Room to Improve.

Squatman

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I rewatched it last night, as I thought maybe the people assassinating her character on here were right, and she insulted him.
I take on board people's views, and so I checked it out. I even took down snippets of dialogues just to have an objective view, you know, when it's written down.

- She absolutely 100% does not insult Dermot.
- There is great banter between the two for most of the program, and in the end they both say they got on well in spite of the disagreements.
- she is tongue in cheek most of the time, and Dermot gets that.
- Dermot plays the "hurt feelings" "why is she giving out to me" little boy card a lot, I think it's obviously directions from productions.
- she plays the "I'm a tough, demanding cookie" card. In fact, after the zero out of ten dialogue, she concludes "back to the drawing board D", and she checks/looks at whoever (production) is at the back of camera for reassurance. That's how that interaction ends, her checking with producers if she was bitchy enough with a goofy laugh.

- she does get narky towards the end, in particular in 3 instances :

~ colour of window frames, it's the same colour says D, but it isn't, she says, but it is, says D, little back and forward, and D gets the last word.

~ she's a bit abrupt when, after trying to convince her for the umptiethst time about the open plan, D is going on and on about it and the floor.
They have 3 tiles on the floor, she asked him to pick one, he must have gone on about his gripes a while (edited), and she says :
"D you're waffling, pick a tile".
and she tells him she likes the opposite one.

~ the stairs discussion is where she is the narkiest. He's rubbishing their choice, apparently said in an email it was excessive, and is now saying :

"Look, all the things going inside the house, they're not farmhousey.

She says : I know, maybe you need to share your vision of this farmhouse you're trying to create.

I told you, dark tiles, dark tiles in the kitchen timber...

her : are you going to bring in some hens and throw them around the place as well ?"

That's it.
That's the extent of her "bullying".
Meanwhile, D is pushing the open plan thing about 5 or 6 times on camera, and every time she says "this is not what we want", "I don't like open plan", and various explanations of why she does not like it, and how "personally", for herself, she just does not want it, there was open plan in her own house growing up and it's noisy, they want privacy, etc...
Every time she makes her point she makes it clearly and firmly, and I think this gives the perception to people on here that she's rude or bullying.

I'm a sad case but I do have a lot of that dialogue scripted if anyone would like to see, it would just take a lot of space here, while you can just re-watch the thing for yourself. Really other than what's up there it's all just stating her preferences in a respectful way.



Also this myth about Padraic being meek and having no say in this, "poor guy hasn't a hope with her", that's wrong.

He's well able and willing to speak his mind throughout, and she is listening and respectful every time he does so, like in the instance of the size of the window going to the front of the house, the types of cabinets for the kitchen, the colour of the kitchen...

There is characterization going on on the part of production, with many off camera contributions setting them up in their parts :
- she's the tough cookie, very demanding, confrontational, "war" suggestion.
- D is the poor guy who really wants to help but whose feelings get hurt.
(even though he's the one pushing his agenda intensely on 5 or 6 occasions throughout to very patient rebuttal)
- Padraic is the bumbling idiot who talks to his cows.

There are no insults, she does not treat him like rubbish.
By the time she gets a bit narkier as in, above, they know each other well and a lot of banter has already gone on, D has pushed his agenda numerous times, and she has patiently explained her point numerous times.
It is simply not fair and it is disingenuous or knee-jerk to paint her as a thundering B.

whilst this might be true, apparently, Dermot abandoned this project midway and had to be begged back. (if you can believe that)

oh, and congrats on the 27th housewife thingy

Sleepy

That's interesting Squatman, where'd you hear that?

gmisk

I wouldn't personally classify her behaviour as bullying at all but having said that I dont think she came across very well put it that way.

She came across like she had a bit of a chip on her shoulder and overly sensitive with the eye rolling and comments with regards design (the window thing was just embarassing and rude), I thought, but hey she got what she wanted in the house and it was their money being spent not Dermots.

Dermot is no angel in fairness himself, that trick he tried with the bricks a few episodes back was a pure cute hoor move!

sydthebeat

Wombatman wrote: »

An architect brings the 'non changing idea' to life for the client. It's not like she had plans already done up for each room. Dermot was give a few simple parameters and he wasn't creative enough to meet them.

Not at all.... you dont hire a designer if you do not want their design input.
if you have a singular idea of the design you want, and you are not for changing on it, then dont hire a designer.
If you dont want your brief challenged and argued, then again, dont hire a designer.
There are plenty of professionals out there who can flesh out a clients particular design for building purposes, but these professionals design input would usually be limited to making the design function.

remember, unlike the chef analogy above, a building has to exist over time, and over the changing of peoples lives. tastes change, lives change. Many clients only form their brief based on a snapshot of where they are there and then in their lives ie we want 4 bedrooms, we want a guest bedroom on the ground floor, we want a play room, we want a home office etc. A good designer can challenge this brief to question "how often will your guest bedroom be used? can that room double as the home office through clever use of furnishings? what will the play room be used as when the kids grow up? can it double as an extra living space in 15 years time? there you go, ive just saved you 500 sq ft and 75K in mortgage costs.......

it is nonsensical to engage an architect of a wealth of experience and not use or take on board that experience.

Just to clarify, im not speaking directly about dermot bannon, or this particular client in this case. in talking in general. That TV program is an entertainment show and doesnt properly reflect the interaction in the designer / client relationship. It MUST be build on a foundation of trust, and if that trust doesnt exist then the relationship and the project wont be successful.

Mountainsandh

Squatman wrote: »

whilst this might be true, apparently, Dermot abandoned this project midway and had to be begged back. (if you can believe that)

oh, and congrats on the 27th housewife thingy

Well thank you very much, I'm beginning to enjoy all this attention.
Might just keep that going along.
Padraic says hi.

Riskymove

sydthebeat wrote: »

it is nonsensical to engage an architect of a wealth of experience and not use or take on board that experience.

I saw it last night

that was the key point for me and I understand how frustrated Dermot got. The "in your opinion" segment was most telling.

but....it was very different to what I expected based on the reaction to date. I didn't see any bullying

Quazzie

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Really. So people have to research the open plan vs the traditional architect? Or do they say it on their website. I’ve just gone to Dermot Bannon website and it doesn’t say “open plan only”

And even if that’s what he likes and the client disagrees then the architect has to change or they move on.

This is where the restaurant analogy disintegrates. Restaurants do advertise their type so you won’t get, or expect, an Italian meal in a Chinese restaurant.

Hiring an architect is more like hiring a chef, who cooks for you. The chef may like to produce a fish dish as his speciality but if you want chicken you get chicken ( or either party can end the relationship at the discussion phase, which didn’t happen here).

Clients should always ask for examples of previous work when hiring an architect. That's why most forms of advertising is their portfolio. This is well established.

sydthebeat

Penn wrote: »

While I mostly agree syd, I don't think she had a 'non for changing' idea of the design she wanted, but there were certainly specific things she wanted and specific things she didn't want. Everything else was malleable and she did seem open to ideas on many things, and took his advice on a lot of things. But those specific things she wanted and didn't want were largely ignored in his original concept. There's challenging the client's brief, and then there's ignoring it.

She wanted his design ideas and expertise, but in a concept that would deliver the functions they wanted. His initial concept didn't achieve that for them. I think most architects are aware that open plan doesn't suit all families. There are alternative and innovative design ideas Dermot could have used rather than a wall with doors to separate the spaces and allow it to function as both open and separate as needs be but ultimately the budget didn't allow for that.

And as persons not familiar with design and costs, that's why they needed an architect. Sometimes you want an architect to give you a fantastic design, but sometimes you need the architect to tell you you can't afford it and have to make the choice between design and their own preferences for functionality. They chose the latter.

i suppose i should have posted my most recent post first, in that im not speaking specifically about this episode or even dermot bannon himself. No bodys perfect. I dont watch RTI myself as i find it incredibly frustrating

Im really talking about the client / designer relationship and how it should work.... and i was replying to two comments that were made on architects in general, and not on the specifics of this episode... one being that architects didnt have their own style, and the other comment being about clients being afraid to say what they want in fear of the 'authority figure'.

iamwhoiam

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I may post some of these dialogues where she is just assertive later on, Fresh popcorn.
The above is genuinely all that can be said about her. There is forming an opinion on someone saying "you're an asshole", and then there is slating someone for saying " this is not what I like", "this is 100% not whgat we want".

People have different opinions because they have often different levels of acceptance . I might find something rude where you might not . Often people interprete a look or a gesture differenty too . It doesn't actually make one wrong and one right .
I found the girl snipey and condescending at times , I don't think she was the divil incarnate but at times I found her rude . She might very well have been aiming to be funny and only she knows that but for me she came across as teachery and a tad condescending . But my guess is it is an aquired look that many teachers have and akin to the " look " a mammy gives to the bold toddlers

Wombatman

Sleepy wrote: »

The lengths you're going to trying to defend her, I'm beginning to think you are Katie, Mountainsandh!

Her behaviour on the show was stereotypical schoolyard bully. Passive aggressive, condescending and passed off as "sure it was just a bit of banter" or "but I was only messing". Perhaps she is just utterly oblivious to normal social interaction and thought she was being funny by belittling the professional they'd asked to work (for free) for them. Her sense of humour was well off if so. Even her mother seemed embarrassed by her behaviour!

You can be assertive and polite. Rolling your eyes dismissively at the opinion of an expert in an area you're an amateur is not a polite way to assert oneself. We really need to stop excusing such behaviour as "assertiveness" in young women on the basis of their gender as it really does them no favours (as the vast majority of social media response to this episode highlights).

Bully, Embarrassing, Aggressive, Condescending, Utterly oblivious to normal Social Interaction, Impolite.

I'd take a bit of eye rolling and a dodgy sense of humor any day in the place of this backbiting judgmental labeling. Begrudgery at its finest. Haters gonna hate is guess.

vicwatson

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Isn't it great you don't have to read it ?

I happen to have a bit of spare time right now and I think it's worth debating. There's a young lady possibly feeling crap now because people are quick to judge and publish their thoughts, with the added bonus of what it is exactly that we can expect from an architect, and a good dash of "assertiveness is fine if you word it up really really delicately so as not to offend".

Just giving my opinion, that not allowed no? Obviously not, if it’s against yours.

irishmoss

I think she locked her horns in when Dermot refused to build the wall. I think when she used "in your opinion" she was possibly referring to the fact he was not listening to what she wanted and she used a bad choice of words. But she was condescending to him in the car.

I get the feeling though that the china cabinets really weren't for herself but for her mother. Maybe she has plans on moving her into the bedroom downstairs:)

Sleepy

Wombatman wrote: »

Bully, Embarrassing, Aggressive, Condescending, Utterly oblivious to normal Social Interaction, Impolite.

I'd take a bit of eye rolling and a dodgy sense of humor any day in the place of this backbiting judgmental labeling. Begrudgery at its finest. Haters gonna hate is guess.

No begrudgery at all, I wouldn't live in that part of the world for any money.

"haters gonna hate"? :rolleyes: Are you 12? From Compton? Or just trying too hard to be "down with the kids"?

Penn

sydthebeat wrote: »

i suppose i should have posted my most recent post first, in that im not speaking specifically about this episode or even dermot bannon himself. No bodys perfect. I dont watch RTI myself as i find it incredibly frustrating

Im really talking about the client / designer relationship and how it should work.... and i was replying to two comments that were made on architects in general, and not on the specifics of this episode... one being that architects didnt have their own style, and the other comment being about clients being afraid to say what they want in fear of the 'authority figure'.

That's absolutely fair and I'd agree. But I also think there's only so far architect's should or can push out the extents of the clients' brief if the client is looking for particular things (when design of same is still in the architect's charge). The architect should definitely point out any flaws or what they would consider to be mistakes, but ultimately the architect has a responsibility to the clients to provide as best a design as they can while adhering to the specific requests of the client even if they choose to proceed against his suggestions/expertise.

Obviously if the architect believes their requests to be so egregious against what they believe to be standard design practices they may choose to excuse themselves from the job altogether as they can't deliver the product the client is looking for. Conversely if the client believes after hearing the advice of the architect that they have as good an idea of what they want and wish to substitute their preferences over architectural design, they may excuse the architect. I just think that sometimes those things don't become apparent to either side until you're already knee deep in the design process.

Hence why I think that "...if you have a singular 'non for changing' idea of the design you want then you don't hire an architect.... Because an architect is a "design" professional" isn't a fair comment to make. Sometimes you need to hire an architect or other design professional to be able to a) point out what they perceive to be flaws in their brief, b) show them what they can actually achieve with their budget/brief, and c) try to find the compromises between design, brief and budget. The clients don't always know that or even how singular their own ideas are until it comes to light as part of the design process.

Wombatman

Sleepy wrote: »

"haters gonna hate"? :rolleyes: Are you 12? From Compton? Or just trying too hard to be "down with the kids"?

Backbiting judgmental labeling. Tisc tisc.

Care to expand on the Compton reference?

sydthebeat

Penn wrote: »

That's absolutely fair and I'd agree. But I also think there's only so far architect's should or can push out the extents of the clients' brief if the client is looking for particular things (when design of same is still in the architect's charge). The architect should definitely point out any flaws or what they would consider to be mistakes, but ultimately the architect has a responsibility to the clients to provide as best a design as they can while adhering to the specific requests of the client even if they choose to proceed against his suggestions/expertise.
.

i absolutely agree. Its always a to and fro process.... and you find decisions made at the beginning of the process hugely impact the final product. Its the architects job to provide the client with the best end product to suit their needs. Its my assertion however, that going into the project a lot of clients dont actually know, or realise what their needs are, and it isnt until they are challenged on their brief do they realise this. It goes back to the mantra that "people want what they know, they cant want what they dont know"... its the architects job to offer these unknowns to the client... and, if after that offering, the client is still adamant to go with their original request, fine.... but if it appears that the client never changes from the original brief even after all the alternatives / mistakes are pointed out... then theres a problem.

Penn wrote: »

Hence why I think that "...if you have a singular 'non for changing' idea of the design you want then you don't hire an architect.... Because an architect is a "design" professional" isn't a fair comment to make. Sometimes you need to hire an architect or other design professional to be able to a) point out what they perceive to be flaws in their brief, b) show them what they can actually achieve with their budget/brief, and c) try to find the compromises between design, brief and budget. The clients don't always know that or even how singular their own ideas are until it comes to light as part of the design process.

youve really just agreed with my point, even though youve said it isnt a fair comment.

Your a), b) and c) and final statement is examples of the clients changing... whereas i was referring to client who are not for changing, and them being the ones who should not hire designers.

I think we're coming from the same place on this.

Penn

sydthebeat wrote: »

youve really just agreed with my point, even though youve said it isnt a fair comment.

Your a), b) and c) and final statement is examples of the clients changing... whereas i was referring to client who are not for changing, and them being the ones who should not hire designers.

I think we're coming from the same place on this.

Agreed. My basic point is that the clients don't always know they're not for changing until they've already hired an architect and are partway through the design process, when the realise how deep-set their own ideas already are and how it conflicts with the architect's advice. You can't always know that until you're already in the process, because you haven't gotten the advice from the architect yet and don't know it's against modern design principles and the style of most architects.

sydthebeat

Penn wrote: »

Agreed. My basic point is that the clients don't always know they're not for changing until they've already hired an architect and are partway through the design process, when the realise how deep-set their own ideas already are and how it conflicts with the architect's advice. You can't always know that until you're already in the process, because you haven't gotten the advice from the architect yet and don't know it's against modern design principles and the style of most architects.

fair point.

as a designer though i find i know whos not for changing pretty quickly in an initial consultation. There are people out there who simply only want a "shoulders down" service.

PARlance

Watched it last night, my biggest gripe was them making a point of how amazingly well designed upstairs was, how they fitted in 4 bedrooms etc and then didn't bother even showing a floor plan or a quick zoom through... Maybe I'm just daft and shouldn't expect any architectural insight at this stage.

My wife and her sister had watched it on Sunday, I only got around to it yesterday. They had said given a few hints that "your woman was a bit of a wan".
Maybe it's just my natural tendency to disagree with my wife (I ain't no Padraig ) but I was watching it thinking "she's only hamming it up for the camera. Yes, she's opinionated, yes she's on the bossy spectrum but fundamentally she's grand, a tiny bit of craic at times even... Now, I wouldn't call around for a cup of tea, no matter what china was on offer but I know that type. Being bossy or "hard to get" (going back to my younger days) was what they're all about. I "got" many in my day and in fairness, an awful lot of them went on to become teachers

The two of them were a match made in heaven. He was looking for a Mammy and she couldn't be happier playing that role. Fair play to them, I don't think Padraig will have too many worries in his life, a simple and happy life. She'll love her role and fulfill her dream of being a model housewife. She got her 15 minutes like her own mother so that box is ticked too.

I've seen first hand how these types of shows get produced, it's all orchestrated. People are made to repeat and exaggerate comments just for dramatic effect. She didn't come across well at times, to say the least, but I would agree with mountainsandth's post.

After watching it, I jokingly said to my wife "She's not that bad, she reminds me of a cross between yourself and your sister (teacher)"....

Our spare room could probably do with some improving.

Could they not have shown us a plan of upstairs!!!

PARlance

I actually thought she was doing a fair bit of flirting with Dermot, in her own unique way.

Reati

I want to know what happened that lovely skylight box he was putting into the kitchen. I'm sure it was cut for budget but was a key thing i liked.

PARlance

Reati wrote: »

I want to know what happened that lovely skylight box he was putting into the kitchen. I'm sure it was cut for budget but was a key thing i liked.

The kitchen (with skylight) was originally planned to be in the previously extended section to the side of the house. That got Nil Points so it ended up being moved to the back of the house, the living area replaced it in the old extension.

If she didn't want her living area open plan, I doubt she wanted a bloody skylight in it Sure you could be watching TV with a Skylight overhead.

Reati

PARlance wrote: »

The kitchen (with skylight) was originally planned to be in the previously extended section to the side of the house. That got Nil Points so it ended up being moved to the back of the house, the living area replaced it in the old extension.

If she didn't want her living area open plan, I doubt she wanted a bloody skylight in it Sure you could be watching TV with a Skylight overhead.

Ah I missed that. They never showed a 3D overview again. I'd love that skylight in my kitchen. I'm thinking of putting it in a few years from now when the money is saved up.

spookwoman

The part about the sitting room tiles she sounded bitchy and was short with him. She tells him to stop waffling and choose a tile, he chooses one and she says well guess what i like that one on the end. Ref the staircase even the lady from the builders said it didn't fit the place. She did say at one point as well If Dermot likes it I definitely don't like, I don't know about anyone else with that mentality why the hell did she get him to continue. I checked his site and it seems to be all all open plan stuff so again why go to him.

She may be feeling low about what was said about her online but guess what no one forced her to go on the show and no one forced her to behave that way. The only person to blame is herself.

GT_TDI_150

Re watched it today.

Out of the whole episode what bothered me most was the rolling of the eyes when Dermot started to talk about a different style kitchen to the one she has in her mind...

How childish. It was before he had even articulated the style of kitchen hed recommend..

She came across as needing to be the one that broke Dermot. It seemed that was her goal from day one

BabysCoffee

When I was watching I thought the "back to the drawing board Dermot" was a very orchestrated statement. She seemed to glance over at the producer after saying it with an expression like "is that the way you want me to say it"

jimbobaloobob

For her sake i hope shes busy watching tv in her snug room or making tea in china cups rather than reading this.
Is it the most talked about episode ever?

Colser

BabysCoffee wrote: »

When I was watching I thought the "back to the drawing board Dermot" was a very orchestrated statement. She seemed to glance over at the producer after saying it with an expression like "is that the way you want me to say it"

I felt the 0 out of 10 sounded orchestrated as well.She definitely came across as domineering but she could have been setup for some of it,I really liked her mother and really disagreed with the backlash she received.

I wouldn't like to be her right now tbh and I genuinely feel sorry for her if she's reading everything online,not saying that I liked her but I don't think anyone deserves to go through this.

Autosport

A friend of mine is a neighbor of them and she says that she’s not a very friendly person but padraic is very quiet and is extremely shy and that episode was the most she has ever heard him talk.

nuac

Why do people enter these programmes? I presume they still have to pay their builder. Even if there is a reduction on architect's fees, it may not be worth the hassle and exposure.