Why people 'SMOKE'?
Dearest Johnny,
In reply to your post on your blog..
There are many reasons why pple use 'smoke' to describe their design.
1) The tutor could have changed their design so much that they couldn't possibly identify with it or even agree with it. The reason why students heed to the tutors' advices because we are afraid that we might fail if we don't.. and usually we always think that tutors could have given us the better solution since they are more experienced. This is what I appreciate about our tutor. She's not exactly very deterministic, and she allows room for us to make our own decisions, and carve our own ways. (haha!.. although sometimes.. remarks like "i don't know, you have to try it yourself" weren't very inspiring and helpful!)
2) The student is not focussed in the process of design. As a result, the student included many things.. that couldn't possibly linked to their orginal intent. Hence, they find it difficult to deliver a convincing project presentation. They could have felt that their design is fragmented in ideas and architecture intentions. Hence, "smoking" their design is conveniently and indirectly used to express one's in ability to create a holesome picture of their architecture. Many of us face this problem, because we could be easily distracted from the multiple options we have, and not followed closely to our original intent. In another situation, our original intent does not perpetuate our design development far, and from the original intent, we digressed to other small intents/ strategies, that could be mostly irrelavant to what we have started with. Most of us coud also have been so caught up with the idea of 'CONCEPT' that we find it difficult to deliever an architecture that is very very coherant with our concepts.
3) When we look back at our design process, and try to make some sense out of it.. sometimes we realise that we spend a lot of time post rationalising our design. When we design, we would meet with unexpected solutions which we couldn't possibly explain and summarise these solution in words. We could have obtained these unexpected solutions from multiple permutations of a solution to a design problem or purely by our own intuition. A solution obtain from our intuition is usually not valid in our crit because the tutor would want us to substantiate our every move in our design execution with thoughtful reasons. We couldn't possibly tell the tutor "I feel that it is correct.. therefore I do it this way.." !! haha.. Hence, when we post rationalise, and when we couldn't find valid and convincing reason.. therefore.. we tried to fabricate a good enough reason to back up our design.. some of us 'smoke'.
In summary, some of us 'smoke' because we are not confident of ourselves and our designs. We could really tell from the way a person presents his design during crit. If he has a purpose.. We could see it in his face and hear it through his words.
Dearest Johnny,
In reply to your post on your blog..
There are many reasons why pple use 'smoke' to describe their design.
1) The tutor could have changed their design so much that they couldn't possibly identify with it or even agree with it. The reason why students heed to the tutors' advices because we are afraid that we might fail if we don't.. and usually we always think that tutors could have given us the better solution since they are more experienced. This is what I appreciate about our tutor. She's not exactly very deterministic, and she allows room for us to make our own decisions, and carve our own ways. (haha!.. although sometimes.. remarks like "i don't know, you have to try it yourself" weren't very inspiring and helpful!)
2) The student is not focussed in the process of design. As a result, the student included many things.. that couldn't possibly linked to their orginal intent. Hence, they find it difficult to deliver a convincing project presentation. They could have felt that their design is fragmented in ideas and architecture intentions. Hence, "smoking" their design is conveniently and indirectly used to express one's in ability to create a holesome picture of their architecture. Many of us face this problem, because we could be easily distracted from the multiple options we have, and not followed closely to our original intent. In another situation, our original intent does not perpetuate our design development far, and from the original intent, we digressed to other small intents/ strategies, that could be mostly irrelavant to what we have started with. Most of us coud also have been so caught up with the idea of 'CONCEPT' that we find it difficult to deliever an architecture that is very very coherant with our concepts.
3) When we look back at our design process, and try to make some sense out of it.. sometimes we realise that we spend a lot of time post rationalising our design. When we design, we would meet with unexpected solutions which we couldn't possibly explain and summarise these solution in words. We could have obtained these unexpected solutions from multiple permutations of a solution to a design problem or purely by our own intuition. A solution obtain from our intuition is usually not valid in our crit because the tutor would want us to substantiate our every move in our design execution with thoughtful reasons. We couldn't possibly tell the tutor "I feel that it is correct.. therefore I do it this way.." !! haha.. Hence, when we post rationalise, and when we couldn't find valid and convincing reason.. therefore.. we tried to fabricate a good enough reason to back up our design.. some of us 'smoke'.
In summary, some of us 'smoke' because we are not confident of ourselves and our designs. We could really tell from the way a person presents his design during crit. If he has a purpose.. We could see it in his face and hear it through his words.
posted by Faith Tan SY at 4:31:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home