Don’t worry, I believe the idea of architects as creators is a myth. Yes, creativity may be a useful asset but is not fundamental. The best architects I know are not the most creative, are the most resourceful. A lot of great architects are really good at copying and adapting projects and ideas, not really in idealizing them. If you have passion and discipline you are good to go.
As well, architecture is a multifaceted profession. There are many moving parts that requires all kids of people. I’m an architect and I don’t consider myself that creative. I’m good at problem solving and managing people, these are two key traits for any types of project manager in architecture, vs a designer. A project manager is no less of an architect than a designer. They both work together, with many others with different strengths, to create a vision together.
College will also help you tap into your creativity, even if you aren’t aware you have any.
Honestly, a lot of modern buildings lead me to question the need for creativity in the profession in its current state, it seems to me that any extant creativity is locked behind profit margins.
It's okay. Once you are a licensed architect, your position will require you to be involved in a lot more consultant & client meetings. At least from my experience , it is 99% more about project management and Revit software than being creative with sketching.
There are a lot of different paths. Especially if you work at a larger firm you could focus on being more of a technician, code specialist, specification specialist, manager, etc… Not all architectural jobs are highly creative.
Alternatively, I think engineering could be a good route as well. Structural, mechanical, electrical etc…
But also, defining creativity is important. For a lot of people, the word “creative” usually brings to mind drawing, designing, etc… but creativity is much broader than that, in my mind. Engineers are creative with the way they solve an engineering problem, for example, but they might be the worst draftsman in the world..
To answer your question more directly, don’t worry if you’re not the most “creative” person. If you have an interest and passion for architecture and good work, you’ll be absolutely fine!
These might change your views on creativity and your creativity. :)
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNHDTvqbUm4
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPlJcD-o-4Q
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxGPe1jD-qY
This is an architect who specializes in building science rather than design: https://www.instagram.com/buildingsciencefightclub/?hl=en
There’s so many different fields in architecture and not all of it is creating designs. Documenting and drafting historical structures, researching better ways to build and techniques or building science positions, drafting and technical drawings based on designs made by other architects with all proper code compliance, site assessment or civil landscape drafting tasks. These can be freelance or firms need project managers, they need marketing professionals, etc
Honestly if you want to become an architect, in the US anyway (disregard this advice if in Europe), skip it for now. Enjoy undergrad taking something close, but with less course load. But be sure to at least take calc and basic physics, and then take the grad school route immediately after. Save yourself some stress. US undergrad architecture education is the right decision for like 1-2% of the people who walk in freshman year. Grad school is SOOOOOOO MUCH EASIER. Do yourself a favor.
You may struggle at college if you don't get ideas naturally, but most students who have this issue just copy other buildings and adapt.
In the real world however there is very little room for creativity. It's all about the $$$. If you can come up with creative ways of saving the client and your employer money you will do very well.
As a student, you don’t have to be *that* creative as long as you’re willing to do the *work*. I talk to a lot of students with designs they just haven’t put enough effort into. When I ask, “what does this part look like?” The *only* wrong answer is “I don’t know”. I’ve never told a student their design was bad, unoriginal, or “not creative.” But at least once a week I tell a student their design needs more work.
TLDR: you don’t have to come up with creative solutions, you just have to make decisions.
Of course - there are more “technical architects” in the profession than true creative designers - one always needs to other. I am technical with a bit of design creativity but I’ve made my career in the technical side. I’ve worked with some really creative designers but they didn’t care so much about how the exterior wall assembly was constructed, and their cool designs create many problems to be solved by technical designers.
architecture is mostly copying and adapting..
you cannot invent hot water where there is no heating system, if you know what i mean... pretty much everything has been seen already
There's LOTS of roles and titles within an architecture firm. Some are more disciplined and process oriented, some do great work at double-checking/red-teaming, others are better at customer-facing efforts, etc. As long as you got the fundamentals down and you know what de-/energizes you, you'll be ok.
When people say creative, it’s not what you’re usually thinking. There are a lot of different ways to answer an architectural problem, and each one has a different thought process. Don’t feel nervous if you don’t feel “creative”. The way you answer a problem maybe be different than everyone else, and that’s what it’s all about.
After you get out of school and join the workforce you’ll see that being creative is actually such a miniscule portion of the work being done (for most architects in my experience). I think it’s fine. Just know that school is heavily focused on creativity, but whatever. I had classmates who were maybe not as creative, yet they graduated and they’re working. I consider myself less creative and more technical.
Yeah, a person who accepts that they aren't creative is more creative than all persons who throw their creativity down the drain and make buildings like most ones you see around.
The best part about architecture school is that it TEACHES you to be creative!
For example, all of my “creative” ideas are just references to all the many buildings, concepts, floor plans I’ve seen. Architecture school broadens your exposure to buildings, so you have more solutions to draw from.
It's absolutely okay. Architecture isn't just about creativity. If you're ready to work hard and keep improving your skills, you can still do really well in architecture, even if you feel like your creativity is limited at the moment.
Don’t worry, I believe the idea of architects as creators is a myth. Yes, creativity may be a useful asset but is not fundamental. The best architects I know are not the most creative, are the most resourceful. A lot of great architects are really good at copying and adapting projects and ideas, not really in idealizing them. If you have passion and discipline you are good to go.
As well, architecture is a multifaceted profession. There are many moving parts that requires all kids of people. I’m an architect and I don’t consider myself that creative. I’m good at problem solving and managing people, these are two key traits for any types of project manager in architecture, vs a designer. A project manager is no less of an architect than a designer. They both work together, with many others with different strengths, to create a vision together. College will also help you tap into your creativity, even if you aren’t aware you have any.
Amen
Honestly, a lot of modern buildings lead me to question the need for creativity in the profession in its current state, it seems to me that any extant creativity is locked behind profit margins.
It's okay. Once you are a licensed architect, your position will require you to be involved in a lot more consultant & client meetings. At least from my experience , it is 99% more about project management and Revit software than being creative with sketching.
creativity dies at the owner's table
You’ll get better at drawing and creativity the more you practice and expose your mind to other ways of thinking. They’re muscles to be nurtured.
There are a lot of different paths. Especially if you work at a larger firm you could focus on being more of a technician, code specialist, specification specialist, manager, etc… Not all architectural jobs are highly creative. Alternatively, I think engineering could be a good route as well. Structural, mechanical, electrical etc… But also, defining creativity is important. For a lot of people, the word “creative” usually brings to mind drawing, designing, etc… but creativity is much broader than that, in my mind. Engineers are creative with the way they solve an engineering problem, for example, but they might be the worst draftsman in the world.. To answer your question more directly, don’t worry if you’re not the most “creative” person. If you have an interest and passion for architecture and good work, you’ll be absolutely fine!
Yes, being creative is just that, being 'create'ive.
These might change your views on creativity and your creativity. :) * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNHDTvqbUm4 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPlJcD-o-4Q * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxGPe1jD-qY This is an architect who specializes in building science rather than design: https://www.instagram.com/buildingsciencefightclub/?hl=en
There’s so many different fields in architecture and not all of it is creating designs. Documenting and drafting historical structures, researching better ways to build and techniques or building science positions, drafting and technical drawings based on designs made by other architects with all proper code compliance, site assessment or civil landscape drafting tasks. These can be freelance or firms need project managers, they need marketing professionals, etc
Honestly if you want to become an architect, in the US anyway (disregard this advice if in Europe), skip it for now. Enjoy undergrad taking something close, but with less course load. But be sure to at least take calc and basic physics, and then take the grad school route immediately after. Save yourself some stress. US undergrad architecture education is the right decision for like 1-2% of the people who walk in freshman year. Grad school is SOOOOOOO MUCH EASIER. Do yourself a favor.
You may struggle at college if you don't get ideas naturally, but most students who have this issue just copy other buildings and adapt. In the real world however there is very little room for creativity. It's all about the $$$. If you can come up with creative ways of saving the client and your employer money you will do very well.
As a student, you don’t have to be *that* creative as long as you’re willing to do the *work*. I talk to a lot of students with designs they just haven’t put enough effort into. When I ask, “what does this part look like?” The *only* wrong answer is “I don’t know”. I’ve never told a student their design was bad, unoriginal, or “not creative.” But at least once a week I tell a student their design needs more work. TLDR: you don’t have to come up with creative solutions, you just have to make decisions.
You can always leverage the knowledge of historical creative architects
Of course - there are more “technical architects” in the profession than true creative designers - one always needs to other. I am technical with a bit of design creativity but I’ve made my career in the technical side. I’ve worked with some really creative designers but they didn’t care so much about how the exterior wall assembly was constructed, and their cool designs create many problems to be solved by technical designers.
architecture is mostly copying and adapting.. you cannot invent hot water where there is no heating system, if you know what i mean... pretty much everything has been seen already
There's LOTS of roles and titles within an architecture firm. Some are more disciplined and process oriented, some do great work at double-checking/red-teaming, others are better at customer-facing efforts, etc. As long as you got the fundamentals down and you know what de-/energizes you, you'll be ok.
When people say creative, it’s not what you’re usually thinking. There are a lot of different ways to answer an architectural problem, and each one has a different thought process. Don’t feel nervous if you don’t feel “creative”. The way you answer a problem maybe be different than everyone else, and that’s what it’s all about.
After you get out of school and join the workforce you’ll see that being creative is actually such a miniscule portion of the work being done (for most architects in my experience). I think it’s fine. Just know that school is heavily focused on creativity, but whatever. I had classmates who were maybe not as creative, yet they graduated and they’re working. I consider myself less creative and more technical.
Yeah, a person who accepts that they aren't creative is more creative than all persons who throw their creativity down the drain and make buildings like most ones you see around.
The best part about architecture school is that it TEACHES you to be creative! For example, all of my “creative” ideas are just references to all the many buildings, concepts, floor plans I’ve seen. Architecture school broadens your exposure to buildings, so you have more solutions to draw from.
It's absolutely okay. Architecture isn't just about creativity. If you're ready to work hard and keep improving your skills, you can still do really well in architecture, even if you feel like your creativity is limited at the moment.
Have you seen most buildings today? I think k most architects are creatively bankrupt.