2 minute read
Readings + Theory
from Weave + Thread
ANALYSIS - REFLECTION - ACTION
Readings + Theory
Advertisement
The experience of public space is at the core of the analysis for the design of this project. Public spaces are undervalued in holding a level of adaptive capacity, allowing certain freedoms and flexibility with less technical elements1 - a focus on experience over the architectural object.
Jan Gehl’s text, The Human Dimension elicits the importance of fluid pedestrian flow through spaces provided for people to carry out activities, gatherings and interactions. Gehl argues that for cities to remain liveable, healthy and dynamic, architects must reinforce the pedestrianised city, with people being at the core. At eye level, the interstitial urban spaces and building fringes have the opportunity to become the most activated, sensory spaces.2
The sensory delights individuals encounter in public spaces foster belonging and built community, as described by Gehl in “Outdoor Space & Outdoor Activities,” and presuppose a vital shift from necessary to optional social engagement in outdoor space and activities. Gehl suggests there is a scale of contact intensity between people. Low intensity interactions, or passive engagement such as hearing and seeing other people in the public realm, are valuable in building more complex interactions.3
Weaving art into public space promotes a city space that is intricate, beautiful and attracts visitors to gather and ponder. It creates conversation and meaning to an otherwise plain space as discussed in Claire Bishop’s text, Art of the Encounter: Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics.4 Bishop acknowledges that public space “without people, [is] not art, it’s something else.”5
The discourse of James Russell’s article, “Building Public Places For A COVID World,”6 Bishops Art of the Encounter: Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics, alongside the extensive work of Gehl, is built on an intersection of the value of relationship between all matter, audience, designer and environment, living and non living as elemental to facilitating collective and individual experiences in public space. Inclusive design which invites and engages for the common good, for without relational experience to nourish, space is dead.
It is the intention of this project to embed the work of such theorists and designers into authentic practice.
1 Stevens, Nicholas J, Silvia G Tavares, and Paul M Salmon. 2021. “The Adaptive Capacity of Public Space Under COVID-19: Exploring Urban Design Interventions through a Sociotechnical Systems Approach.” Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries 31 (4): 346. 2 Jan Gehl. “Cities for People”, Island Press, 2010. ProQuest Ebook Central 3 Jan Gehl, “Outdoor Space & Outdoor Activities,” in Sustainable Urban Development Reader, London: Taylor & Francis Group, 2014. Accessed February 2, 2022. ProQuest Ebook Central. 4 Claire Bishop, “Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics,” in October 110 (2004): 51–79, Accessed February 4 2020. http:// www.jstor.org/stable/3397557. 5 Bishop, “Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics,” 51–79 6 James S. Russell, “Building Public Places for a COVID World,” New York Times, Sep 11, 2020, Late Edition (East Coast). Accessed February 3 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central.
