After talking to the design expo guys and gals, they understood my worries, concerns, and assumptions, and affirmed them all. Each and every one of them said "REVIT! REVIT! REVIT! What....hand drawings? What are those, but meager sketch drawings used as process for the napkin or tablet?"

Of course, hand drawings have their place in the world of Arch still, but their power seems to be dwindling. I've yet to talk to an architect who said that they were hiring young, technologically advanced college students Because of their HAND DRAWING SKILLS. I'm not going to say that all firms and all architects are only looking at our portfolios for our highly detailed 3ds Max renderings, but it seems to be the general swing of things. As a drawer by nature, this project (and the way I have decided to go about it ((all revit))) is slowly pushing me off a mountain cliff. But, I realize the importance and the obvious benefits of a computer program that doesn't fail [if the user doesn't fail]. I know that it is not revit's fault for my problems, but my lack of willingness to learn the software that is [for the moment] free. If I had semesters to learn revit, and not weeks, would my skill be greater? Should there be an entire class to learn revit? Did Mike do his job in 232? What separates those people who have a natural affinity for computers and those who don't? Are those people who know computers well also the kids who receive laptops for their 10th birthday? Is our enculturation the preemptive action here? And who told me in high school that a strong basis of Math and Physics are the only things I need going into Architectural School?

Certainly I wish that I'd have had better training on a computer before college. I'm working against the flow of my education K-12. But beggars don't receive good marks. They earn the street.


So it goes that I'm striding to learn what is put in front of me, and for anybody who reads this and agrees, I hope we all can get our heads out of our asses and learn something alien.