I just re-read my initial Manifesto. I'm quite embarrassed. One of our tasks recently was to write a job application for a position we're definitely not (yet) qualified or ready for, I think this is how I felt writing the last manifesto. I don't think any of the previous experience I talked about in that manifesto applies much to what I'm learning now. And what I should know from previous lectures I can't remember. Thank goodness it's all written down in books.
I have a way to go in getting used to the world of planning, its lingo, and what it all means, but this course is definitely giving me a window, a rather large viewing window into it. I thought my previous work in practice would be relevant. In some ways it is, in lots of ways it's not. Topdownbottomupbottomheavylocalismpolicy...it's still all a little confusing. But my physics teacher used to say that it'd all decant through in the end, and it's quite nice having things trickling through up there again.
We were asked today whether we have experience in submitting planning applications. I don't really think I do. I'm not sure if I want to, not with the way the system is at the moment (said in hope of making change). I understand now why the word 'propositional' was being bandied around during our introductory talks. It seems quite hard to be propositional where planning is involved.
The word 'Consultation' is also used a lot. It's almost a defence mechanism for anything that gets built, or for anything that wants to get built. The dynamic between planner and architect was an interesting one on the 'Mayor's Great Spaces' talk day. Some had consulted each other more than others it seems. And strangely enough, the ones who had done this ‘consulting’ had a closer relationship and tended to speak a similar language. This is the language I'd like to speak; the inbetween one. (Welsh isn't really that useful).
No comments:
Post a Comment