DAY 2

Hello all. So here it is, Day 2!

Around 9 AM I checked in with Ms. Okamura at Sage. We talked over what I've accomplished during the last few days and of my plans for the next few days. Afterwards I went to the school library to turn in my overdue books (Latin Real Book and The Jazz Theory Book, both overdue about a year.... shhh....)

I had an appointment scheduled at 10 AM with Ms. Shank (The COO of the school) regarding my DiscoverDesign project. I entered a design competition, hosted by the Chicago Architecture Foundation, for high school students a few weeks ago. The objective was to redesign my school cafeteria to improve efficiency, food quality, and sustainability. You can check out my entry here: http://discoverdesign.org/design/gallery/1793#overview
Anyhow, the biggest issue that students complain about the cafeteria is the speed of traffic flow within the cafeteria. This issue had been addressed to the administration several times, and it was also a theme that I tried to tackle in this project, so we tried to see if any of my solutions and ideas could actually be put in place. Long story short, two strongly possible improvements are: 1) Adding another door next to the current entrance/exit so that there is a clear route of entry and egress, and 2) Moving the cashiers away from the wall to allow each cashier to serve two lanes, and to alleviate congestion. You can read more about my project on the link above.

Afterwards Ms. Shank offered me to work with her on other architecture/construction-related projects on campus. My response was... "Do you need to ask?" I'm hoping that I get to be part of the design process of the new science building... or really any other projects on campus. We'll see!



At 11:30 AM, I headed toward Los Angeles with my dad. On our way there we stopped at a Chinese restaurant for lunch, and continued to the Carlson-Reges House, where the final review session for a Cal Poly Pomona Urban Design studio was to take place. Mr. De Jarnett (still now it bothers me. Is it De Jarnett or de Jarnett? I've seen it both ways in his electronic signatures, and my utter lack of understanding in French doesn't help much. Ugh.. I should have asked him), to whom I was introduced by Ms. Okamura, had invited me to attend part of the critique and maybe have a little chat afterwards. I arrived at the house at 1:30pm.

The house itself was beautiful; it sort of reminded me of those quaint little galleries I used to peek in with my mom back when I was in Seoul.  I was fortunate enough to be present when the architect who designed the house, Michael  Rotondi (left), came to talk a little about the house and to critique some of the students’ works.

The interesting thing about the design of the house was its improvisational aspect. Mr. Rotondi explained that he intentionally left his design incomplete, so that he could develop the design in a forward, additive manner. He compared the process to “how a child might build a house,” beginning with a basic structure and continuously adding on pieces.  The result is a very raw-looking structure, with beams showing everywhere. He also mentioned that almost all the materials used in the project were recycled from the excess left from building high-rise buildings and whatnot. Very interesting... Sadly a similar approach to building would be near-impossible, considering that this is now (technically still private but) a public facility and the ADA standards and codes are much stricter now. Here are some more pretty pictures for your enjoyment:

"Only 8 people up on pool deck at one time." 

For some reason I found this to be hilarious.

Some pictures from up the deck:

The review itself: when I walked into the main gallery area I could see rows and rows of garden chairs, sitting in them stressed and sleep-deprived 4^th year architecture and landscape design students. In the very front row sat a panel of juries—architects, professors, you get the idea. Also set up in the front were a projector and benches and frames for models. Mr. De Jarnett had been there sine 12 pm, reviewing these students' projects. I sat in the third row from the front, stage left.

Some pictures of the models the students built:

Before settling down to watch the critiques I went outside in the garden area to talk to the students about their project. All students in the studio were either 4th year architecture or landscape majors. In a nutshell, the area of LA with zip code 90031 was divided into 9 sections. Each group, consisting of two architects and two landscape designers, was assigned to a section. The objective was to improve the area in one way or another. From the conversation I sort of picked up that this critique session is somewhat equivalent to a final exam for their project. 

Above are ome pictures of the presentations. It was interesting to watch a formal, college-level critique, especially when I had just gone through a similar process that morning with Ms. Shank. I learned the importance of concise and articulate communication. Each group was given five minutes (FIVE minutes!) to present their work and ten-twenty minutes to receive feedback from the jury. As you can imagine, this is quite a challenge, especially when the presentation is on such a macro-scale project. None of the groups could finish their presentation in the given time (there was a professor in the back who kept motioning to his students to move quickly through the slides), but nevertheless I think I learned much about the importance of being able to communicate to a disinterested audience quickly and effectively.

(Yup. Sleepy architecture students.)

Well, because every group took more than five minutes to present their work and the critique of the jury ended up taking more than twenty minutes each, the schedule kept running behind and I was not able to talk to Mr. De Jarnett until almost 4. I had previously talked to him over the phone about going into the field, choosing colleges, etc., but this was the first time we met in person. I would like to thank him for so kindly inviting me to the critique and sharing his story and knowledge with me. 

We sat down in the back yard of the house and talked for about an hour. We began with his story of becoming an architect, how he began as a fine arts major and then attended the M. Arch program. 

Since then he has both worked as an architect and taught at several universities. His background story in architecture was somewhat similar to mine. Neither of us had a family member who was involved in the field, and yet we decided to take on that path. We had previously talked at length about colleges and degree paths, so that wasn't as big of a part in our conversation. 

Mr. De Jarnett pointed out that his experience in the fine arts undergraduate program helped him immensely with his M. Arch degree. This emphasized once again the fact that there really isn't a "correct" path to anything. After talking to many counselors, college representatives, architects, and researching on my own, I decided that B. Arch is a degree path most compatible with my current goals and interests (a decision that Mr. De Jarnett also agreed with). His story, however, reminded me the importance of wide range in one's experiences. Architecture is an interdisciplinary field; moreover, life is an interdisciplinary field. I realized the danger of having a tunnel-vision, as Eddie told me last Saturday. So one lesson to take away was to not be afraid to explore other fields, and to not lock myself away in a single field. 

I took my portfolio with me juuust in case I get a chance to have it reviewed... and I did! Mr. De Jarnett was happy to take a look and give me some feedback. Some tips he had were:

1. Find a good typeface... ideally other than Helvetica, even though that is probably impossible.

2. Pay attention to the design and layout.

3. Never, NEVER use graphic design to "fancy up" the portfolio with fancy layout/background design; just    show them what you have.

4. Don't put too many things on one page; "White space is your friend." (that's verbatim)
5. Try to have everything in the same orientation (landscape or portrait)... Ideally portrait.
6. Consider the ease of use. There is no need to put fancy, outrageously shaped covers on the book.
7. Refer to some books about book design. (Google Ellen Lupton)

In addition, he pointed out which pieces in my portfolio are "essential" to include in admission, and which ones I should consider taking out. Overall I think that was the kind of feedback I needed.

Lastly, I would like to finish with something he said today that resonated with me:

"School is a place to fail."

I think it's very important to realize this. So many of us high school students become caught up in "success" that we forget the value of failure. School is probably the safest place in the world to make mistakes. In a sense that's logical,  because we learn most from our failures. This is a philosophy that I would like to take with me for the rest of my high school years and college. My dad and I ended up having a nice discussion about this on our drive home (what else do you do in rush-hour traffic?), and we both agreed that the sentence was true.

Without a doubt there were many mistakes, or at least things I could have improved on even in my preparation for Spring at Sage and my first office visit yesterday. I hope I will improve on the mistakes I made the first time and make an even better experience out of my day tomorrow. 8:30AM, Mr. Gregg Abel's office. See you tomorrow!