Research Area
My research area is, broadly, the relationship between certain kinds of social theory and architectural practice, as applied to the urban public realm/space and social spaces and the degree to which this relationship is observed in practice. More specifically, the research area is concerned with the complexities and contradictions which comprise so much of the public realm (Deutsche, 1998), and how these tensions may have an impact on the role of the architect.
This research area emerged in Semester I through writing a position paper that initially began as an informal study of personal topics of interest. These included urban social theory and behaviour within public realms and social spaces, and their complexities which play out between individuals and groups within these spaces. These theories are primarily anthropological and social science-based, and do not all have a direct correlation with architecture. The theorists studied do not indicate within their writings to ever imagine their theories manifested architecturally. Furthermore, from my research thus far, the evidence suggests that architectural texts may not always consider the design of public space from enough of an ethnographical, anthropological, or socially scientific perspective. This position paper highlighted a disconnect between architecture practice and urban social theory and established the inception of an exploration into this disconnect, which formed the basis for the research idea of the project. I believe exploring this disconnect between social theory and practice is relevant as, and to, an architect and the architecture profession and so is the subject which is observed and tested throughout this project.
My research area is, broadly, the relationship between certain kinds of social theory and architectural practice, as applied to the urban public realm/space and social spaces and the degree to which this relationship is observed in practice. More specifically, the research area is concerned with the complexities and contradictions which comprise so much of the public realm (Deutsche, 1998), and how these tensions may have an impact on the role of the architect.
This research area emerged in Semester I through writing a position paper that initially began as an informal study of personal topics of interest. These included urban social theory and behaviour within public realms and social spaces, and their complexities which play out between individuals and groups within these spaces. These theories are primarily anthropological and social science-based, and do not all have a direct correlation with architecture. The theorists studied do not indicate within their writings to ever imagine their theories manifested architecturally. Furthermore, from my research thus far, the evidence suggests that architectural texts may not always consider the design of public space from enough of an ethnographical, anthropological, or socially scientific perspective. This position paper highlighted a disconnect between architecture practice and urban social theory and established the inception of an exploration into this disconnect, which formed the basis for the research idea of the project. I believe exploring this disconnect between social theory and practice is relevant as, and to, an architect and the architecture profession and so is the subject which is observed and tested throughout this project.
A photograph of two homes and their dividing boundary wall, Dublin, Ireland.
This research idea advanced towards a design methodology around the subject of housing and privacy which encompassed my personal interest in the complexity of the urban public realm. I established a design methodology that takes social theorists and their theories and moves forward to develop representative personas. These personas became the occupants of varying types of unit – each unit in the Common Ground co-housing scheme was designed as if these theorists themselves were to occupy them. The design decisions were guided by their beliefs and hypotheses, through my own interpretation of their theories.
For the purpose of this text, this methodology will be labelled as Character Occupancy. This methodology represents the research idea, which developed as a way to help guide the design, and the decisions, of the architect. Each architectural project requires a specific entry point, be it physical elements such as site or clients, inspiration from travel, or extant designs. This project expands upon that entry point, by exploring and testing it as a research idea. Within this project, the methodology aided in bridging the gap between social theory and practice, as well as exploring the complexities and contradictions that com-prise the social, urban public realm. My previous research in Semester I identified this as a key component of good public space (Deutsche, 1998). The research idea and design project will be discussed and explained in detail throughout this dissertation, as well as outcomes and reflections. |
Research Idea
My research idea represents a progression from my first and second semester projects. The culmination of the processes and outcomes of these projects, has led to the establishment of my methodology. After Semester I’s research into urban social theories and theories about the public realm, Semester II saw the introduction of a co-housing design brief. This was a live brief developed by the co-housing group Common Ground4 to be located in Bray, Co. Wicklow. The general approach to housing in Ireland has historically favoured a private typology (McMenamin, Sheridan, & Beattie, 2019), where spaces are largely demarcated as either private or public. This is seen, for example, in the instance of walled front and back gardens throughout the country, which create physical boundaries between neighbours, fuelling the generational ‘national obsession with private-home owner-ship’ (McMenamin, Sheridan, & Beattie, 2019). This widespread, national belief of housing being a private possession, which can en-courage an inward way of living (McMenamin, Sheridan, & Beattie, 2019), not only opposes the beliefs and brief of Common Ground but also goes against the social theories of the public realm studied in Semester I5. This dichotomy between the long historical and cultural practice of private home design and living, and a co-housing group and their brief and beliefs, revealed an interesting entry point to the project, while also being pertinent to the aforementioned social theories. |
Research Question This research project has progressed several research questions and concerns, rather than perhaps the more traditional process of beginning with a singular question and framing the project as a consequence. This project is the consequence of a methodology, which has raised several core research questions or concerns throughout Semester III. The development of the research led to a multi-layered outcome: a. bridging the gap between social theory and architecture practice; b. development of a methodology that provides a framework for an architect to assess complexities, differences, and conflicts between the two ends of the bridge; and, c. impact on the role of the architect as a mediative force in this environment. The Character Occupancy methodology initially highlighted a disconnect between social theory and architecture practice. This was the research concern that initiated the project. The expanse of this subject soon became apparent while reading Adrian Forty’s ‘Words and Buildings: A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture’ (Forty, 2004), which evaluates modern architecture’s surprising inarticulacies ‘when it [comes] to describing the specific social qualities aimed for in its works.’ (Forty, 2004). It was obvious that the disconnect between social theory and practiced architecture was a widely shared issue within the architecture profession and reaches far into different realms of this profession, that the earlier research question of ‘Research Into the Disconnect Between Social Theory and Architecture Practice’ needed to be narrowed. While the concern of the disconnect between social theory and practice is still relevant to the project, it is the macro concern that encompasses and conceives more focussed concerns and hypotheses, such as the importance or role of complexity within the public realm. This complexity of the public realm is the overlapping theme in each of the studied texts in semester I. Applying the Character Occupancy method to Albert Walk allowed for an exploration of these complexities within a specific public space. The research question at this stage had advanced to ‘Research Into the Relationship Be-tween Social Theory and Architecture Practice, as Applied to a Found Public Space’. What was understood and investigated during this stage was the mediative role of the architect. Design issues such as conflict and contradiction as well as harmony and cooperation arose. This posed a choice for me as the architect to take a position, which was to counterpoint and balance these issues as opposed to attempting to resolve them, thus adopting a mediative role. Consequently, the research question has now resolved to: Highlighting and developing the mediative role of the architect in relating social theory and architecture practice in given and found spaces. |
|
RESEARCH
|
PART I
|
PART II
|