Re: Forming relationships with consumers?
Jay Lemke (jllbc who-is-at cunyvm.cuny.edu)
Wed, 05 Nov 1997 11:50:38 -0500
>
>Thanks, Greg, for word about the Discovery listgroup. I might drop in and
see if I can stir up a little heat, and light!
>
>On a related thread here on xmca, I'm interested in the issue of
architectural design and educational priorities. I am sure there are
different affordances in closed vs. open space designs for schools, but I
am not sure that there is any necessary or clear-cut relationship with
teaching strategies, feelings of community, etc.
>
>If we apply the same logic I put forward about software design, or
curriculum design, we have to ask about studies of patterns of use -- i.e.
relatively unconstrained, open ethnographic-style studies of how teachers
and students (and others) actually make use of various sorts of space
designs. As mentioned here already, some teachers rebuild the walls to
close down spaces they perceive as too open, and we know that students in
some schools take over the hallways as a form of open social space in
contrast with the closed, and controlled space of classrooms.
>
>One useful notion here might be the distinction political geographers make
(cf. David Harvey) between space and _place_. The former looks mainly at
the physical-technical affordances, the latter adds in the users'
experience of space as culturally and individually meaningful. The same
space can make very different places for different people. What people want
is a certain kind of place, and the designer of the space can try to
support their desires. But as with other kinds of design, architects often
get rather totalitarian notions about totally controlling 'their' products,
right down to what paintings or posters can be hung on the walls in private
office spaces (a real example).
>
>It is normal for architects to meet with clients and do rather elaborate
surveys of client needs, but there is still a strong sense of ownership
rights that architects exercise: it is 'their building', _for_ the clients,
but it is not really a jointly produced collaborative product. Architects
are perhaps even more notorious for their 'egos' than university
professors! comparable perhaps with film directors ... So, my hypothesis
again is that the input from clients is carefully limited so as to retain
the greatest freedom and power for the architect to do (usually) his thing.
(I wonder whether women work as designers in more client-centered and
collaborative ways; there does seem to be a gender issue under the surface
here.)
>
>There is not much point in good use-studies until we know where the points
of maximal leverage are for input to the design process, or until we know
why the design process tends to close itself and strictly limit inputs --
so that we might have a chance to open it up to let the use-studies have a
practical impact. I think this is equally true in architectural,
curricular, and software design. JAY.
---------------------------
JAY L. LEMKE
CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
JLLBC who-is-at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
---------------------------