Eddie Jasso
INTD 4563
Research Paper
February 4, 2009
Hidden Dimension: Fixed-Feature Space
Programming or analysis of a building requires much investigation. One of the few concepts to investigate is the use of space and how it functions as a whole. Edward T. Hall compares Phillip Aries pre-eighteenth century European theories to contemporary organization. The architecture building can also be compared in the same way programmatically speaking. If the architecture building were comprised of large multipurpose rooms, would the student behaviors change? What if it were programmed to have extremely defined and specialized rooms?
One of the terms used in non-verbal language is proxemics. Edward T. Hall coined the term in the 1960’s in his book the Hidden Dimension. Proxemics investigated mans use of personal space in contrast with fixed and semi-fixed space. Hall later breaks down the proxemic levels into sub-categories, fixed-feature space, semi fixed feature, and informal space. How can Hall’s philosophy on proxemics affect the development of concepts when reprogramming the University’s School of Architecture? According to Hall, fixed-feature space is considered to be organized spatially and require special rooms for special functions. The school of architecture is organized spatially to a certain degree. To program the school to have highly specialized rooms would create a gateway for individualism and selfishness. As Hall explains, “[architecture]…can provide a refuge where the individual can let his hair down and be himself.” Creating a fixed-feature space will fortify the concept of the nuclear family. Organized spaces create mental connections that associate specific rooms to specific functions. Ordered and planned out classrooms produce a dependency and then make it difficult for the student to conform to any type or form of change. This type of mentality generates a sense of comfort when entering a certain room. When moving about, students can enter a room and quickly change their frame of mind as they enter because of the familiarity and dependence of order and specialized rooms. Purpose-specific rooms are more likely to create a disconnection of peers because of all the separation. A division between the student body is not healthy for any school, especially the School of Architecture. The school would not have a sense of community; instead it will be behind a closed door in its respective room.
Studio culture is about working together in one big open space. What would school be like if it was comprised of several large communal areas? How would that be of any benefit? In his book, Centuries of Childhood, Philippe Aries’ description of eighteenth century European domestic architecture can be directly applied to the architecture school. Aries explains that childhood did not exist prior to the specialization of rooms according to function. Before then, “children dressed and were treated as small adults”, which was a norm at the time. If the school were reprogrammed to have large communal rooms, then underclassmen would be treated as equals by the upperclassmen. There would be more of a community setting within these rooms. If there isn’t any “privacy” between peers, this will stimulate the desire of sharing ideas and counsel. These shared areas would have to be divided with the simplicity of furniture placement. Organizing tables to establish a division between different classes would be ideal in this type of setting. The fact that classrooms would not have any type of wall to separate each other leaves it open for interaction between one class and another. In this case, the freshman would be treated as a “small upperclassmen”. The size of the shared areas would have to be determined according to school enrollment but would accommodate at least 4 studios. Studios work together and build that family bond, in a communal studio, the bond would become greater and stronger. Administration would continue behind closed doors and walls considering the need for privacy during meetings and phone calls. Students will also need privacy and gathering areas, which can easily be integrated or placed adjacent to the shared studio. As far as storage in a communal studio, lockers or individually owned supply carts could work to keep supplies and tools safe. Maybe as the family bond grows greater then there will be no need for lockers.
Creating a sense of unity in a school is most important. There are two options when reprogramming the school; they include the open floor plan with communal studio spaces or highly function-specific spaces. Both options are possible and are capable of improving the school. A decision has to be made as far as what kind of atmosphere the University wants to offer. A decision that can only be made after the proper investigation and analysis has been done.
Bibliography
Aries, Philipe. Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life. New York: Random house, 1962.
Goffman, Erving. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Double Play, 1959.
Hall, Edward T. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Anchor Books, 1966.