As a designer and graduate of the Syracuse architecture school, this show is pretty cool. The students idea of a concept is pretty weak for the most part, particularly since like most architecture students they are hyperaware of contextual issues (site history, environment, architectural history). However, they ended up with some cool houses. We don't know what exact kind of budget they were working on so we can't make judgement calls like oh they should of gone back to the original style of the area. well, you know, that style actually costs more to build due to fact that SIP panels are cheaper per square foot and take less time to go up.
building and designing great houses/buildings is like any other industry. It strives for innovation and a better product. The house you live in is no doubt better than any house build in America 200 years ago. Would you live in that house in the 1700s or the one you have now? The answer is probably no, why? Because we have advancements in our public infrastructure, plumbing, cheap electricity, better building techniques (insulation, better windows, better wood framing). The students here represent a small forward step in building design. although you may not agree with what they are doing, they are trying to make our built environment a safer, more sustainable, healthier one. The same argument is particularly true of computer technology, why would we make better computers if we have perfectly fine ones right now?
We as consumers demand more and more of the things we used everyday. Yes we can go back to the old shotgun style of housing. Why can't be look back on that style and find its flaws, fix them, make a better house? What makes it better?
Oh, those designers, not making houses that fit in. let's make computers that don't distinguish themselves from other computers. Oh mind as well give up your MacBook then. Let's make cars that don't distinguish themselves from other cars. Forget about that Prius or the Volkswagen bug. Let's live in the past. We will never have a better future if we keep rebuilding past designs for houses. Those shotgun houses were small, got compartmentalized preventing airflow, didn't allow stack effect, and were poor insulated. let's keep building them! let's not say we did.
building and designing great houses/buildings is like any other industry. It strives for innovation and a better product. The house you live in is no doubt better than any house build in America 200 years ago. Would you live in that house in the 1700s or the one you have now? The answer is probably no, why? Because we have advancements in our public infrastructure, plumbing, cheap electricity, better building techniques (insulation, better windows, better wood framing). The students here represent a small forward step in building design. although you may not agree with what they are doing, they are trying to make our built environment a safer, more sustainable, healthier one. The same argument is particularly true of computer technology, why would we make better computers if we have perfectly fine ones right now?
We as consumers demand more and more of the things we used everyday. Yes we can go back to the old shotgun style of housing. Why can't be look back on that style and find its flaws, fix them, make a better house? What makes it better?
Oh, those designers, not making houses that fit in. let's make computers that don't distinguish themselves from other computers. Oh mind as well give up your MacBook then. Let's make cars that don't distinguish themselves from other cars. Forget about that Prius or the Volkswagen bug. Let's live in the past. We will never have a better future if we keep rebuilding past designs for houses. Those shotgun houses were small, got compartmentalized preventing airflow, didn't allow stack effect, and were poor insulated. let's keep building them! let's not say we did.
Please login or 
