8087 2

PAPERREF#8074
Proceedings:EighthInternationalSpaceSyntaxSymposium
EditedbyM.Greene,J.ReyesandA.Castro.SantiagodeChile:PUC,2012.
IMAGINATIVECONTENTANDBUILDINGFORMINTHE
SEATTLECENTRALPUBLICLIBRARY
AUTHOR:
JulieBrandZOOK
CollegeofArchitecture,GeorgiaInstituteofTechnology,UnitedStates
email:jbrand3@mail.gatech.edu
KEYWORDS:
Aesthetics,Social,Visual,Theory,Library
THEME:
ArchitecturalTheoryandSpatialAnalysis
SonitBAFNA
CollegeofArchitecture,GeorgiaInstituteofTechnology,UnitedStates
email:sonit.bafna@coa.gatech.edu
Abstract
The inquiry extends space syntax methodologies beyond descriptions of social content to assess how
buildingsengageimagination.WeproceedwithacasestudyoftheSeattleCentralPublicLibrary,designed
bytheOfficeforMetropolitanArchitectureandcompletedin2005.Socialstagingisconstruedbydescribing
routes taken by users as they carry out specific, contrived tasks that are germane to the library program.
Pointsalongtheseroutesaredescribedusingstandardspacesyntaxanalyticaltechniquesthatcharacterize
thedistributionofpotentialviews,exposure,andaccesstodifferentpartsoftheprogram.Inthesecondpart
of the analysis, the social staging is set against phenomenal staging, understood here as the underlying
strategies by which the sensory phenomena of the building are presented to the builder users. We then
observewaysbywhichthephenomenalstagingmodifiesthesocialrealityconstructedbythebuilding.
The study thus makes the case for an analytical approach that distinguishes between two distinct sets of
architectural tasks that are often conflatedthose that support everyday activity, as captured by space
syntax, and those that excite reflective engagement through imaginative perception, as described in the
phenomenalstaging.Weproposethatthecriticalsuccessofabuildingmaydependnotonassimilatingthese
tasksintoaseamlessform,butratheronexploitingthetensionthatisoftengeneratedbetweenthem.Asfar
as supporting everyday activity is concerned, the Seattle library retains a typical genotypical structure of
reading areas organized about stacks. Phenotypically, however, it sets up an absorbing imaginative
experiencethatdecentersthevisitorandexcitesexploration.Inthelastanalysis,thecriticalsuccessofthe
Seattle library lies in its capacity to tune the qualitative, subjective, conscious experience of visitors to the
reciprocal relationship between the sense of self on display and the sense of self as onlooker and to the
generallyfleetingexperienceoflifeinanurbansetting.
8087:1
SantiagodeChile:PUC,2012.
INTRODUCTION
Space syntax, as a descriptive and analytic field, has investigated the nondiscursive social content of
buildings, identifying how spatial configuration helps engender social relationships and is therefore
explained by them. This inquiry extends the interests of social content to include descriptions of how
buildingsalsoengagetheimagination.Inrecentyears,therehasbeenincreasingdiscussionwithinthespace
syntaxcommunityonhowspacesyntaxmightcontributetotheexplanationofvisualforminarchitecture,
andmoregenerallyonissuescentraltoarchitectureasadisciplineratherthanbuildingpracticeatlarge.In
thelastsymposiumalone,papersfromBafnaetal.(2009),Holanda(2009),Koch(2009),andPsarra(2009)
raisedseveralinterestingissuesontherelationshipofarchitectureandbuilding,onhowspacesyntaxcould
contributetoarchitecture,andonthevisualfunctioningofarchitecturethemesthathavepreviouslybeen
broached by Hillier (1996), Hanson (1994 & 1999), and Peponis (2005). In pursuing the way buildings are
designedtoengagetheimagination,weintendtocontinuetheongoingdialoginthosepapers.Webegin
withthepremisethatformalmanipulationcreatesimaginativecontentoverandabovethecreationofsocial
content.Whatwewilltrytoshowishowimaginativecontentemerges,partlybutalsosignificantly,fromthe
tensionbetweenhowusersarestagedsociallyandhowtheyarestagedphenomenally.
TheinquiryisformedaroundacasestudyoftheSeattleCentralPublicLibrary,designedbytheOfficefor
MetropolitanArchitecture andcompletedin 2005.Social staging of users is inferredusing standard space
syntax analytical techniques. By convention, syntactical variables such as connectivity and integration are
used to characterize the potential social life within a spatial setting because behavioral patterns often
coincidewiththedistributionofthevaluesofthesevariables.Itisthereforelogicaltoexpectthesevariables
tobeusefulincharacterizingtheexperienceofthesociallifeofthesituateduser.Wefocushereonthetask
orientedvisitortothelibrarywhoisneitheratouristicvisitor,noradailyinhabitantofthebuilding,suchas
an employee. Since patterns of visual exposure are related to the perceived publicness of particular
locations, they can directly influence the social self that is adopted by the user in ways well described in
sociological literature (originating with Goffman, 1959; but also cf. Douglas, 1970). The term staging
directlyreflectsGoffmansdescriptionofthedramaturgicalperspectiveinsociallife.
Procedurally,socialstagingisinferredherebyfirstdescribingcontrivedroutestakenbyvisitorsundertaking
particular tasks and then characterizing their experience based on the values of standard syntactical
variables in the spaces at selected points along these routes. The values of these variablesvisual
connectivity,visualintegrationandmaximumradialshavedirectsocialorperceptualinterpretations,and
thereforethespacesateachpointcanbedescribedashavingdistinctsocialcharacteristics.
Inthesecondpartoftheanalysis,thesocialstagingissetagainstphenomenalstaging.Phenomenalstaging
ischaracterizedbyidentifyingpatternsinhowthelibraryispresentedtothevisitorasaprogramofsensory
incidents.Thispartdevelopsfromourbeliefthatbeyondexposinguserstofundamentallyinterpersonalor
social environments, buildings also expose them toan imaginative environment wherein the experiencing
selfisledtoconstructanimaginingselfinresponsetohisorherphenomenalexperienceofthebuilding,
much in the same way that he or she is led to construct a social self.1 The evocation of an imaginative
responseseemstodrivemuchcreativeworkinarchitecture.Imaginativeresponseis,inanycase,centralto
thecasewetakeupinthispaper.
"Itisimportanttonotethatthisimaginingselfisnotcreatedbytheactivityofimaginativeengagementbutratherisassimilated[into]
ourownextantsenseofself.Thesociallogicofbuildingsmaywellplayaconstitutiveroleinthecreationofasocialorrelationalself,
butinimaginativeengagement,thevisualizedselfisourordinaryextensionalandhistoricalself(forlogicalconstraintsontheselfinthe
contextofimagination,seeWilliams1973);weimaginativelyexplorewhatitwouldlike,forus,tobeinsuchasetting.Suchan
imaginativeconceptionhasbeendescribedasrecreativeimagination(CurrieandRavenscroft,2003;seealso,Bafnaetal.2009).
8087:2
Whatwewanttostudyspecificallyishowthetwokindsofstagingoftheselfarehandledinthedesignof
the library. Much of the critical literature on buildings conflates the imaginative and social aspects of
buildings.Insuchdescriptions,phenomenalaspectsofthedesignelicitimaginativeresponse;socialaspects
are assumed to be subsumed under, finetuned, or intensified by the phenomenal staging. We will try to
showthatthetwoaspectsdonotneedtooperateintandem.Inthelibrary,atleast,partoftheaesthetic
chargecomesfromthetensionbetweenthesocialstagingandthephenomenalstagingofthesituateduser.
THESEATTLECENTRALPUBLICLIBRARY
As with other buildings and projects in of the OMA oeuvre,2 program is meant to be understood as
generating building form in a particular way at the Seattle library. In this case, project architect Joshua
PrinceRamus describes the library as a specimen of hyperrational buildings, whose form is found by
translating representations of program into built form (Joshua PrinceRamus). The irony of such an
explanationisthatthebuildingthatresultsfromthisprocessisnotatallrationalistinappearance.Rather,
itisirregular,boxy,andcrumpledontheoutside.Ontheinside,anatriumisformedagainstaconcretecore
thatabutsfloorplatesofvaryingdimensions;theentireinteriorisinterjectedwithabstractlyshapedmasses
andsurfacetreatments.
Image1.Buildingexterior.PhotobyBryanChang
TheParcdelaVillette,JussieuLibrary,andVoluntaryPrinsonersofArchitectureprojectsareotherexamplesoftheexplicity
translationofprogramintoform.
8087:3
Image2.Buildinginterior.PhotobyChrisSchroeerHeiermann.
However,forallthevisualirregularity,abinarylogicreadilyemergesfromthebuildingsection.Theprogram
is portioned out into two alternating types of platforms or floors, each with a corresponding
programmaticdesignation.Oneprogrammatictypeistermedfunctionandcharacterizedasstableand
theotherattractionandunstable(ElCroquis,2004).Functionalprogrammaticlevelsincludethebook
stacks,meetingrooms,andemployeeandadministrationworkspaces.Attractionprogramlevelsinclude
reading, reference, circulation, and learning areas. Functions and attractions systematically differ in their
interface with the vertical circulation systems, with the building enhancing incidental movement into
attraction spaces while limiting such ingress to the functions. For example, the multifloor escalators
originateandterminateinattractionplatformsonly,altogetherbypassingthefunctionplatforms.Thereare
additional,iflessconsistent,differencesinspatialshapebetweenattractionsandfunctions,withattractions
opentotheatrium,andenclosingsurfacesmorelikelytobeslopingandaggregatedfromvarioussurfaces.
8087:4
Image3.Labeledsectiondiagram
IntheSeattlelibrary,thealternationsofthesectionareoverlaidonthedispositionofreadingroomsabout
thestacks,whichtypicallyoccursinlibraryplans.Thebuildingisonaninclineddowntownblockwithlower
andupperentrancesopeningtothefirstandthirdfloors,bothattractionplatforms.Thefirstfloorhouses
circulation,thechildrensarea,andanauditorium,andthethirdisavoluminousreadingareatogetherwith
thecoffeeandgiftshopsandthefictioncollection(pictures1stand3rdfloor).Thesetwolevelsarelinkedby
a twostorychartreuse escalator that bypasses a floor of employeeand book processing spaces. The next
escalator, which begins on the third floor, bypasses a closed mezzanine level of meeting rooms and
terminates on an open mezzanine with reference and computer areas (pictures: closed and open
mezzanine).Thefinalescalatorascendsfromthefifthfloorthroughfourlevelsofbookstacks,amultifloor
functionplatform,andterminatesinanairyreadingroomslevelonthetenthfloor.Thefourlevelsofbooks
stacksarerampedlikeacarparkandarecontinuouswiththetenthlevelreadingrooms,butnotthefifth
floorreferencearea.Theeleventhlevel,thefloorplateofwhichisoffsetfromthereadingroomsfloor,isthe
socalled headquarters, another employeeonly, function space. There is a basic typological distinction
between functions, mainly corridor plans, and attractions, which are largely open plans. (pictures:
stacks,readingrooms)
8087:5
Image4.HHintegrationfloors1,3,4,5,7,and10.
8087:6
SOCIALSTAGINGINTHELIBRARY
Wewillinfersocialstagingoflibraryusersbydescribingstereotypicalroutesforundertakingthreespecific
tasks:checkingoutabook,attendingameeting,andmeetingafriendtoworktogether.Wewillthenassess
connectivity,maximumradials,andintegrationforselectpointsalongeachpath.Forthepurposesofthis
inquiry,connectivitywillberelatedtoasenseofpublicness,asthegreaterthedegreeofvisualexposurethe
less private the activities undertaken in a space will be (following Vialard & Bafna, 2009). Interpreting
connectivity as senseofpublicness by way of exposure picks up relevant distinctions between office
cubiclesandofficeroomsorcorridorsandlobbies.Whilethislogicalsoregistersinrelativelyclosedareas,
like the library stacks, such areas are not private in the same way that closed rooms are. We therefore
discuss connectivity together with maximum radials, which measure the depth of vision into surrounding
spaces.Combiningmetricdepthwithconnectivityisexpectedtopickupdistinctionsbetweenthepublicness
oflibrarystacksandthatofclosedrooms.Highintegrationareasaremoregloballycentral.Suchareastend
tobeperceivedasanchorspacesforwayfindingandorientation(Peponis,Zimring,andChoi,1990;Haqand
Zimring,2003),but,inthecaseofaweakprogrambuildinglikethelibrary,theyarelikelytoprovidegreater
unplannedencountersamongstvisitors,andsocanalsobecharacterizedassociallypublic(Grajewski,1993;
Penn,Desyllas,andVaughan,1999).3
In sum, our approach assesses publicness as it is both directly and indirectly perceived by building users.
Directperceptionofpublicnessisassociatedwithexposureandiscapturedbymeasuringspatialformusing
connectivityandmaximumradials.Indirectperceptionofpublicnessisassociatedwithsocialencounterand
measured using integration. Where direct and indirect forms of publicness conform to one another,
perceptionsofthespatialstructureofthebuildingandofthelifewithinitwilltendtoreinforceeachother.
Thereforeifagivenlocationinthelibrary,thepublicnessperceiveddirectlythroughthespatialformandthe
publicnessperceivedindirectlythroughsocialencountercoincide,wearguethatthesenseofinstitutionality
and conformation to the library genotype at that location is enhanced. Here we emphasize Hillier and
Hansonsdefinitionofgenotypesasabstractrulesunderlyingspatialforms.Inthisformulationthespatialis,
ofcourse,fundamentallysocial,andthereforegenotypesresonatewithinstitutionsasmechanismsofsocial
order.
Procedurally,wehaveselectedpointsalongcontrivedtrajectoriesforthreepathsthatspanmultiplefloors.
For each point, connectivity, maximum radials, and integration are each normalized as a percent of the
maximumvalueforthefloor.
CheckingOutaBook
Astereotypicalpatternforcheckingoutabookwasinferredasfollows.Aregularvisitortothelibrarycomes
inbythefirstfloorentrance,intendingtofindaparticularbook.Thoughtheelevatorisimmediatelyinfront
of the entrance, it would clearly require a wait. And why wait when just off to the right an escalator
perpetually beckons upward? At the top of the long escalator, the visitor crosses the third floor from the
readingareaintothefictioncollectiontothenextescalator,whichleadstotheopenmezzaninereference
area.Exitingtheescalator,theuserapproachesaworkstationandfindsthecallnumberandfloorlocationof
thebook.Thereisachoicehere,whethertotakeathirdescalatorintothemidpointofthestacksandwind
upordowntheramptofindthebook,ortotaketheelevatortothedesiredlabeledfloor.Nowtheelevator
Weshouldalsonotethatinthestudiescitedabove,integrationandconnectivityvaluesarecalculatedusingaxialmaps.However,as
morerecentstudieshavefound(forinstance,Peponis,Bafna,etal.2007),thevisualintegrationmappingwhichweusehereis
consistentwiththeaxialmappingatthegrosslevelthatweoperateinthispaper.
8087:7
seemsworththewait,asthevisitordoesntwanttospendallmorningwanderingupanddownthebooks
spiral.
Image5.Showingroute,syntaxvaluesandvisibilitypolygonsforgettingabook
8087:8
Theconnectivitymeasurementsindicatethatduringthefirsthalfofthistrajectory,allthewayuptosettling
inattheworkstation,visualexposureisgenerallyhigh,indicatingthatthesenseofpublicnessandoftheself
asaparticipantinthesocialsettingofthelibraryarealsohigh.Thisexpansivesensecontractsdramatically
asoneapproachestheworkstation,thenaccessestheelevatoroffashorthallwaythatisclosedatoneend.
Intheconstrictionofoverviewandexposure,thesesubtasksaretreatedmorelikeworkandlesslikethe
publicpresentationoftheself.Forthisfirstpartofthetrajectory,thepatternsofmaximumradialsreflecta
programthatengendersrelativelyshallowaccesstothefirstflooranddeeperaccessintothethirdandfifth
floors.
Onceinthestacks,connectivityisveryhighatintersectionsformedbytheshelving,butextremelylowinthe
spacesbetweenshelves,creatingsharpdemarcationsbetweenhighlyexposedandhighlycontainedareas.
Themaximumradialsconcurrentlyindicateasharpdropfromverylongtoveryshortsightlinesinthestacks.
Whileonthefirstthreefloors,exposureandvisualaccesspromoteaconsistentsenseofbeingonview,in
the space of the stacks abrupt changes in both exposure and visual access stage surprising or startling
encounterswhereverylongmaximumradialsinareasofhighexposuredirectlycrossveryshortmaximum
radialsinareasoflowexposure.Returningbyelevatortothegroundfloor,thecheckoutprocesshappensin
aspaceofshallowvisualaccessandmoderatelyhighvisualexposure.
Integration patterns for the same trajectory are somewhat more uniform and always above 50% of the
maximumintegrationforthefloor,indicatingthatusersgenerallydonotfeelthemselvestobetoofarfrom
the social center of the building. However, the locations specific to the task of accessing books (the
computerterminal,elevatorslobbiesatreferenceareasandstacks,thestacksthemselves)aremarkedlyless
sociallycentral.
AttendingaMeeting
A stereotypical route for attending a meeting is much simpler. Imagine a hurried visitorsomeone with
placestobebothbeforeandafterwardwhoentersonthethirdfloor,walksdirectlytothebackofthe
space,andascendsanopenstairthatservesthefourthflooronly.Thevisitorproceedstoameetingroom
andafterwardleavesbythesamerouteheorshecameby.
Image6.Showingroute,syntaxvaluesandvisibilitypolygonsforattendingameeting.(continuenextpage)
8087:9
For attending a meeting, the connectivity percentages indicate a rapid dropping off of sense of visibility,
exposure,andpublicnessasoneproceedsfromthestreetentranceonthethirdfloor,wherethereisgreat
visualcommandoftheroom,backtowardthestair,oneoftheleastvisuallycontrollingspacesontheentire
floor. Here we find a concordantdive in visual access asexpressed by the maximum radials. Once on the
fourthfloor,theuserstaysinamoderatebandofconstant,moderatevisibilityontheringofcorridor.The
sametrajectory,whenevaluatedforintegration,showsadropfromaveryhighcentralityatthethirdfloor
entrance,followedbyaquickdropofftoamoderatepositionofcentrality,thenahoveringbelowthe50
percentilefortheremainderofthetrajectory.Therearenoreversalsintheintegrationpatterns;onesimply
movesfromthesocialcentertotheperiphery.Themaximumradials,connectivity,andintegrationtendto
movetogetherfortheentiretrajectory.
MeetingaFriendontheReadingRoomsFloor
A regular visitor to the library enters by the first floor to meet a friend on the tenth floor readingrooms
level.Theuserwaitsfortheelevator.Thechainofescalatorsandassociatedspacesbetweenthefirstand
tenthfloorsistoogreataninvestmentoftimeandattentiontoevenbeconsidered.Theuserexitsonthe
tenth floor, then winds down a ramping path around a raised plinth of restrictedaccess collections.
Roundingthethirdturn,nearthetopoftheescalator,theuserseesadownwardslopingpathandthreeun
walled,openplan,terracedreadingareastotherightofit.
8087:10
Image7.Showingroute,syntaxvaluesandvisibilitypolygonsformeetingafriend
The firstfloor portion of the trajectory, a short shot from door to elevator, is exposed in nature. The
moderatelengthmaximumradialsindicateshallowviews,andintegrationvaluesarehigh.Thetenthfloor
portionofthetrajectory,bycontrast,showsgreatvariationinvisibilitylevels.Theexitfromtheelevatorand
the singleloaded corridor winding around the restrictedaccess collections are both relatively unexposed;
however, near the top of the escalator asthe user rounds thecornerto see the reading areas, there is a
burst of visual access, which contracts again as user approaches the workspace. The longest radials align
8087:11
with greatest connectivity and the greatest integration. The radials show a generally uniform increase of
depthofvisionasonetheapproachtotheworkarea,withadiveindepthofvisionasonesettlesinatthe
workspace.Throughoutthetrajectory,thevaluesofmaximumradials,connectivity,andintegrationmove
inaconcordantway,indicatingthatthesenseofpublicnessandthesenseofsocialcentralitycoincide.
SOCIALSTAGINGINTHELIBRARY
Inmostcases,thevaluesformaximumradials,connectivity,andintegrationriseandfalltogether.Wehave
arguedthatthecovariationofthesevalueswilltendtoreinforcethelibrarygenotypeand,byextension,the
sense of institutionality. When connectivity and integration covary, builtform publicness (as associated
withconnectivity)andthesocialpublicness(asassociatedwithintegration)ofthebuildingcoincide.
Promenade spaces for the public have been a common feature of American libraries throughout their
history (Chanchani, 2002). The Seattle library emphasizes the sense of promenade insofar as direct and
indirect publicness patterns tend to conform to one another. Circulation into the attraction spaces,
especially ingress by escalator, usually occurs in areas of high integration, high connectivity, and high
maximumradials.Bycontrast,thelocationsforlibraryspecifictasks,includingsearchingthecollectionsand
retrieving books, are often relatively socially peripheral (i.e., low integration). Isovists taken at the
workstationpointsampledonthefifthfloor,thestacksontheseventhfloor,andthedeskonthetenthfloor
donotoverlapwiththehighestintegrationvalues,implyingthehighestintegrationareasareoneormore
turnsawayfromthesetaskareas.
Asfarassocialstaging,itisreasonabletoinferthatuserssensethemselvesasparticipants,ratherthanas
spectators,astheirvisualcommandoftheenvironmentchangeswiththesocialcentralityoftheirposition.
While undertaking tasks, users are not, for example, typically taking on large physical views from socially
peripheralpositions.
PHENOMENALSTAGINGINTHELIBRARY
While the social staging of the user conveys a library genotype that is to some degree typical, the visual
impactofthelibraryispatentlyspecial.Thephenomenalexperienceofthelibraryconveysaspecificagenda,
andthisagendamodifiesthesocialsenseofthelibraryasdescribedsofar.
A note on the methodological approach here: phenomenological staging, which we wish to capture, is
difficult to describe in an objective sense. In being definitionally subjective, objective description of
phenomena from thirdperson perspective is not technically possible. In what follows, we give a personal
account of the phenomenal experience of the building as a possible instance of how a subject might
experience tendencies in the presentation of visual phenomena.We rewalk a trajectory following the
escalators from the first floor to the upperlevel readingrooms floor, describing the phenomena
encounteredbythesituateduser.
The first floor entry to the library opens off of Fourth Street. As viewed across the landscaped plaza, the
lowerpartofthisfaadeisdoubleheightstorefrontglazing.Abovethestorefront,averylarge,verydeep
volumeoffoldedfaadeprojectshorizontallyovertheplaza,risingverticallyfortheheightofacoupleof
floors,thenrecedingoutofsight.Crossingbelowthefolded,reflectivefaade,eachentrantismultipliedby
8087:12
three,theoriginalplusonereflectiononeachofthefaadesverticalandhorizontalsurfaces.Oneenters
thewide,shallowlobbyofthefirstfloorandisgreetedbytheflatfaceofabankofelevatorsencasedin
concrete, with relatively deep peripheral views, to the childrens area and the circulation desk area. Just
aroundtheelevatorcore,theescalatortotherightcomesintoview,chartreuseandilluminated.Itisalong
escalatorthattravelsuptowardatiltedpatchofglasscladsky.
10
Images8,9and10.Buildingwalkthroughandassociatedplans.Image9bySarahC.Campbell
Theescalatordepositsitspassengersonthethirdfloorinalarge,tentingexpanseboundedbyinwardtilting
glazedfaadethatjoinstherestofthebuildingataheightofthreestories,abovetwomezzaninelevelsthat
overlookthefloor.Casuallyarrangedseating,plantsandthecoffeeandgiftshopsarearrangedunderthe
tilting facade, with bookshelves at oblique angles populating a lowceiling portion of the floor under a
mezzanine.Overall,thespaceseemsanimatedbymovement,acrosstheflooritselfandupanddownthe
illuminated escalators and glazed core of elevators. The lower mezzanine level has a red faade with an
obscurewindowthatthrowsintosilhouettepeoplemovingbehindit.Abovethisfaadeisarail,andother
8087:13
libraryvisitorsarejustvisibleontheothersideofit.Alarge,high,atrium,whichadjoinstothemezzanineon
oneside,hasawhitesurfacewithrepeatedbandsofgreenstripwindows.Itvisiblyopenstoalargerlevel
nearthetopofthebuildingshortlybeforeterminatinginaskylight.
11
12
14
13
Images11,12,13and14.Buildingwalkthroughandassociatedplans.Image14bySarahHouhgton
The next escalator, perpendicular to and visible from the first, disappears into the mezzanine level. It
requiresonetocrosstheflooraroundasunkenauditorium.Fromthesecondescalator,oneemergesinto
anothernovelenvironmenttwofloorsup:alarge,raileddeckwithmetallicfloortilesandorange,black,and
gray furnishings. The space is open, subdivided only by a set of upright trusses, columns, and the various
stair,escalatorandelevatortowers.Everythinghigherthaneightfeetispaintedachunkyfireproofblack;
belowthat,columnsarecasedinwhitegypsumboard.Long,fixedtablesareconfiguredtoformanXin
themiddleofthespace.
Theescalatorterminatestowardthebackofthespace.Tablesforstudyandworkstationsliebetweenthe
topoftheescalatorandhigh,openspacesharedwiththepreviousfloor.Fromthisposition,thebacksideof
theilluminatedescalatorthatprovidesaccesstothestacksascendstothetopofthehighceilingedspace.
8087:14
Thestrangestthingabouttheescalatormaynotregisteratfirst;itisjustoneescalator,onegoingup,no
othercomingdown.
16
15
17
Images15,16and17.Buildingwalkthroughandassociatedplans.Image16byShoSeph.
Asoneapproachesthethirdescalator,itbecomesclearthatitisaverylongescalatorthatpuncturesthe
blackceiling,thoughitsfinaldestinationcannotbeseen.Asonerises,glassedinoneitherside,thefloorslab
moves from the upper front to the lower rear of the visual field. The book shelves, perpendicular to the
movinguser,riseandmovebehind,onebyone.Occasionally,apersonemergesintoview,movingalonga
differentplanethantheescalatorspassenger.Withthebuildingandfurniturealreadyinrelativemotion,a
movinghumanisdoublyasdynamic.Afterfourfloors,theescalatorterminates,nudgingitsusersintoan
8087:15
airy and lovely series of terraced reading rooms, finished in relatively harmonious,naturalistic colors. The
metalofthecladdingispaintedapaleskyblue.Ifonewindsuptheramptothehighestpointinthepublicly
accessible part of the building, one can see down the large light wellthe long, white, expanse of the
atrium,therailingandmetaltiledfloor,theredbandoftheclosedmezzanine,andthefurnitureandlarge,
foliageprintedrugsofthethirdfloor.Turningbackanddescendingviathebooksspiral,onefindsitsquat
andcramped,almostneverprovidingviewsout,whichisoddconsideringtheentirebuildingiscladinglass.
18
19
20
21
22
23
8087:16
24
25
Images18,19,20,21,22,23,24and25.Buildingwalkthroughandassociatedplans.Image23byNicoleC.Engard.
THERELATIONSHIPBETWEENVISUALANDPHENOMENALSTAGINGINTHELIBRARY
Theseriesofescalatorshastakentheuserthroughanunfamiliar,intriguing,andvariedvisualvista.While
thefunctionalelementsofalibraryarefamiliarenough,thecolors,changesoffloorlevels,andorganization
defamiliarizetheoverallsetting.Perhapsmostdisconcertingisthattheredoesnotseemtobeanobvious
underlyingreasoningbehindtheorganizationofthevisualenvironment.Itallfeelsadhocandaccidental,
even as it works functionally. Phenomenally then, one has the sense of not being in institutional
environment,butratheranunsettledurbansetting,oratbestasettingthatisstilltakingshape.
Severalstrategiesforthearchitecturaldeploymentofphenomenacanbeobserved.Oneverypowerfuland
verytypicaldefamiliarizingdesignstrategyisthatmanypartsoftheprogramarevisuallyorganizedsothat
theyareseenfromtheoutside,and,significantly,theirappearanceasaredstripfaade,orablackvolume
set in the free plan, or an atrium that is blankfaced save a few strips of windowsdoes not express
programmatic function. Occlusion of parts of whole shapes is another strategy with implications for how
usersengagetheprogram.Forexample,portionsoftrajectoriesthatarekeytothefunctionalorganization
oftheplanoftendisappearbehindedgesorobjects,requiringuserstotravelintospacestheycannotfirst
takeprospectof.Thisisthecasewhenescalatorsslipbehindmezzaninefacadesorintonarrowholesinthe
floor. As a sort of complement to this strategy, the building often frames users so that they are seen in
incompletearcsofaction.
8087:17
Image26.Aphotoandlocationofthefirstoverlook.
Image27.Aphotoandlocationofthesecondoverlook.
Further,thereareanumberofkeyvisualexperienceswithinthebuilding,andtheirlocationdoesnotcovary
with the values of syntactic variables. We will describe two such instances. The fourth floor hosts a
comfortable,striking,highlyattractiveoverlooktothelivingroom,givingadeepviewtothespacefroma
refugelike position behind the scrim of the window surface. The large window occurs along the ring of
circulationonthefourthfloor,whichincludestwostairsandseveralblindhallways.Thesalientfeaturesof
thehallwayarethatallitssurfacesareeitherredoraslightlyoffredpinkanditsreflexcornersarealmost
all curved. The window overlook is the main respite from these features, over and above its inherent
interestasanonreciprocalviewthatis,avoyeuristicviewtothemainpublicspaceofthebuilding.The
window is located in an area of relatively low integration. It neither houses nor uniquely leads to any
8087:18
functionalarea.Itisperceptualinterestormerecircumstance,butnotsyntacticstaging,thatislikelytotake
avisitorthere.
Thesamecanbesaidfortheoverlooktotheatriumfromthetenthfloorreadingroomslevel.Theviewis
less about visual command of a sublime multiplication of parts, and more about a presentation of an
irreduciblycompactdisplayofthepartsofthebuilding,anitemofdiagram.Again,thespotfromwhichthe
viewisavailable,whichoccursatthetopoftherampingcorridorthatbeginsatthebottomofthesixthfloor,
occupies a space of low social centrality.One comesto it by other prompts, suchassignage and building
maps,oritspositionattheapexoftheramp.Inbothcases,theviewavailableislargeandnonreciprocal,
but it is taken from a position of low integration. Such staging positions users as outsiders within the
building; they take on large, even global, views of the space from socially isolated positions. At the tenth
floor overlook, integration values are 22% of the highest value on the floor; on the fourth level overlook,
theyare51%ofthehighestvalueonthefloor.
Accesstooverviewsoccursinspacesoflowsocialcentrality;thecontrivedroutes,bycontrast,showtask
oriented users encountering socially and visually coherent spaces, with connectivity, integration, and
maximum radials covarying and reinforcing the character of the local spaces. When visual and spatial
aspects reinforce one another, it would tend to mold users as participants. However, the points at which
overviewsofthespaceareprovided,withtheirfundamentaldissonancebetweensocialcentralityandvisual
command,stagetheuserasanobserver,asanoutsider.
Wearguethatthepositioningofbuildingusers,sometimesasparticipants,sometimesasspectatorsprimes
themtoexplorethebuilding.Thispointcanbeemphasizedretrospectively;acharacterizingqualityofthe
buildingisthatitexcitesexploration.Weproposethatthetensionbetweenthesocialcentralityofthespace
anditsvariousvisualattractorssomewhatoffthebeatenpathofthesociallycentralengendersasortof
restlessness, a sense that things are happening somewhere nearby. Partly, this may be the result of
triggeringacognitivemismatchsystem.4Thevisualenvironmentofthelibrarycreatesoverallunfamiliarity
by frequently offering changing configurations of visual cues that can potentially trigger the cognitive
mismatchsystemandsocreatemotivationforfurtherexploration.
Thepointtonoteisthatthissenseofbeingdecenteredandtheconsequentrestlessnessisnotexperienced
asanurgeorcompulsiontoact,butratherasabackgroundmotivationandashiftinqualitativesubjective
consciousexperience.Wetheorizethattheuserregistersdecenterednessasacuriositytodiscoverwhatlies
behindthewall,orovertheparapet.Further,themaineffectofthetensionbetweensocialstagingandthe
phenomenal one is not just to instigate particular types of behavior (say, exploratory movement), but to
becomemoreattunedtotherawfeelofaspaceandonesroleinit.
Following Seigel, the Western concept of the self has traditionally been conceptualized along three
dimensions:thephysical,orbodily;therelational,whichisfundamentallysocial,andthereflective,which
hastodowiththeindividualscapacityforobservinghisorherownconsciousness.Thereflectiveselfnot
only reflects individual consciousness, but also worldly phenomena, including those that give rise to the
bodilyandrelationalaspectsofconsciousness;itistheselfthatactivelyandconsciouslymakesuswhatwe
are. In the library, the reflective sense of self foregrounds the social. In bringing the social forward in a
OKeefeandcolleagueshaveshownthatcertaincellsofthehippocampusmapthevisualenvironment,andifanunfamiliar
environmentisencountered,themismatchbetweentheexpectedmapandthemappingobtainedthroughsensedatatriggers
exploratorybehavior(summarizedinOKeefe,1993;originalformulationinOKeefeandNadel,1978).
8087:19
setting that shifts users social roles, the reflective self becomes engaged in the task of defining and re
definingtherelationalself.
Asavisitorexploresbothmundaneandunexpectedvistas,shapes,andvantagepoints,theroleplayedshifts
fromparticipantsteepedinthewebofrelationsengenderedbythebuildingtoreflectivespectator,whois
separate from and aware of the relational nexus, and back again. This role makes the user an incidental
actor,bothparticipatinginandbutalsoatacriticaldistancefromthestaging.Stagingusersinanexplicitly
dramaturgicalrolealignswithanexpressionofthearchitectscriticalintentfoundinthevisualdescriptionof
theKunsthal5inSMLXL.Init,dialoguebetweenVladimirandEstragon,protagonistsoftheabsurdistplay
WaitingforGodot,appearsinlargeprintoverasequencedseriesoffullpagephotographsthatprovidea
tour of the building. Fine print below the dialogue instructs where to move and what to see. Noisy,
absorbing,pointlesschatterunfoldsoverthequietimperativesofarchitecturalform.
TheKunsthalisanartmuseuminRotterdam,theNetherlands,designedbyOMAandcompletedin1992.
8087:20
Images28and29.CapturesfromSMLXL.
8087:21
Morebroadly,thestudymakesthecaseforananalyticalapproachthatdistinguishesbetweentwodistinct
setsofarchitecturaltasksthatareoftenconflated:thosethatsupporteverydayactivityandthosethatincite
reflective engagement through imaginative perception. We propose that the critical success of a building
depends not on assimilating these tasks into a seamless form, but rather in exploiting the tension often
generatedbetweenthem.Thisisnottoclaimthatitisonlythroughtensionbetweenthesekindsofstaging
thatanarchitectcanbringthebuildingintomind.Buildings,afterall,offeruscomplexwaysofinteracting
withthem.Thetensionbetweenthetwotypesofstagingisoneremarkablyeasywayofensuringawork
engagesthereflectiveself.
Weareawarethatthestudyhassomekeylimitations.Methodologically,thereneedstobemoresystematic
methods for recording subjective impressions that are the basis for the description of the phenomenal
staging.And,moreworkneedstobedonetoestablish,eitherthroughobservationofbehavior,orthrough
carefullycontrolledselfreportdata,thekindsofeffectsthatphenomenalstagingcanhaveonvisitors.On
boththesecounts,wehavereliedratherheavilyonfirstpersonobservationsfromoneofus.Thatlimitsthe
generalizability of findings,but is enoughwe feel to make a case forthe systematicunderstanding of the
imaginativefunctioningofbuildings.
REFERENCES
Bafna,S.(2005).SymboliccontentintheemergenceoftheMiesianfreeplan.JournalofArchitecture,10(2),
181200.
Bafna,S.,Hyun,M.,Lee,H.,Antunez,C.,andYi,L.2009.Theanalysisofvisualfunctioningofbuildings,In
Koch, D., Marcus, L., & Steen, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Space Syntax,
Stockholm:TRITAARKForskningspublikation1,7.17.12
Batty, M. (2001). Exploring isovist fields: Space and shape in architectural and urban morphology.
EnvironmentandPlanningB:PlanningandDesign,28,123150.
Chanchani,S.(2002).ArchitectureandcentralpubliclibrariesinAmerica,18871925:Astudyofconflicting
institutionsandmediateddesigns.Unpublisheddoctoralthesis.
Currie, G. & Ravenscroft, I. (2003). Recreative minds: Imagination in philosophy and psychology. Oxford:
OxfordUniversityPress.
ElCroquis(2004).OMA(I),19962006.131/32,3435.Madrid,Spain.
Grajewski,T.(1993).TheSASheadoffice:Spatialconfigurationandinteractionpatterns.NordicJournalof
ArchitecturalResearch,2,6374.
Goffman,E.(1959).Thepresentationofselfineverydaylife.NewYork:Doubleday.
Hanson,J.(1994).Deconstructingarchitects'houses.EnvironmentandPlanning(B):PlanningandDesign,
21,675704.
Hanson,J.(1999).Decodinghomesandhouses.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Hillier,B.(1996).Spaceisthemachine.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
8087:22
Holanda,F.(2009).Ofglassandconcrete.InKoch,D.,Marcus,L.,&Steen,J.(Eds.),Proceedingsofthe7th
InternationalSymposiumonSpaceSyntax,Stockholm:TRITAARKForskningspublikation2009:1,43.143.15.
Joshua PrinceRamus: Designing the Seattle Central Library. Retrieved July 18, 2011 from
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1x0PA0Rnjho&feature=player_embedded>
Kwinter,S.(1996).RemKoolhaasConversationswithstudents.NewYork:PrincetonArchitecturalPress.
Koolhaas,R.(1978).DeliriousNewYork:AretroactivemanifestoforManhattan.NewYork:OxfordUniversity
Press.
Koolhaas,R.(1995).Small,medium,large,extralarge:OfficeforMetropolitanArchitecture,RemKoolhaas,
andBruceMau.NewYork:MonacelliPress.
Koch,D.(2009).Architecturereconfigured.InKoch,D.,Marcus,L.,&Steen,J.(Eds.),Proceedingsofthe7th
InternationalSymposiumonSpaceSyntax,Stockholm:TRITAARKForskningspublikation2009:1,58.158.11.
Psarra,S.(2009).Theghostofconceivedspace.InKoch,D.,Marcus,L.,&Steen,J.(Eds.),Proceedingsofthe
7th International Symposium on Space Syntax, Stockholm: TRITAARK Forskningspublikation 2009:1, 89.1
89.10.
OKeefe,J.(1993).Kantandtheseahorse:Anessayintheneurophilosophyofspace.InEilan,N.,McCarthy,
R.,andBrewer,B.(Eds.),Spatialrepresentation:Problemsinphilosophyandpsychology.Oxford:Blackwell,
4364.
OKeefe,J.&Nadel,L.(1978).Thehippocampusasacognitivemap.Oxford:ClarendonPress.
Penn,A.,Desyllas,J.,&Vaughan,L.(1999).Thespaceofinnovation:Interactionandcommunicationinthe
workenvironment.EnvironmentandPlanning(B):PlanningandDesign,26,193218.
Peponis,J.(2005).Formulation.TheJournalofArchitecture,10(2),119134.
Peponis,J.,Zimring,C.,&Choi,Y.K.(1990).Findingthebuildinginwayfinding.EnvironmentandBehavior,
22,555590.
Peponis,J.,Bafna,S.,Bajaj,R.,Bromberg,J.,Congdon,C.,Rashid,M.,Warmels,S.,Zhang,Y.,&Zimring,C.
(2007).Designingspacetosupportknowledgework.EnvironmentandBehavior,39,815840.
Peponis, J. & Bellal, T. (2010). Fallingwater: The interplay between space and shape. Environment and
PlanningB:PlanningandDesign,37(6),9821001.
Peponis, J., Hadjinikolaou, E., Livieratos, C., & Fatouros, D.A. (1989). The spatial core of urban culture.
Ekistics,334/335,4355.
Seigel,J.(2005).Theideaoftheself.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Turner, P. A., Doxa, M., OSullivan, D. & Penn, A. (2001). From isovist fields to visibility graphs: A
methodologyfortheanalysisofarchitecturalspace.EnvironmentandPlanningB:PlanningandDesign,28,
193121.
8087:23
Vialard,A.,&Bafna,S.(2009).ThestructureofchangeinmidtwentiethcenturyAmericanhouse.InKoch,
D., Marcus, L., & Steen, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Space Syntax,
Stockholm:TRITAARKForskningspublikation2009:1,130.1130.13.
Williams,B.(1973).Imaginationandtheself.InProblemsoftheSelf,CambridgeUniversityPress,1973,pp.
2645.
8087:24

8087 2

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

8087 2

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

PAPERREF#8074

Вам также может понравиться