.jpg)
This design competition is an invitation, the kind that you didn't expect to receive.
After participating in the celebration, we left empty-handed, but it doesn't mean we didn't take anything away. In fact, being empty-handed allowed me to concentrate on contemplating what exactly is being compared in this so-called "comparison of designs"...? (Certainly, it's not just about the "design" itself.)
It is inevitably related to our team's practical experience, which is a very realistic and pragmatic matter. From the perspective of the public sector, a significant level of experience represents our capability to accomplish tasks (although it's not a guarantee, it is certainly persuasive). Therefore, the lack of experience reflected in our qualifications may make it difficult for us to accumulate sufficient experience. It may also result in a situation where we spend a lot of time focusing on design, leading to a lag in experience compared to those who handle a large volume of projects quickly during the same period. However, these are the known problems we face and the situations we should confront. Currently, the most stable asset we have is time, and I believe we need to carefully and efficiently exchange time for experience in administration, budgeting, procedures, and other aspects (gaining qualifications is an additional benefit).
Among the various troubles, what frustrates me the most is networking. In terms of social interactions, I have always preferred a "seek-encounter" style of interpersonal relationships. However, it is evident that this may also affect our success or failure in the competition. If we want to expand our external relationships, I cannot just devote my time to the work at hand. On the other hand, once I cannot have enough time to focus on my work, I am uncertain about being able to face the outcome of the work in the end. Even so, "even if the objectives are the same, can't there be a more romantic approach to execution?" I couldn't help but naively think this way.
"Making efforts to consider our shortcomings in design" is probably the most reassuring part for me after the entire process of comparison. It's like thinking about how I should move forward. This competition provided a reasonable preparation time, so I can finally, without excuses, honestly face my time management issues during the design process. We have already been able to find design clues and information about spatial environments and practical needs within the limited time. However, regarding that crucial, conceptual, and somewhat abstract element, it is as difficult to satisfy as usual. In this comparison process, I believe I managed the preliminary analysis work reasonably well, which perhaps made me certain that we inevitably have deficiencies in concept generation and design development processes. It's truly both anxiety-inducing and exciting! (Even though I have a sense that this doesn't necessarily mean we can only stand and watch others enjoy the cake... because many times, the ones distributing the cake don't pay much attention to these things.)
--
Well, to be honest, I really enjoyed the whole process. Approaching architecture from a public affairs design perspective allowed me to appreciate another lovely aspect of architecture. Although I haven't quite mastered the methods to win competitions in practice, I have already understood the mindset of not feeling defeated in the intellectual competition: just do the "right things" from start to finish. Even if we don't win, we won't feel like losers.
But the tricky question is: What exactly are the "right things"? (That's why they say the journey of learning architecture has no end!)