Throughout my studies and professional career I have come to the conclusion that any personal attempt to define architecture is unsatisfactory and inherently reductionist. To establish an architectural cannon is to ignore the very nature of the field. The architect functions as an interdisciplinary bridge. He or she interacts with clients, builders, engineers, citizens and any other party with a stake in the project. Their goal is to create discourse in the narrative between objects and their audience. It is through this discourse that tangible objects manifest.
As architects, we try to predict what functional form a space will take. Architecture distinguishes itself from simple geometry through the consideration of use. Architecture is saturated with both substance and act; where utilitarian meaning engages formal design. The field is an interdisciplinary pursuit, dwelling in the poché between schools of thought. During my education, it became my ambition to explore this poché. It is my conclusion that to properly understand architecture, it must be viewed through as many lenses as possible. During my pursuit to understand architecture I confronted a variety of narratives. By doing so, I hope to better understand what it means to be an architect.