Life is defined by living things and their activities in the Oxford Dictionary. The text “Life between Buildings� was very interesting as the author, Jen Gehl focused deeply on the influence of the daily activities and behaviour of humans towards the outdoor spaces that lies amongst the buildings in the city. Spaces that were often neglected or seemed to be less important were studied in this text to show how big their roles were in creating better cities. Jan Gehl studies the relationship of human activities and the quality of the public spaces in between buildings by looking at it in 3 categories namely necessary activities, optional activities and social activities. Necessary activities are activities that are bound to happen every day due to the obligation and needs of people, optional activities are activities are activity that happens only when there is a favorable exterior condition while social activity is defined as activities that are reliable on others in the space in the text. These activities inevitably will not only provide opportunity for human contact that will bring life to the city but also attract more people to the site. In our city, Kuala Lumpur, walking is not really favorable due to the weather and also the unreliable public transportation. This has led many people to own their own vehicle to get to their destination to fulfill necessary activities quicker, which decreases the probability of walking and thus less human contact. The lack of this human interaction and instead more vehicle just passing by often make some place become less happening and often when the activity decreases tremendously, the site become dormant. Sometimes, even the most well designed outdoor public spaces with beautiful landscaping can turn dormant when there is no human interaction and activities happening. More walking happens in the city center of Kuala Lumpur where the roads are often congested and walking becomes more convenient. There are more chances of human contact, and more activities such as men bustling by the streets that attracts people. There might be cracks on the uneven pavements but the crowd and flow of people naturally attracts more people to participate or use the space. Gehl’s theory has made me open my eyes wider and I have become more sensitive towards the spaces in between building. Occasionally these public spaces would act as nodes in the city where there is concentration of human density. Where there is more people, there will be more activities happening giving more life to the space. Aesthetic of a public space should not be neglected but the function and environment that encourages more activities of the public space will always be more important.
Semiology is the study of signs and symbols. The author Charles Jencks, a theorist and critic is architecture holds that architecture can be understood in a direct analogy with language since language dominates all sign systems. Instead of words, architecture can be reconceptualised into visual codes. Jencks writing aims to show that semiology and architecture can be connnected. Jencks writes that inevitably, a meaning to a form will be acquired despite how random or nonmotivated it could have been. Even by denying and rejecting the meaning of something, at the end of the day, a new meaning would be created by that rejection. Probably just like Frank Gehry who wanted to break away from the modernist stylist tropes and wanted to go against people’s expectation, creating an avant-garde. His new way of architecture has rejected the former and created a new meaning or theory in architecture. Jenks points out about the presences of relationship and connection between language, thought and reality just like the semiotic triangle. There is a symbol, a thought and a representation. He then applies it to architecture proofing it by stating that when we see a building (symbol), we have an understanding (thought) of it and then we put it in words (representation). These representation and understanding of the signs are influenced by our background and past memory. That is the reason why the meaning of things and architecture differs. What one person feels and understands about a building form differs to another as they probably had different experience and memory of the building. In other words, the understanding of architecture form is very subjective. The ambiguity of it is susceptible to many meanings and interpretation. I agree to what Jencks has written, that everything is bound to have a meaning. Meaning is what makes architecture what it is. Without meaning, a building is merely a building. Buildings that were built in the past during ancient times were built to provide shelter and create space that were needed by the people then. However, in the present time, the buildings have been analyzed and given meaning, creating theories and architecture. Example, the Egyptian pyramids, initially built as stacking trapeziums that inspired it to be built as a pyramid were built just because and then it evolved. It was later given more meaning and became architecture. I believe that architects build with a meaning so that people are able to connect to the building better. In an event that the architect builds without a meaning, I suppose people will create a meaning to it based on their past experience and memory so that they can relate to the building, making that building an architecture with multivalent experience.
In modern culture, there is an ever-growing emphasis on responding to global needs yet retaining a sense of local sustainability. In architecture, there have been a gradual shift towards a built environment to be more respectful to the site, resource consumption and the environment’s well-being. As our world is consumed by inhuman mechanical places and poorly plan human settlements, the need to create regional integration within our dwelling spaces becomes vital. In Kenneth Frampton’s article, he talks about the degenerative condition of traditional culture and the way in which our current technocratic world has shifted society to the universalization of civilization. Because of this, Frampton finds a new type of architecture, in short-architecture of resistance where it is architecture that synthesizes the identity, history and culture of a region with contemporary demands, and an image of prosperity. In part 3, critical regionalism and world culture, the aforementioned holding position has a name, arriere-garde and Frampton proposes that this arriere-garde position will generate a resistant, identifying giving culture. Frampton states ‘ the fundamental strategy of Critical Regionalism is to mediate the impact of universal civilization with elements derived indirectly from the peculiarities of a particular place; and from there it is clear to see that Critical Regionalism depends upon maintaining a high level of critic self-consciousness. Things such as the range and quality of the local light, or in tectonic derived from a peculiar structural mode or in the topography of the site should govern inspiration. I agree to what Frampton has proposed. When these elements are considered, the architecture would be catered to be on that particular site. If it were to be placed elsewhere, it would not sit well contextually. Therefore, a resistant architecture is formed where it gives identity and culture to the place also potentially becoming the landmark of the place. In part 4, the resistance of the place form, Frampton talks about physical space of region and the place where the communication between people are not the same things. When applying critical regionalism to the design, architects should consider the idea that there is no limitation of physical space and the characteristic of place cannot be consisted of an independent building. Instead of being the ending, borders should be the beginning of the place and spaces can be created by enclosing. Relation between exterior qualification of places such as its entrance, exits and the circulation should be considered and thought about when solving the spatial organization of a building. What Frampton has stated is agreeable. It is important to define spaces that interacts with the site where the movement of the users into the site and out of the site is considered. As users approach architecture, users are sure to have a first impression where sometimes, it might be a decision making point of he would want to continue his journey to experience that architecture if a choice was given. Therefore, the consideration of not only have the building sits on site is important but also how people approach the building is.
In modern culture, there is an ever-growing emphasis on responding to global needs yet retaining a sense of local sustainability. In architecture, there have been a gradual shift towards a built environment to be more respectful to the site, resource consumption and the environment’s well-being. As our world is consumed by inhuman mechanical places and poorly plan human settlements, the need to create regional integration within our dwelling spaces becomes vital. In Kenneth Frampton’s article, he talks about the degenerative condition of traditional culture and the way in which our current technocratic world has shifted society to the universalization of civilization. Because of this, Frampton finds a new type of architecture, in short-architecture of resistance where it is architecture that synthesizes the identity, history and culture of a region with contemporary demands, and an image of prosperity. In part 3, critical regionalism and world culture, the aforementioned holding position has a name, arriere-garde and Frampton proposes that this arriere-garde position will generate a resistant, identifying giving culture. Frampton states ‘ the fundamental strategy of Critical Regionalism is to mediate the impact of universal civilization with elements derived indirectly from the peculiarities of a particular place; and from there it is clear to see that Critical Regionalism depends upon maintaining a high level of critic self-consciousness. Things such as the range and quality of the local light, or in tectonic derived from a peculiar structural mode or in the topography of the site should govern inspiration. I agree to what Frampton has proposed. When these elements are considered, the architecture would be catered to be on that particular site. If it were to be placed elsewhere, it would not sit well contextually. Therefore, a resistant architecture is formed where it gives identity and culture to the place also potentially becoming the landmark of the place. In part 4, the resistance of the place form, Frampton talks about physical space of region and the place where the communication between people are not the same things. When applying critical regionalism to the design, architects should consider the idea that there is no limitation of physical space and the characteristic of place cannot be consisted of an independent building. Instead of being the ending, borders should be the beginning of the place and spaces can be created by enclosing. Relation between exterior qualification of places such as its entrance, exits and the circulation should be considered and thought about when solving the spatial organization of a building. What Frampton has stated is agreeable. It is important to define spaces that interacts with the site where the movement of the users into the site and out of the site is considered. As users approach architecture, users are sure to have a first impression where sometimes, it might be a decision making point of he would want to continue his journey to experience that architecture if a choice was given. Therefore, the consideration of not only have the building sits on site is important but also how people approach the building is.