Internship – a good deal? – Mail from Rotterdam (4)

Building design

The Game Room by MVRDV (© Max Graber)

Is an internship a kind of deal between employer and architecture student? After the interview with Mark Michaeli, architecture professor at the Technical University of Munich, Baumeister Academy winner Maxi Graber reports first-hand on his work experience as an architecture student.

Even if you can hardly use the term deal in the age of Trump, the question still arises: Is the internship an enriching life experience or pure exploitation? – After the interview with Mark Michaeli, architecture professor at the Technical University of Munich, Baumeister Academy winner Maximilian Graber reports first-hand on his work experience as an architecture student. Max is currently completing an internship at MVRDV in Rotterdam.

At the end of my fourth bachelor’s semester at the Technical University of Munich, I was gripped by curiosity: what does the everyday life of an architect look like? An internship like this certainly couldn’t hurt. But when the time came, I asked myself: Am I even ready for it? During the first few weeks of my previous internship at Renzo Piano, I couldn’t let go of this thought. But finally, in the third or fourth week, I realized that the work itself was making me more self-confident day by day. I settled into my new workplace, got used to new faces, languages and computer programs and grew with my tasks every day. And I quickly lost the shyness to ask questions. After all, that’s the deal that Mark Michaeli talked about in his interview with Baumeister Architekturmagazin last week: this form of employment is based on a certain reciprocity. So an internship is not only added value for the intern alone, but also a good opportunity for experienced architects to refresh their knowledge when they have to answer questions.

Give and take

Unfortunately, however, it is not uncommon for interns to be responsible for making coffee, drawing stupid plans or working through Excel sheets for days on end. And they are not even paid a decent wage for this. To the advantage of many offices, there are plenty of students who need to earn some extra money on the side – in the truest sense of the word – or want to gain professional experience. A qualified architect costs at least three times as much for the same work. And of course, I can see that these “tedious” activities are part of the job. But where is the learning effect, the second part of the deal? As an intern, I expect a certain challenge, a task I can grow with or a mentor I can learn from. Granted, as a student you may not necessarily have years of construction site experience or in-depth detailed knowledge, but what about a breath of fresh air, creativity, a feel for form, color, material and, above all, motivation? I am of the opinion that an internship should be worth the price you pay. As an intern, you’re allowed to have your expectations, right? My opinion: If both parties ultimately fulfill their contractual conditions, then nothing should stand in the way of a successful internship.

Click here for the interview with Mark Michaeli.

The Baumeister Academy is supported by GRAPHISOFT, BAU 2019 and Schöck Bauteile GmbH.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Zaha Hadid builds Tokyo’s Olympic Stadium – but not after all

Building design

Back to square one in Tokyo: Zaha Hadid Architects will not be building the central stadium for the 2020 Olympic Games after all.

It’s back to square one in Tokyo: Zaha Hadid Architects will not be building the central stadium for the 2020 Olympic Games after all. Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has now declared that the entire process will be reset to zero for cost reasons. “We are starting all over again,” the Guardian quotes the Japanese politician as saying. So there will probably be a new competition.
Ultimately, however, the ever-increasing construction costs are likely to be just one reason for the decision. Architecturally, the extravagant building (Hadid, that is) also came in for a lot of criticism – not least from other architects. Arata Isozaki had described Hadid’s design as a turtle just waiting for Japan to sink into the sea so it could swim away. Pritzker Prize winner Fumihiko Maki had organized a symposium against the design, which was attended by Toyo Ito, Kengo Kuma and Sou Fujimoto, among others. A petition against the building was also initiated.
Patrik Schumacher, the first architect in Zaha Hadid’s office, apparently holds this architect-dominated counter-movement partly responsible for the decision. He wrote on Facebook: “Maki and Ito will be remembered for this.”

The center of Berlin remains green

Building design
The perspective shows the planned steps on the banks of the Spree.

1st prize to Büro RMP Lenzen: Steps on the banks of the Spree with a view of the cathedral (Visualization: RMP Lenzen)

RMP Stephan Lenzen win the open space competition for the City Hall and Marx-Engels-Forum in Berlin: The office won against 52 other entries.

It’s all about a prominent area in Berlin’s historic center: sandwiched between the new Humboldt Forum and the television tower, the Rathaus- and Marx-Engels-Forum are getting a new design. The RMP Stephan Lenzen office has won the competition for the green center of Berlin.

Where the roots of the city of Berlin lie, there will soon be no new construction. The open spaces of the Rathaus-Forum and Marx-Engels-Forum will remain green. However, the area will be given a new design, which will result in a flight of steps leading down to the adjacent Spree. The Berlin Senate Administration invited people to take part in a competition in the spring. After an initial phase, citizens were allowed to have their say. A total of 21 landscape architecture firms then developed their ideas further in the second phase of the competition. The landscape architects from RMP Stephan Lenzen ultimately won over the jury. They proposed a central ribbon that connects listed areas of the Rathausforum with the Marx-Engels-Forum. This green ribbon ends in a large staircase on the banks of the Spree. Opposite, on the other side of the water, the eastern façade of the new Humboldt Forum shines.

The open space in the middle of old Berlin used to be called “Park an der Spree”. As one of the most central green spaces in the Mitte district, it dates back to the Second World War. It damaged the Heilig-Geist-Viertel, which ultimately prompted the GDR leadership to demolish it. Since then, the area between Karl-Liebknecht-Straße in the north, the park by the television tower in the east, Rathausstraße in the south and the Spree in the west has remained undeveloped. For a long time, there was an ensemble of monuments in the middle of the area, but this had to be moved to the north-western edge when the subway was built. The future of the Marx-Engels Forum has been under discussion since the 1990s. The ideas were many and varied. They ranged from the reconstruction of the Heilig-Geist-Viertel to the design of a park at the Marx-Engels-Forum. The latter ultimately prevailed.

Marx-Engels-Forum competition brief

The design of a park on the Marx-Engels-Forum now had to be fleshed out as part of the ideas and realization competition. The participants were asked to engage with the place where Berlin was founded, the historical layers hidden in the ground and the surrounding area. At the end of the long debate about the future of this site, citizens’ guidelines for the future development of the Rathaus Forum and the Marx-Engels Forumwere drawn up . These guidelines state that an open space should be designed that does justice to the dimensions and significance of the location and strengthens the identity of the site. In addition, it should bring the eventful history to life and at the same time enable diverse and intensive uses.

In the first phase, the competition initially asked for a vision and an idea for the entire Marx-Engels-Forum. Only the participants in the second phase had to derive their vision. In addition, they outlined an intermediate state for the year 2030 in the ideas part of the competition. In a third realization part, the concrete implementation for 2024 was then to be shown. This step-by-step approach is based on the intended gradual realization of the project. This will take a long time. Accordingly, the ideas must be based on a clear approach and offer a great deal of flexibility for process-based implementation.

The landscape architects from RMP Lenzen provided the most convincing solution for the new design of the Rathaus- and Marx-Engels-Forum. They designed an open space that is characterized by a striking figure. The plan is to keep the Rathaus- and Marx-Engels-Forum free of buildings. The green space promises a high quality of stay with areas for strolling, relaxing and enjoying spectacular views of the cathedral, Humboldt Forum and television tower. RMP Lenzen is equipping the new space with plenty of greenery and lots of shady trees. But water is also included, which contributes to cooling as well as infiltration areas that fit in with future rainwater management. Overall, the contribution to the Marx-Engels-Forum competition envisages a modern, climate-resilient urban space that enables a variety of uses.

Good things take time

The idea of initially creating a green space in the heart of old Berlin preserves opportunities for future generations. For the near future, the jury recommended that the first prize-winning work by RMP Lenzen be realized. This brings a controversial debate to an end. Hardly any other place in Berlin has experienced more planning and discussions than the Marx-Engels-Forum. But for the building senator, it is clear that the city of Berlin has done the right thing. After the fall of the Wall, it did not rush into planning. Now, against the backdrop of current plans for Alexanderplatz and Molkenmarkt and against the backdrop of climate adaptation and the mobility turnaround, things can be designed in peace.

Would you like to find out more about projects in the capital? We have summarized the next planning steps on the former Berlin Tegel airport site for you.