so… i’ve been thinking about design and the process of it. brief bio – i studied on the west coast [ undergrad ] and worked for the first time [ in the field of architecture ] on the west coast [ socal ] before going to an art school [ to get an MArch ] in the suburbs of michigan and then moving to new york to continue working… at any rate, i must have picked up some preconceptions about what is expected/assumed from architectural design while on the west coast [ not to say that these are exclusive to that area, they just don’t seem so self evident here ] the first of which is that a building designed by an architect will function properly. i know this is not an assumption everyone can make [ there are certainly skill levels ], but i figure if you are a good architect [ or even if you only consider yourself a good architect ] you begin with the assumption that you can design a building that meets the given program… a client expects that at the very least… even from a developer. that is a given right? you have to follow through, but you don’t win the project by proving that you can make the program work in most cases. in my past experience, you focus on the next level… you get the project by having the most seductive, the coolest, the most intriguing design… you make the program fade into the background… it works, but a patron doesn’t go to a restaurant and say “my god! look how efficient the cook line is!” or “the bathrooms are so elegantly hidden behind that partition created by the service station!” ugh… no, that’s inside baseball… an architect quietly earns the respect of the restaurateur that way, showing them that you know what is expected while focusing on the patrons’ experience of the place. anyway, i’m getting off track. the next progression, as i see it, is to take the aesthetic ‘wow’ factor as assumed. ‘yes, of course the design will be amazing looking… we are architects, that is part of what we do.’ and built into that assumption is the previous assumption that the building will work for them. now what we will do is reprogram the building or streamline it or make it self sufficient or…. do you see? in summary: what is it that an architect does? A. design a building that will stand up [ i didn’t even mention this above since it’s kind of self evident ] B. makes the building function properly. C. makes the building look good. D. gives that something else. [ new inventive program, inspired structural/building system, etc ] okay, so part D is a relatively loose description, but you get the point right? A, B, and C are assumed!!!