architect: to be or not to be?

current tune: a perfect cirle - blue

the state of illinois would love to punish me every time i refer to myself a an architect. tough luck, i'm not going into a 20-minute explanation for every one who doesn't know that being an architect requires licensing. i'm calling myself an architect until further notice.

further notice would be if/when i decide not to ever go back to grad school, since i've seen plenty of the field and don't think it's warranted. perhaps i'm just bitter because of the way K2 works. we have one or two projects which matt deems design-worthy (little black pearl workshop, a possible casino) which we work on more than we get paid for (as an office). then, we have the rest of the projects that get us by for money.

if i go to grad school, and work at k2 another year and a half, i can get a license so i can do the same thing except with it being my designs i'm whoring, not matt's. whoopie.

is it time then for me to say, hey i've got a job which gets me by but i'd rather move to a different field if i'm going to spend another two years in school?

or, maybe i just need to work at a different firm which will make me unjaded by having real design projects, and not having to sacrifice to get them. i'm not sure i can think of one example of such a firm.

ben's friend burt, who did some renderings for K2 just got hired by ILM for 3.5 times what i make. he recieved a competitive bid from EA games. what am i in this business for again? if i can create space that people inhabit in a realm where good design isn't more expensive, just more desirable, for 3 times the money, what's the point?

i need a nap. i just spent 8 hours doing demo on our new office space.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Comments that do not follow the guidelines may be removed. By submitting a comment here you grant this site a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Required fields are marked *
↓ Preview