.
Over the weekend I engaged in an interesting conversation that walked the line between friendly and hostile. We started off talking about McMansions and our mutual disdain how the priorities of the home-buying public has changed from a quality to quantity mentality. I do not like McMansions and I think they create bigger problems than just simply creating unsightly and poorly planned buildings. The neighborhood where I live is rife with these sorts of projects, and as an architect who specializes in residential projects, I am always at risk of inserting my foot in my mouth when I go over to someone’s house. If this is the first time they have had me over and they know what I do, it doesn’t take long for them to ask me what I think of their house. Since I don’t want to lie – and I have no interest in climbing up on my soapbox – I tell them the truth. It generally goes like this:
New Friend: So you’re an architect, do you design the inside of buildings or the outside?
Bob: I design both, but mostly I focus on residential projects.
New Friend: So you design houses? What do you think of my house?
**we interrupt this conversation for a brief point**
This really is a cruel question to ask an architect. You are either oblivious to the predicament that you have just created, or you want to hear an “expert” tell you that your house is great – regardless of whether it is or isn’t.
** resume**
New Friend: “… What do you think of my house?”
Bob: “What really matters is what you think of your house. What’s your favorite part?”
New Friend: “I just love the kitchen and all the closet space and ….”
.
Crisis averted for now. The best part about that answer is that I am not lying, but speaking to an even deeper truth is that I don’t to have a conversation about architecture with someone who clearly judges their house with a different measuring stick than I would judge one of my own projects. And that is o-kay with me because it is their house and if they love it, I am genuinely happy for them. Maybe I have shifted my moral position a little because I design fairly large homes that typically exceed the needs of the occupants. On more than one occasion, I have found myself defending what I do, that I am part of a problem systemic to the quantity over necessity debate. I will agree that it is hard to justify a 5,500 square foot house for 2 people, so I don’t try to do it anymore. I’m not suggesting that our service level ever changes based on the size of the house or the project budget – we don’t take every project nor are we hired for every project for which we interview. We work in a specific quality range so regardless of the project size, they are get the same attention and development.
.
.
What it comes down to is that when you hire me (or hopefully any architect for that matter) to design a home for you, projecting or imparting popular current social values and mores is not part of the services I am offering. Occasionally some marriage counseling comes into play but that’s a value added service that comes standard with basic services. If you want a 5,500 square foot house and have the means to pay for it – great. I haven’t now, nor will I ever, tell someone who wants to retain my services to piss off because they don’t need what they want. That, my friends, is not my job. Discovering that good clients are better than good jobs takes some experience to figure out. I’ll help you pick out a front door, I’ll help you design a trellis in your backyard, and yes – I will design a 10,000 square foot house that 2 people will live in – because that is what I do. I am an architect and I design houses.
.
.
.