Hostile Design
1
Hostile Design
2
3
4
Contents This book is about the relationship of space, design and social interaction. It examines hostile design within the architecture of public spaces, especially public furniture and specifically seats and benches.
Hostile Design
04
Separating Arm Rests
10
Increased Segregation
14
Leaning Bench
20
Reconditioning Behaviour
24
Anti-Skating Bars
30
Removing Function through Art
34
Cold Seating
40
People or Animals?
44
Camden Bench
50
5
Hostile Design Discomfort, unhappiness, or revulsion; disagreeable
In
Obstacles, psychological and sensual manipulation in common/public spaces
principles that directly effects the use of
Social engineering of the group subconscious
deliberate employment of hostile design
essence,
Hostile
Architecture
is
the
implementation of a set of aggressive design public furniture in a hostile fashion. The principles directly alters how we the user can interact with the object, by creating a set of limitations to how the space can be misused. This includes both positive and negative aspects, such as: anti-social behaviour, rough sleeping and criminal damage. However, in most cases the implementations of hostile design doesn’t immediately resonate with the public’s perception while using a space. Yet, ironically the design directly affects the user’s ability to interact with and enjoy a space. The use of subconscious social engineering by the planner allows for a certain level of control over the user; enabling designers to regulate factors such as the average loitering time, if an area is covered in graffiti or not, as well as if the space is used by a rough sleeper as refuge. These aspects further bringing into question who a space is truly intended for? As well as the moral responsibility a community has to be inclusive to all facets of society, not matter creed, age or social situation. By combating egregious Hostile Design the public actively fights against increased social division,
while
pseudo-public
simultaneously spaces
which
resisting
reactionary
hostile architecture covertly encowurages under
6
the
guise
of
preventing
crime.
7
In
essence,
Hostile
Architecture
is
the
implementation of a set of aggressive design principles that directly effects the use of public furniture in a hostile fashion. The deliberate employment of hostile design principles directly alters how we the user can interact with the object, by creating a set of limitations to how the space can be misused. This includes both positive and negative aspects, such as: anti-social behaviour, rough sleeping and criminal damage. However, in most cases the implementations of hostile design doesn’t immediately resonate with the public’s perception while using a space. Yet, ironically the design directly affects the user’s ability to interact with and enjoy a space. The use of subconscious social engineering by the planner allows for a certain level of control over the user; enabling designers to regulate factors such as the average loitering time, if an area is covered in graffiti or not, as well as if the space is used by a rough sleeper as refuge. These aspects further bringing into question who a space is truly intended for? As well as the moral responsibility a community has to be inclusive to all facets of society, not matter creed, age or social situation. By combating egregious Hostile Design the public actively fights against increased social division,
while
pseudo-public hostile under
8
simultaneously spaces
architecture the
guise
of
resisting
which
reactionary
covertly
encourages
preventing
crime.
9
10
11
12
Seperating Arm Rest One of the simplest ways to restrict the
Targeting rough sleepers
usage of a bench is to implement arm rests
Restricting the use of the bench as a meta object. Limiting Social interaction through physical division.
in spaced intervals. Creating limited spaces for only one person. So even if a number of people want to sit together on the bench they
are
separated
by
armrests.
This
physical barrier not only stop interpersonal closeness but restricts the bench from having multiple purposes. For example, a body of an adult person could not fit on this bench so they can’t lay down. Sometimes the sharp dividers don’t even fit the purpose of an armrest but serve primarily as prevention.
13
14
One of the simplest ways to restrict the usage of a bench is to implement arm rests in spaced intervals. Creating limited spaces for only one person. So even if a number of people want to sit together on the bench they
are
separated
by
armrests.
This
physical barrier not only stop interpersonal closeness but restricts the bench from having multiple purposes. For example, a body of an adult person could not fit on this bench so they can’t lay down. Sometimes the sharp dividers don’t even fit the purpose of an armrest but serve primarily as prevention.
15
Increased Segregation Cynically targeting the Homeless population in a cost effective manner.
Existing benches subsequently have been
We exists in a world where are morals are skewed in such a fashion that it is more convenient for us to hide from public sight Rough Sleepers, than it is to deal with the problem at the source directly.
they loose functionality to conform with the
Instead we choose to put up social and physical dividers.
within that particular space to be. As a
perverted by external intervention so that increasingly limited guidelines. This is done so that the urban planner can exact control over what they perceive the desired behaviour consequence of this action, the planner also succeeds in eliminating closeness between multiple users alongside the function of the furniture. These armrests or sharp edges on benches prevent sleeping, skaters, sex as well as any activity that doesn’t involve isolationist sitting. Although not all of these behaviours are to be desired, the policy eliminates our right to a choice as to how we use an object and eradicates the furniture’s ability to be a
meta-object . Those who suffer most under hostile architectural design are that of the disabled and rough sleeping populous. As these are the communities that benefit most from public furniture and objects that are multifaceted in their functionality.
16
17
Existing benches subsequently have been perverted by external intervention so that they loose functionality to conform with the increasingly limited guidelines. This is done so that the urban planner can exact control over what they perceive the desired behaviour within that particular space to be. As a consequence of this action, the planner also succeeds in eliminating closeness between multiple users alongside the function of the furniture. These armrests or sharp edges on benches prevent sleeping, skaters, sex as well as any activity that doesn’t involve isolationist sitting. Although not all of these behaviours are to be desired, the policy eliminates our right to a choice as to how we use an object and eradicates the furniture’s ability to be a
meta-object . Those who suffer most under hostile architectural design are that of the disabled and rough sleeping populous. As these are the communities that benefit most from public furniture and objects that are multifaceted in their functionality.
18
19
20
21
22
Leaning Bench The leaning bench is perhaps the pinnacle of hostile architecture. The benches entire purpose is to be so uncomfortable and unwieldy that you are not able to sit on it.
Targets loitering, while effecting the disabled as well as rough sleepers. Allows for brief rest, while not allowing the user to get comfortable enough to stay for an extended period of time.
Instead you are forced to merely lean,
an important factor when analysing why the leaning bench is being implemented. The leaning benches are usually located in places of short term waiting. Be that bus stops, train stations and other such shelters usually
accompanied
by
an
overhead
covering. They are designed in such a way that they enable a form of rest without the user getting too comfortable. They are very clearly intended to be a temporary resting solution, and from the core of their design principle imply that they want the user to move on as quick as possible. This enables control over such factors potentially antisocial behaviours such as loitering, sleeping and over all prolonged stay. Whether the councils
that
implement
these
benches
would like to admit it or not, these benches are a direct affront to the homeless and rough sleeping community. They want the covered areas to be free for the types of user that put money back into the systems that make such areas possible. Commuters provide a revenue, the rough sleepers do not.
23
24
The leaning bench is perhaps the pinnacle of hostile architecture. The benches entire purpose is to be so uncomfortable and unwieldy that you are not able to sit on it.
Instead you are forced to merely lean,
an important factor when analysing why the leaning bench is being implemented. The leaning benches are usually located in places of short term waiting. Be that bus stops, train stations and other such shelters usually
accompanied
by
an
overhead
covering. They are designed in such a way that they enable a form of rest without the user getting too comfortable. They are very clearly intended to be a temporary resting solution, and from the core of their design principle imply that they want the user to move on as quick as possible. This enables control over such factors potentially antisocial behaviours such as loitering, sleeping and over all prolonged stay. Whether the councils
that
implement
these
benches
would like to admit it or not, these benches are a direct affront to the homeless and rough sleeping community. They want the covered areas to be free for the types of user that put money back into the systems that make such areas possible. Commuters provide a revenue, the rough sleepers do not.
25
Reconditioning Behaviour The physical effecting the subconscious.
In implementing purposefully obstructive
Restricting the potential of an object in the minds of the user down to its most simplistic and unimaginative state.
architecture, the designer is able to utilise a great deal of control over the behaviour of the user. This is done through a mixture of nonverbal and implied ergonomic signals. An example of this would be the leaning bench. The leaning bench performs much of the same functionality as a regular bench, yet it achieves its function in a brutalist and inhospitable manner. The quality of rest is reduced, it provides a service in the most uncomfortable way possible, discouraging loitering and sleeping. Yet it still provides the service it was intended for on paper and for most people; since the leaning bench provides the same function as a regular bench, the distinction goes mostly unnoticed. In this way is the scope of the usability within the public conscious is stifled.
26
27
In implementing purposefully obstructive architecture, the designer is able to utilise a great deal of control over the behaviour of the user. This is done through a mixture of nonverbal and implied ergonomic signals. An example of this would be the leaning bench. The leaning bench performs much of the same functionality as a regular bench, yet it achieves its function in a brutalist and inhospitable manner. The quality of rest is reduced, it provides a service in the most uncomfortable way possible, discouraging loitering and sleeping. Yet it still provides the service it was intended for on paper and for most people; since the leaning bench provides the same function as a regular bench, the distinction goes mostly unnoticed. In this way is the scope of the usability within the public conscious is stifled.
28
29
30
31
32
Anti-Skating Bars Anti-skating bolts push away groups of individuals that would use the public space in a creative fashion and are a community that inhabit a space. The anti-grinding bolts make
Grind stoppers target skaters, BMX riders and Rollerskaters. Utilising control over what activities that deviate from the predisposed function of the seat.
it very clear that the function of the space is not to deviate from the predetermined function layout by the planner and the designer. This has the effect that the space cannot develop an atmosphere and create any cultural significance naturally in its own right. Instead it stagnates carefully preserved in its hollow self. Although is does preserve the space from damage, it also sends a clear message that if you partake in these kinds of activities then you are undesirable in the eyes of the planner and they very clearly don’t consider you an asset to the atmosphere and overall aesthetic of the community.
33
34
Anti-skating bolts push away groups of individuals that would use the public space in a creative fashion and are a community that inhabit a space. The anti-grinding bolts make it very clear that the function of the space is not to deviate from the predetermined function layout by the planner and the designer. This has the effect that the space cannot develop an atmosphere and create any cultural significance naturally in its own right. Instead it stagnates carefully preserved in its hollow self. Although is does preserve the space from damage, it also sends a clear message that if you partake in these kinds of activities then you are undesirable in the eyes of the planner and they very clearly don’t consider you an asset to the atmosphere and overall aesthetic of the community.
35
Removing Function through Art Obfuscating hostile design principles through the vale of artist integrity.
The
Restricting the potential of an object by concealing in overly complex design which inconspicuously hides the fact that the object has lost most of its function.
practice
most
insidious
implementation
of
hostile design occurs through over the of
architectural
combining concepts
experimental within
public
furniture. On the surface level it appears a great way of creating an atmosphere in an area that may be lacking or being playful and encouraging users to congregate within the space. However, many implementations limit the functionality of the object and can often be exclusionary. Furthermore, it personifies a mindset of creating intolerant designs for the homeless. Not that we should necessarily design for the homeless problem as it shouldn’t be a permanent issue that we should acknowledge. Although, we should be mindful of homelessness as an issue.
36
37
The
most
insidious
implementation
of
hostile design occurs through over the practice
of
architectural
combining concepts
experimental within
public
furniture. On the surface level it appears a great way of creating an atmosphere in an area that may be lacking or being playful and encouraging users to congregate within the space. However, many implementations limit the functionality of the object and can often be exclusionary. Furthermore, it personifies a mindset of creating intolerant designs for the homeless. Not that we should necessarily design for the homeless problem as it shouldn’t be a permanent issue that we should acknowledge. Although, we should be mindful of homelessness as an issue.
38
39
40
41
42
Cold Seating Cold seating often exists within the same continuum as leaning benches as they both reside in the same category of deterrents that try to stop anything that isn’t temporary, short
Grind stoppers target skaters, BMX riders and Rollerskaters. Utilising control over what activities that deviate from the predisposed function of the seat.
term seating. This is done through either ventilated seating, usually on stainless steal that stop the user from getting to comfortable; or by pumping air conditioning in to make sure that the user is continuously cold.
43
44
Cold seating often exists within the same continuum as leaning benches as they both reside in the same category of deterrents that try to stop anything that isn’t temporary, short term seating. This is done through either ventilated seating, usually on stainless steal that stop the user from getting to comfortable; or by pumping air conditioning in to make sure that the user is continuously cold.
45
People or Animals? At what point do we start treating humans with the same respect that we do to animals. When analysing the techinques used in design to discourage certain behaviour types, at what point are we treating human beings like we would a pest like mice, rats or pigions; and what does that say about us as a society of people?
A lot of the anti-homeless measures taken by the council such as spike, noise emitters and hostile architecture are introduced in a similar manner to how pests and vermin are dealt with. This brings into question the moral responsibility that urban planners and designers have on how they design for the public and that they make sure that they are inclusive to all walks of life. This is due to the connotations of how if you have money or if you in some way feed into the economy then you have the right to be there. There is also an issue of social control and how designers enact control over user through their urban planning. This subconscious re-writing of our behaviours is worrying in itself as we subconsciously have our decision making eroded under us.
46
47
A lot of the anti-homeless measures taken by the council such as spike, noise emitters and hostile architecture are introduced in a similar manner to how pests and vermin are dealt with. This brings into question the moral responsibility that urban planners and designers have on how they design for the public and that they make sure that they are inclusive to all walks of life. This is due to the connotations of how if you have money or if you in some way feed into the economy then you have the right to be there. There is also an issue of social control and how designers enact control over user through their urban planning. This subconscious re-writing of our behaviours is worrying in itself as we subconsciously have our decision making eroded under us.
48
49
50
51
52
Camden Bench The Camden bench was once described as the
ultimate bench . This is due to the extensive amount of design and consideration that has gone into combating the particular ways
Grind stoppers target skaters, BMX riders and Rollerskaters. Utilising control over what activities that deviate from the predisposed function of the seat.
in which the bench could be misused. It’s just a shame however, that hostile design principles developed by Factory Furniture. The bench is covered with an anti-tagging, non-stick material that stops tagging, fly posters, skating and urination. It also has no flat surfaces to prevent litter accumulation and repels dirt and stagnating water. There is also a recess to stow baggage away from potential thieves while it can also act as a defence system against vehicles. These are all valid design decisions that directly benefit the user. Yet all these decisions have negative connotations that may surpass any positives gained. The anti-tagging and fly posters may stop for artistic expression within the area. The lack of flat surfaces that are angled in a way so that no two people can sit next to each other, directly target anyone who wishes to lay down or sit down in large groups. The designers made a statement in which they said: ‘Homelessness
should never be tolerated in any society and if we start designing in to accommodate homeless then we have totally failed as a society. Close proximity to homelessness unfortunately
makes
us
uncomfortable
so perhaps it is good that we feel that and recognise
homelessness
as
a
problem
rather than design to accommodate it’
53
54
The Camden bench was once described as the
ultimate bench . This is due to the extensive amount of design and consideration that has gone into combating the particular ways in which the bench could be misused. It’s just a shame however, that hostile design principles developed by Factory Furniture. The bench is covered with an anti-tagging, non-stick material that stops tagging, fly posters, skating and urination. It also has no flat surfaces to prevent litter accumulation and repels dirt and stagnating water. There is also a recess to stow baggage away from potential thieves while it can also act as a defence system against vehicles. These are all valid design decisions that directly benefit the user. Yet all these decisions have negative connotations that may surpass any positives gained. The anti-tagging and fly posters may stop for artistic expression within the area. The lack of flat surfaces that are angled in a way so that no two people can sit next to each other, directly target anyone who wishes to lay down or sit down in large groups. The designers made a statement in which they said: ‘Homelessness
should never be tolerated in any society and if we start designing in to accommodate homeless then we have totally failed as a society. Close proximity to homelessness unfortunately
makes
us
uncomfortable
so perhaps it is good that we feel that and recognise
homelessness
as
a
problem
rather than design to accommodate it’
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
This book is an exploration into the Hositle Design that effects us all in everyday life. The insidious nature in which it utilisies control over our behaviour and the how it impacts it has on society.
68 64