From this list, I would choose:

From this list, I would choose:

          ARCHITECTURE! over architecture?

ARCHITECTURE! to me reads as keynote architecture; or architecture that has never been duplicated except by various ideas if form, structure, and/or function. The beauty of this architecture can be found in it's uniqueness and deliberate existence to contrast contemporary standards of it's time. As I begin to practice, I hope to be able to take on large scale projects that will put focus on my overall design ideas as to copying or re-implementing someone else's ideas in the same atmosphere in another built environment. This desire comes from the atrocious placement of houses all over the US, with most having no unique quality in coordination with it's surroundings. The same structures are found in a catalog that can be purchased for $20 at a local bookstore. So I ask, how is that expressing architectural ideas???

          Networks over Objects

As I have interned and worked on studio projects dealing with urban design and development, I have begun to understand how important the fabric of life, culture, the built environment, humans, nature, and many others begin to overlap into a living organism network. As I move into the future, I hope to develop buildings not just for the client or for my own personal prestige, but for the overall greater good of the surrounding fabric of networks. Everyday, we experience the built environment, sometimes unconsciously walking and interacting with the surroundings. So I pose the question, instead of interacting with just the building, what if your interactions in the building can impact and interact with the greater built environment or networks of life and the like organisms? What if flushing a toilet or using a sink would lead to a water purification system in the building that waters the plants on the exterior of the building, which in turn feeds the endangered birds of the area. Would then architecture not contribute to the greater good of life?

          Substance over hype

I must choose substance over hype because I feel that too many keynote building now days are hyped up over the architect or person funding the project. Where many of these projects fall short is their connection to networks and the “WOW!” factor. Anyone who has millions of dollars can fund a major project and any architect can drop trees hardheartedly onto flat surfaces. However, I question what greater good will that building serve? If the building doesn't take into account environmental factors, the various networks of human and natural interactions, or the account a greater purpose, then I question why build the space as a monumental structure? Why not instead keep the project as a simple building that everyone recognizes for it's purpose because unless every-time someone walks into a building and feels a greater good or connection, then the keynote building will be no different than the mall down the street.