<p>Situation: a companion of mine is currently in a two year Architecture program. She recently decided she no longer wishes to pursue Architecture as a major. The time to transfer into a four year college looms. What are obvious subjects to transfer into from Architecture without losing too much time? The preferable course of action would be to start in the new school as third year status. Civil Engineering is a consideration, although she lacks enough Physics and any Chem. Her plan is to take Calc II next semester.</p>
<p>Any advice or insight is greatly appreciated.</p>
<p>Don't settle for something. Try and decide what you would really like to do, even if it takes a little longer. You will never get another time in your life to explore and take risks. You can settle for something less later in life.</p>
<p>She had dreams of being an Architect since she was just a few years old. However, her sophomore year was a bit of disillusionment. She really wanted to design residential structures, her sketchbook full of fancy Victorian houses, but she dislikes the more abstract design projects and her professors have said what she wants to do is mostly impossible, with most graduates working at firms approving housing projects. She now feels more or less lost and confused. </p>
<p>Civil Engineering is not her dream, but what she feels would make the most sense since her childhood dreams did not pan out. Currently there is nothing to 'settle' for, since she does not know precisely what she wants to do.</p>
<p>I don't understand- if she loves architecture-- and the architecture of another time that shouldn't be a problem. -- You must follow your dreams-- and if a school tries to squash them you must try to understand what you love about them and tell the professors. we only have a certain amount of time in life, and too much of this is done doing what we do not love. If the architecture that she is engaged in is not one which she enjoys then maybe she is doing the wrong architecture and she should start doing the "right" architecture. None of this means switching fields.</p>
<p>Part of the problem is that she was really in love with the design and feel of older style (I don't know the right term for this) houses, and has learned that she won't be able to make a living designing such houses. Her professors have more or less reaffirmed that it is a lost cause. In addition, she has a hard time relating to the internet culture obsessed [read: WoW, Youtube] studio students and her grades have slipped a little as she tries to avoid the studio altogether. These students flock together and even badger her for doing "weird things" such as reading books.</p>
<p>In this situation, how would one go about doing the "right" architecture?</p>
<p>part of being in arch school is learning new ways of thinking and breaking your preconceptions of what architecture is. you might not always like what you're learning but at least you're expanding your horizons..which is really important for an architect</p>
<p>part of being in arch school is also discovering what it takes to think like an architect and i'd say most people entering into architecture school have no idea what it really is like (including myself) until they've been exposed to the studio structure and how architecture is taught. </p>
<p>architecture can be such a broad field and is related to so many majors that you can always form some sort of relationship with architecture and some other field. some possible related majors-</p>
<p>computer science (if you're into thinking about systems, programming, which has quite some relation to architecture)
history (analysis, theory, etc)
real estate development (if you're more into the economics and how people behave etc)
business (creative ideas, solutions)
engineering (problem solving)
urban planning (large scale, infrastructure, culture, theory, history)
historic preservation (preserving old houses for analysis, culture, etc)</p>
<p>Of course the professors say that what she is interested in is a lost cause- most likely they are of modern thought and don't appreciate the Victorian style. Just because it isn't being done now doesn't mean it can't be done.</p>
<p>there are tons of victorian houses being built today called mcmansions-designed by architects hired by rich clients. they're probably more replicates than anything though</p>
<p>the question though more is the relevance of victorian architecture in today's contemporary world because victorian architecture addresses little of the contemporary issues that we face today. </p>
<p>i'm sure profs today appreciate victorian arch because a lot of modern architecture deviated from victorian architecture (le corb, etc) and it's always interesting to see how ideas from the past can be translated into the future.</p>
<p>I think there is a reluctance to create ones own architecture---and I know she can develop a new architecture which can address contemporary issues but still in essence be Victorian. Why can't she strive to be the next Carlo Scarpa(but in a different way of course)? The first step is to identify specifically what she loves about Victorian architecture that isn't present in modern architecture and go from there.</p>