[Insert Tactical Title]
It's not that "less is more", but rather that "less makes way for more"
Like government, architecture relies on both an excellent design and the people using it to achieve greatness. I think it's a symptom of the architect's education that we see so many spaces ripe with potential idly wasting away. Usually, our case studies look at building form as a cause for the activities happening within, instead of thinking of the activity as an integral part of the design.
This is a can opener. It opens cans. It will not open cans alone, it requires a user to pick it up, attach it to the can, and proceed to turn the handle in a very specific way. Many of our projects are full of potential, but will not live up to it because the user doesn't know how to make them work.
Like government, architecture relies on both an excellent design and the people using it to achieve greatness. I think it's a symptom of the architect's education that we see so many spaces ripe with potential idly wasting away. Usually, our case studies look at building form as a cause for the activities happening within, instead of thinking of the activity as an integral part of the design.
For example, the typical south carolinian is, at best, just learning how a plaza works. Too often it's merely a space for commemoration or "urban" punctuation rather than the popular forum we see in some of the more powerful plazas, such as Times Square, Rambla de Raval, or any of the great Italian piazzas. They almost work better without paving systems–improvisation happens on the "vacant lot" but the paved space requires permission and planning, for some reason.
One of the most significant challenges for an architecture strategically anticipating diverse tactical interventions will be empowering the user to perform tactically within the space. For too long tyrannical architects have demanded spaces be used in a very specific way, and now we must "un-train" building users and developers so they once again feel comfortable tactically occupying the space.
Josh,
ReplyDeleteI see your point. Much of the build environment can be assumed to be detached - a look but don't touch culture for those who are so wrapped up in their daily lives that the city and the buildings are blurred away. I don't think that we need to "un-train" users though - it seems to me that users are going to use the space in the way that they see fit. Whether that be in a work environment (building can be blurred away but bland offices can come to life on the interior - plants, pictures, etc), in a social environment (spaces become an integral and dynamic part - architecture provides a backdrop), or in an individual environment (I hang pictures on my walls to dwell in a space). People are rational utility maximizers, and will tactically occupy a space in a manner that adds value to their individual lives; it's engrained in us.