Post-critical encounters

"No matter how often I tell myself that chance happenings of this kind occur far more often than we suspect, since we all move, one after the other, along the same roads mapped out of for us by our origins and our hopes, my rational mind is nonetheless unable to lay the ghosts of repetition that haunt me with ever greater frequency." -Intro by WG Sebald

Post-critical or doppler architecture acknowledges the adaptive capabilities of architecture. This means we can design spaces with an expected use in mind, but can we control what happens in that space? Probably not. Further, what happens when the program is changed or the building is sold? How do we keep our architecture from becoming trash? By looking forward and using diagramming as a method for looking toward new socio-architectural relationships can we reduce the likelihood that architecture becomes unusable?
In a slightly different light, can we create spaces that encourage this type of chance encounter that Sebald speaks of? Using OMA's Seattle Public Library as an example, I think we can find traces explanatory diagrams as well as forward thinking diagrams.

OMA Seattle Public Library Circulation Diagram (archdaily)

I would argue that this circulation diagram is explanatory, not forward thinking. We could probably all agree that this is a very well made and informative drawing, but it doesn't offer explorations in the future or unexpected uses of the space.

OMA Seattle Public Library diagram (archdaily)

This diagram is much more playful. We can start to see relationships between spaces and the intended users of each space. I find it interesting how the spaces are categorized. It loosens up the physical program and acknowledges that people might use the space in an unintended manner. Opening up to this idea enriches the architecture and empowers the user.