I’d love it we beat them Love it!!!

Do better than most / many Irish architects?

Not too hard a test that. The real secret is get something half decent built here, qualifed or not.

Would joining the RIAI make you an architect??? if the answer is yes then why is it that those four letters make the difference. If the answer is no then why not just get out there and do it for yourself the way that most architect graduates from UCD and Bolton Street do. Enter student design competitions, red and learn about arhitecture, decide what yo ulike in architecture, try when designing to emulate the qualities in designed and built work that you find meaningful and important.

If you can do all of this and then produce decent work then you have a fighting chance of becoming an architect, not by virtue of four letters after your name but because you have actually made an effort and achieved something in your own right.

I think the issue of formal architectural training and membership of an established professional body, while helpful in an educational and professional sense is not essential. Neither Mies van der Rohe, Corbusier or Frank LLoyd Wright were qualified architects and to the best of my knowledge at least two of the ‘premier’ architects in the UK are ‘unqualified’.

Still in the end of the day its up to you what you are capable of learning and absorbing on your own. As a practising architect myself I don’t believe that the qualifications that you cite are adequate to enable you to practise without further sturdy and experience and justifiably call yourself an Architect. Still I also happen to believe that you should’nt be prevented from making the effort in your own right. So if you realy feel that strongly about it buy a brass sign with your qualifications and name listed, add the title architect (its not illegal to do so) and start in practise that way. This is what every other architect in the country in private practise has done. So long as your work is good enough and so long as you behave professionally with your clients you should succeed.

I would add that in calling yourself an architect that you will be legally assuming the duties and responsibilities of a qualified architect (obviously you should obtain professional indemnity insurance) and that your competence in this regard should be adequate to stand up in a court of law in the event that it ever becomes an issue.

You should contact the RIAI obtain all of their educational information on professional practise, contract administration and law, familiarise yourself with it, with the planning, building regulations and fire acts (this usually takes a graduate two years) and then you will at least be professionally competent to practise. Easy really.

As for design. It’s not as haphazard as you might think, there is a methodology although differing architects have differing practises. The common thread is education. Most architects while in college read everything that they can lay their hands on about architecure and design, and it does (in the case of the better ones) inform their work.

To cut it short: Stop whinging, and get out there and do it for yourself, DIY architectural education is’nt easy but if it was good enough for Bramante, Michangelo, Brunnelsichi, Wren, Gandon, Chambers,Van der Rohe, Corbusier, and Wright its good enough for you!!.

And remember what Groucho Marx said: “….I don’t care much to join a club that would have me as a member…”

Wot Me Scared!!!!! Gulp!!!!! No sir.

Actually I was’nt suggesting that you regurgitate anybody elses work only that you might find, by looking at good work that there is a little more to design educatino than the archtiectural technicians (or incidentally degree or diploma) courses offer.

As to the RIAI ‘closed shop’ argument, I happen to agree with you. However I don’t agree that the technicians course necessarily qualifies you in terms of education, to practise as an architect. My own opinion is that the old system of apprenticeship related training should apply for this type of situation.

Lets face it, the average graduate of an architectural degree and diploma course spends approx 6 years studying in college to get a degree in architecture ,plus, on top of that a further two years minimum part time study to enable them to qualify to sit the RIAI’s Part 3 exams to qualify them for membership (these incidentally have a very high – some, myself included would say excessive – failure rate. You can’t seriously expect that purely on the basis of three years study in architectural technilogy (a very different discipline) that you should be entitled to the same treatment from the RIAI.

I should add that I’m coming at this from a relatively neutral (insofar as is possible) stance on this . I’m not a member of the RIAI, I joined the RIBA a good number of years ago precisely because I saw RIAI as a closed shop.

I agree that the idea of an open competitino for unqualified persons is a good idea but this won’t happen, the RIAI has resisted calls from WITHIN its membership for the recognition of apprenticeship applicants, they’re hardly going to do an about face no are they???. Again why bother!!, why not just get on with it and do your own thing however you see fit .I still don’t see why the recognition ofthe RIAI is so important.

You still hav’nt answered my question either, why is it that you believe that those four letters will make you an architect????.

One further thing I noticed at the bottom of the Archeire web page today that an open competition is being run for a ‘Dwelling in the City’. Open means you are free to enter, irrespective of qualifications. Give it a bash!!.

A final note ,if you really feel that strongly about RIAI competitions, then do what I did when I was and unqualified graduate, enter in conjunction with a qualified architect, explain to him or her that you want a chance to enter a design competition and that you would like to use their name as ‘qualified’ entrant.This worked well for me and might work as well for you.