Guardian.UK:
Architects designing cars. Or in this case, new London buses.
Comments:
You’re not a heretic here. Dig through my archives, you’ll find rants over idiotic choices made by leading architects. Like, renovating an old bank with structural steel, complete with too-short angled doorways perfectly designed to peel your scalp off ... and other ‘benefits’.
No, I was about to add to my post, “I’m surprised the buses have windows, actually.”
Posted by Garret P Vreeland on 02/19/09 at 05:54 PM
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Y’know,
I realize I am probably a heretic in this forum for saying this…
I don’t know what it is architects are supposed to actually be good at.
When they design cars they invariably leave off things like headlights, when they design buildings the roofs leak, or they turn out to be uninhabitable.
Are they supposed to be good at Design with a Capital “D”?
The one where you don’t care if the roof leaks as long as the “vision” thing is predominant? Or the acoustics are so bad you cannot carry on a conversation in the restaurant? Just how does this “profession” continue to justify itself?
I participate in a forum for engineers, post questions and problems and get answers. I had to explain the entire procedure for concrete footers and piers to an architect. what the hell do they teach them, and what do they sell after? Is it that “vision” thing? I’m in the wrong business.