How can they 'do it themselves?'
Per the documentary, “Walter’s Way,” Walter Segal dreamed of the unimaginable social housing project in London, England, where the residents used entirely prefabricated, modular materials to build their own homes. The houses on Walter’s Way are clustered together in the cul-de-sac, and the neighborhood has a strong community feel. One of the features of these houses is that they are modular, and they can be added onto with readily available materials from a hardware store. While Segal preplanned the grids and modularity of these houses, the residents built them by hand, and can continue adding on to them as they please. This architecture was truly meant for its residents, and Segal empowered these individuals in need of housing with the ability and skills required to build their own homes. Segal acted as a facilitator in this project, instead of what we typically think of as the architect’s role, and in this way, he gave the user the architecture. While the individual outcomes might not be Segal’s to claim, his methodology was crucial to the process. Habitat for Humanity offers a similar system for residents in need to build their own homes. In the case of affordable housing, this model makes sense in its use, but are there other ways, besides client requested customization in design, in which we can empower users with the architecture we prescribe?
I agree with your point of view. I think as architects we take too large of a decision making roll away from people in the design process at times. I believe in some cases we need to play the roll of a consultant rather than the designer. If we wish for people to get more involved we need to understand that without a mentor or guidance they may not be able to achieve their goals. This is where we need to step in to help empower users.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with this perspective. Architects taking the role as consultants also creates the communication easier for the clients or the community. I think a big problem that is found a lot within the discipline is ego. There are still many architects that think with their background that they have the final word. This idea destroys the sense of participatory design.
ReplyDeleteI believe that there is beauty in living in something you made with your own hands. On a smaller scale, it makes me think of studio projects. There is a disconnect from designer to project in the beginning. In the end, the designer has a connection to the space because they made it and knows it from the inside out. Because of this mentality, I believe when you have a community that are all proud of where they live, they will continue to want to maintain it and build upon it not in just a physical sense, but a relational sense with their neighbors. I believe Segal not only gave them the tools to build a home, but to build a strong community.
ReplyDelete