|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
crinno
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 37
|
 Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:48 am Post subject: Can architecture act as a catalyst for social change? |
    |
|
I am about to embark on my master thesis titled "The capacity of architecture to act as a catalyst for positive change and cultural regeneration in an informal Romani settlement". To help strengthen my argument I am seeking to find some historical references or examples where architecture has had a positive effect on society. Am I naive in thinking there are cases where architecture has been able to ameliorate a social condition?
Yamasaki's Pruitt-Igoe project may have evidenced some planning mistakes that made them more dangerous than intended, but the mistakes didn't create the behavior of dangerous people. I personally believe architecture can effect peoples behavior but is it only on the surface?
thanks a lot for reading!
kate |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Arc1tectronic
Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Posts: 18
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What does ameliorate mean? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
starkca3
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 174
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
hmm well thats definitely one for debate, but i see the entire renaissance driven by architectural redefinition and revival. But other people probably see it differently  .
_________________
busy~ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djswan
millennium club
Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 1121
Location: Montana, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Go for it! Start embarking and quit thinking about it. 
Debarking is a good first step, use a drawknife or a spud.
www.tfguild.org
_________________
n/a |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lekizz
millennium club
Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 1212
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
There are many examples of architecture having an effect on individuals and their activities. On the macro scale I think of the redesign and reorganisation of Paris in the mid-nineteenth century, which made it easier for the authorities to police the streets and more difficult for the disgruntled Parisiennes to build barracades and fight back, which is good or bad depending on your viewpoint.
There are self-build community schemes which have acted as social enablers in fragmented communities. I am thinking of large schemes such as Byker Wall (by Ralph Erkine) which involved the current and future residents integrally in its development and construction.
On the micro scale I'm sure good architecture has an uplifting positive effect, creating identity and social 'glue'. We have a news story pinned up in our office kitchen about a young woman who saw a picture of one of our buildings on the interweb and was so inspired she had it tattood on her back!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
solidred
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 728
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Kate
I'd say it's very difficult to isolate architectural effects from socio-cultural ones. I haven't *yet* come across some uniform psychological consequence of some aesthetic device, although there's another thread on this: 'Understanding Beauty in Architecture: Guiding Neuroaesthetic' which suggests that, at least, some research is being done in the area.
Until that isolation of cause and effect is demonstrated conclusively, the attitudes of architects to a)society b)personal psychology / subjectivity c)engagement with the building process as a great deal more than the manipulation of volume and material are significant.
There's an interesting book called 'Le Corbusier and the Concept of Self' which looks into that architect's rather particular (some might say odd  ) attitude towards the individual's relationship with society. Given his prominence in such things as 20th century social housing design etc. the psychological effects on architectural ideation of such an analysed point-of-view may be a useful starting point.
http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300095654
Also, there might be something in differentiating design processes originating in emotional empathy and observational analysis. How close do you get to the people you're designing for? Where does the 'expert' sit in a society? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
solidred
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 728
Location: Scotland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mx2
millennium club
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1977
Location: Miami, Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The capacity of architecture to act as a catalyst for positive change and cultural regeneration in an informal Romani settlement |
That is a mouthful. I was curious about certain aspects of the thesis title; ie. "cultural regeneration" and why "informal" and why "Romani settlement"? The first half of the question could start a debate that would last forever but the second half of your question in the interesting part. For starters, the regeneration of culture fully implies the degenarative status of a culture is needed as a starting point of reference...we can't regenerate a "well" society I suppose. Secondly, the idea focuses solely on culture, as opposed to our environment, health, psychological behaviour or whatnot. When such a light is shined on one aspect of our world, it raises many questions unto itself, such as which culture and how do we define any culture today without referencing all of the concurrent and past influences on said culture?
An informal settlement, as opposed to a civil settlement I suppose evokes an image of the Brazilian favela's, Haiti's bidonville's or any region of squatters in the world, including the hotly contested Gaza strip. But then throw in the very specific Indo-Euro gypsies in this mix and you've narrowed it down to something quite unique.
From this point I can't help but focus on the idea of architecture and gypsies. It made me think of an oxymoron, not necessarily in the realm of people in motion who need architecture (ie, mobile housing) but rather I began thinking of the built environment and specifically about the notion of architecture in motion, ala Archigram's walking cities and other futurist ideas. And I'm left humbled when I tried to apply this to the life of gypsies because I was immediately stopped by one simple concept: who says the life of a gypsy is not better than the lives that are encapsulated by built objects? Then we begin the debate about living architecture...
mx2.5
p.s. Just dropping by to say hello to my old friends...hope everyone is enduring this global recession. Myself, I'm doing okay...not sure about the future since there is nothing in the pipeline...and I assume its the same for most here. All my best...
_________________
*Art of Architecture: The conscious use of skill and creative imagination in the production of an aesthetic building.
*Science of Architecture: The calculated use of technical skill and knowledge in the construction of a functional building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
solidred
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 728
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey, good to erm, sorta 'see' you MX2!
As for the recession, I spent about five months after my last contract finished looking for a new job which I now have, in a local authority housing section. My time off included trips to the Venice Biennale, London and around five weeks in Malta, so I'm not complaining 
As for the Romanys, I was surprised to learn from some Romanian architecture students I was chatting with at the Biennale that, in Romania at least, some of the Romanys don't actually live 'on the move' in caravans but in settlements which have actually a rather elaborate architectural expression. This changes my overall notion of nomadism because it would appear that these particular Romanys are staying 'put' out of choice rather than because of restrictions placed upon their movement. Then again, my actual knowledge on the subject is totally sketchy... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nanrehvasconez
Joined: 25 Feb 2008
Posts: 329
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am not well acquainted with the social topic you are going to work with, but you could study the valuable social endevor of the urbab rehabilitation of old and delapidated neighborhoods in Amsterdam, Oslo ans Stockholm, very interesting rehabilitation of waterfronts and old neighborhoods.
________________________________________________________
Post-war Housing Schemes
Internationally the Netherlands has gained fame for its social housing schemes of the 20th century. The Dutch Housing Act of 1901 formed the background to a lively discussion between architects, not only on architecture and new techniques, but also on the social role of the profession. World-famous pre-war housing schemes such as Vreewijk (by M.J. Granpré Molière, 1916), Betondorp in Amsterdam (by J.B. van Lochem and others, 1923) and De Kiefhoek in Rotterdam (by J.J.P. Oud, 1926-2 aimed at creating an attractive neighbourhood while 'uplifting' the worker population by providing a decent and healthy living environment.
The Neighbourhood Concept
After World War II, the development of neighbourhoods was provided on a larger scale and was organised centrally by the government. The central idea that characterised the post-war housing scheme was the 'neighbourhood concept'. Neighbourhoods were developed with a spatial and functional dimension and also with an explicit community focus. Neighbourhoods were constructed, as it were, to reflect the structure of society. The neighbourhood concept was developed during the 1920s by Clarence Perry as a response to the social and psychological problems that arose from the uncontrolled sprawling growth of cities. In large cities the individual vanished in the masses and the amorphous agglomeration of districts defied the development of any sense of community. In the face of these conditions, it was felt that the growth of towns and districts had to be halted. However, prior to developing a new design solution, a new theoretical framework was needed to understand the societal dynamics and structure. For this purpose research was undertaken to determine the number of residences, schools, churches, shops and so on, in accordance with the expected growth and nature of the population. The intention was to create an authentic community. During the 1930s and 1940s the theme of the neighbourhood was elaborated by Dutch architectural groups such as De 8 ('The 8'), Opbouw ('Development/reconstruction') and internationally during the CIAM congresses. Post-War districts normally consisted of several neighbourhoods. Social and community services (schools, churches, community centres and medical services) were clustered in spacious public green areas. Shops were located in streets or at squares. Elongated residential blocks were alternated with public or semi-public green areas, expressing the idea of 'light and air'. Ideally there was such a wide range of residence design that people could live in a specific neighbourhood their whole life. For each phase of life a suitable house was available.
Inevitably the massive building operation and a shortage of building materials and qualified personnel promoted the use of prefabricated building units. Various architects, from both a more traditional and a more functional orientation, successfully employed prefabrication and adopted overseas systems for the Dutch market. Prefabrication consisted of either the delivery of large ready-to-use building components to the building site, or of pouring the components on site. The method of construction supported the building of strip-like residential blocks. Increasingly, and stimulated by subsidy advantages, the building crane determined the size of the sites: the length of the strips and the distance between them depended on the effective distance capacity of the crane.
Housing Scheme Management and Urban Reconstruction
Housing schemes were commissioned and run by housing corporations and town and city councils. After World War II such corporations became the largest owners of housing stock. For new schemes and services they depended (partially) on government subsidies until the middle of the 1990s. Financial shortfalls were carried by central government. From this date corporations became independent - and risk-taking - with local councils guarding the social responsibilities. The latter largely entailed providing housing for the target groups prescribed by central government and the management and maintenance of the houses. Corporations were allowed to sell part of the housing stock to current occupants and to develop new stock aimed at higher income brackets in order to generate new revenue.
Although central government continually provided subsidies for urban reconstruction and improvement from the 1960s, in 1992 policy makers accepted (nota Beleid voor stadsvernieuwing in de toekomst - 'Policy Document on Urban Reconstruction in the Future') that the renewal operation would have to be terminated at some stage. Funds were henceforth only provided for pre-war housing stock, historical city centres and for the relocation and cleaning of environmentally hazardous industries. Post-war neighbourhoods were explicitly excluded from urban renewal funding, because it was thought that corporations would maintain such neighbourhoods themselves, sufficiently funded by revenue from rent. When this policy was reviewed in 1997, it was found that the general quality of life was really poor in these areas: there were huge maintenance backlogs, deteriorated public spaces, lack of a sense of personal safety and a predominance of low-income households. A new policy of Urban Renewal was introduced to improve these post-war neighbourhoods through a restructuring programme.
'Reconstruction' consisted of taking measurements to change the composition of housing stock in an area in such a manner that its socio-economic structure would be strengthened. It meant that the one-sidedness of residential buildings would be replaced by a qualitatively high and varied housing offer. This approach was aimed at retaining or attracting higher income groups in the areas and to prevent the concentration of groups with low socio-economic horizons. The government stimulates corporations to sell houses to the actual inhabitants, counting on better maintenance and, by result, a positive image of the neighbourhood. However, when supply exceeded the demand (for example in the north of the country) uniformity and deprivation resulted in structural vacancy. Adaptation and dilution of the housing stock could possibly provide solutions to this problem. On the contrary, in the western part of the country, demand exceeds the supply, which leads to intensifying built areas while sacrificing the green space. The Ministry of Spatial Development (VROM) states that 1.7 million houses in 515 neighbourhoods are to be renovated. The annual targets for the period 2002-2010 are as follows, proving that local communities are far behind these objectives:
demolition 20,000
new buildings 90,000
sell 50,000
join 8000.
Threats
Even though the restructuring programme aims at quality and the improvement of quality, existing features are only marginally acknowledged or used. Often the current cliché that the post-war neighbourhoods are monotonous, uniform and have outdated layouts and finishings is easily adopted. This cliché is extremely difficult to eradicate in everyday practice. Furthermore, little research has so far been done on the origins, theories and development of this movement. Often, later additions or the partial completion of a scheme causes a lack of appreciation of the original qualities.
Another cause for concern is the current fragmentary approach to the restructuring process, which defies an integral plan. Replacing houses is inadequate. In addition, the poor condition of the houses and the depreciation period (50 years) may easily lead to demolition. But generally the physical town planning and architectural interventions in the neighbourhoods are justified by the argument of solving socio-economic issues such as threats of segregation, lack of security and poverty. One of the criteria of the subsidy arrangement Investeringsbudget Stedelijke Vernieuwing ('Investment Budget Urban Renewal') for local government restructuring programmes is cultural history. Furthermore, since 2000 the arrangement requires a coherent development vision of the local authority. Central and local government increasingly are aware of the town planning and architectural qualities of post-war neighbourhoods. The housing corporations do not have this awareness yet. They consider their houses in a purely economic way: when houses are structurally of financially depreciated, they have to be replaced. The privatisation of the corporations did not encourage a sensibility for the cultural aspect. Central government would do well to increase public awareness and support and by providing instruments to local authority to more adequately include cultural history when urban restructuring plans are compiled.
At this stage it would be premature to put any buildings on the monuments list or to designate protected townscapes. The Dutch law on monuments still has its limit of 50 years for listing a monument. Although the financial depreciation period tends to get shorter and shorter, the government is still convinced that a certain distance in time is needed to give a (scientific) valuation of the cultural significance of a building. The departure point in the planning document of the National Service for the Conservation of Monuments is to investigate the various categories of building types before evaluations and choices are made. A methodology has been developed on the basis of a historical town planning analysis to assist local authorities to make responsible choices with regard to a redevelopment plan. Currently the departments of Culture and Spatial Development are considering ways to integrate cultural history into restructuring programmes as from 2005. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mx2
millennium club
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1977
Location: Miami, Florida
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well then that resolves one aspect of the question in regards to the thesis; nomads who no longer migrate are no longer nomads. Thruout history migration has lead to "settlement"; the beginning of new cities, even countries and certainly has a lasting effect on the culture. The habits and values must change dramatically. But I assume...for I have no evidence...that there muts be some values that remain from the nomadic past. Perhaps thriftiness, or rationing, for examples. But now then, back to the thesis; what of this degredation? Any know what is meant by this?
mx2.5
_________________
*Art of Architecture: The conscious use of skill and creative imagination in the production of an aesthetic building.
*Science of Architecture: The calculated use of technical skill and knowledge in the construction of a functional building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yessickart
Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:50 am Post subject: Does arch create social change |
|
|
| Sometimes, maybe, sometimes it might affect how people act, sometimes, maybe, but I am not really sure.www.yessickart.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crinno
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 37
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
thanks a lot for your thoughts so far...really helpful. My thesis has progressed slightly since my last post, so here is the update-
The romani I am working with are no longer nomads and in the case of slovakia it is estimated that only 2% of them are still nomads. I threading the line carefully with my intervention in the informal settlement as i am sure my greatest criticism will be...how can an architect from a western education design in a Romani settlement....am I not an imperialistic architect imposing an architecture on them.
the architecture i create is to be constructed by the people themselves thus giving them skills that they can later be employed with. however if they build the building themselves....i.e i design the structure and then they can occupy the space as they wish....the question then arises ...What is the job of the architect? My job i believe is then to say where the buildings/program will be placed, orientation, proportion, fixtures, order.....
So my question is how much architecture can i implement in the settlement...if i do too little nothing happens? if i do too much i am an imperial western architect.
what is the minimum "architecture" we need to implement in a Romani town to achieve an amelioration of their living conditions?
what is the minimum architectural intervention (catalytic) for the maximum result? perhaps you know the example from Pierluigi Nicolin where he proposed 3 corner buildings and a town could then develop around this new centre. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mx2
millennium club
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1977
Location: Miami, Florida
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now I understand the scope of the thesis. In essence, this is a question about the role of an architect.
The danger of a thesis as such is that one could too easily deviate and spend too much time and effort on the question of architecture, rather than the architecture around some concept. The response level one decides to take in approaching a problem should always be 100%. In other words, one cannot design something halfway, even if the intent is to spawn further growth. Part of the explanantion of a good concept is to logically demonstrate what would that growth look like. So ultimately, as an architect assuming the role of a designer for a society, you should design the entire project, the town, the community, even if on a conceptual level (not necessarily where windows are but perhaps where streets and parks intertwine with housing and commercial space). Then this is reflected in the detail of a prototypical house or important building that expresses this concept in further detail. In other words, what is inspired to be the future town should have unqiue character that reflects the values and culture of the people it serves...this in turn would help define the nature of the prototypical structure you would design as a representative of all of these ideas.
An exmaple would be the exploration of materials: does concrete represent a once nomadic people transitioning to a fixed township? How about adobe or other earthern materials? Perhaps glass to marry the inside and exterior spaces? Perhaps it's simply open spaces. Perhaps the material is mixed to represent the various changes the people would have experienced while constantly travelling. Perhaps they seek permanence.
The variety of ideas and tectonics that should be explored and experimented with is what should be your focus. Not whether or not architects should be timidly involved in a people's want of shelter or fircfully dictating how they shoudl live. A good architect is always a curious one who seeks to understand what is important to a client, any client and ultimately designs more than what the client thought they wanted to begin with. If the architect cannot improve upon basic ideas of people, of society, then what is the value of an architect? What we would have then is architecture without architects...and that is another discussion.
mx2.5
_________________
*Art of Architecture: The conscious use of skill and creative imagination in the production of an aesthetic building.
*Science of Architecture: The calculated use of technical skill and knowledge in the construction of a functional building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mortimer33
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crinno wrote: | | My thesis has progressed slightly since my last post |
Your thesis sounds interesting.. I wish you the best with it. I'm not in the same field as you but I completed my thesis on the role of end users in the design and development of graphical user interfaces a few months ago.. It caused a couple of sleepless nights. Hope you fare a bit better!
_________________
House Design Software |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
