D I A L O G I Z A T I O N
Dialogization, or heteroglossia, is generally defined as a constant interaction between meanings, all of which can potentially influence the others.
Everyday Urbanism talks a lot about this idea of urbanism. Its a term that is an umbrella for many sub-jects and ultimately tries to define and describe the atmosphere of a city. It argues through several letters that urbanism should only be defined by the people, and always in conjunction with the architect.
"Dialogization occurs when a word, discourse, language, or culture becomes relativized, de-privileged, and aware of competing definitions for the same things. Un-dialogized language remains authoritarian or absolute."
It gives an example of a car repair shop and a street vender making efficient sense of the same piece of asphalt in a city. One clocks out and the other clocks in, and people seem to find their way there through the maze. I think this idea of urbanism is paralled to congestion, where the city vernacular of pseudo-disorganization is the answer to the design itself. It finds a way to make sense of the space once it is given.
I think that is the answer when speaking about urbanism. It's not being so authoritative to where the spaces are fully designed. It gives the city the canvas on which to paint the design. Give the space, and let the inhabitation do the rest.
Ian, I find this post really interesting by comparing urbanism to congestion, but I completely agree! With how cities are designed, I feel that this would definitely be a better future alternative to the space we are so lacking. Eventually we will run out of room to grow and design, and I think giving a clean slate to allow "inhabitation to do the rest" is a perfect step in the right direction.
ReplyDelete"Give the space" -- YES, I think this should be our position in everything we design. We sometimes get caught in the trap of believing that we, as designers, have to define every space that we create when in reality, the users will always use it differently than we thought. What if we decided now to partner with that idea instead of fighting against it?
ReplyDeleteThis is Sydney, idk what happened to my name.
DeleteI love this idea that we design a space that is meant to be given to the public. I think I have hit on this point in some of my previous posts, but it is impossible for us to predict how our spaces will be used once occupied. All we can do as architects is design a nice space that will ultimately be shaped by the user -- the key word being user. We have to design a space that can be used in the first place. I think that is one of the beauties of architecture, the design of the space doesn't stop as soon as the building is constructed. It evolves over time as it is occupied, which adds a richness to space that the architect can never fully see during the design process.
ReplyDelete