial question – how do you really judge people in architecture? While similar lists can probably be drawn up for other professions or courses (there was one for my school as well) nowhere else has I found broad categorisations about the way people work dictate the way they look at other people or form friendships.
I’m a hypocrite -although I’ve pointed this out, I’m guilty of this myself and I’ve wanted this post to be a satire on the way I see things happening.