Group 1 - Library Duality

Project Members

John Owen - #200110531 - (jowen at sfu.ca)

Katie Holmes - #200135064 - (me at katieholmes.com)

Akash Murgai - #200083547 - (amurgai at sfu.ca)

Ava M. Famili - #200108834 - (mail at avafamili.com)

Project Goal

To study and compare the social networks at SFU Burnaby and Surrey. Our main focus will be the libraries in both campuses, and how they interact with, and are received by the users. On one hand, the Surrey library is nested away, only accessed if one needs to get something from there, whereas the Burnaby library is always visible, creating a dynamic space within the physical space that is already there.

Methodologies

We will, for the most part, use Robert Venturi’s “Learning from Las Vegas” as a guideline for our space and flow analysis of the two campuses. In addition to this reading, we will also rely on Christopher Alexander’s “A Pattern Language” to further illustrate the dynamics of the working space in question. Other considerations that our team will focus on will be to incorporate ethnographic research by listening to what the users have to say about their experiences, observing what they do in the provided space, and construct a visual representation of our user’s flow for the purposes of targeting criticality/complexity within the provided space.

Technologies considered

We believe that an intervention from our analysis should be three part, and namely look into the following factors:

- External Technological Impacts that are affecting the space.

- Internal Technological Influences that are affecting the space.

- Potential areas for Technological intervention.

Assumption:

We are subconsciously enticed to move towards electronic devices and computers when faced with complexity, we have become accustomed to organizing and guiding ourselves using digital devices and computers.

Conclusion: (based on observations made thus far concerning both campuses)

Previously, prior to computers, people would enter library spaces with specific goals, to extract information from books. Adding computers to a library space increases the number of people using the space, however it adds complexity to what user's get out of the library's experience, which in many cases can be nothing but an msn conversation.

Users are naturally drawn to computers or terminals that are visible from entrances, this usually results in interaction with the computer and not the environment. This prevents further exploration of the space, largely because computers can facilitate the majority of user’s needs, therefore impacting their interest in exploring/hunting through physical space.

Another note from Taylor's reading is the following:

Decisions, therefore, are the outcome of the interplay of fate and freedom; circumstances beyond one's control (naturally moving towards a computer) bring one to a crossroads (digital or traditional, not in the quote, just referenced) where a decision must be made.

This decisive crossroads is what complexity theorists of chaos and complexity call a "bifurcation point" where to distinct alternatives or"choices" are open to a system.

While uncertainty associated with the "choice" or "decision" occurring at the bifurcation point remains irreducible, the realization of one rather than another alternative reduces uncertainty and thereby increases information. Once symmetry is shattered and equilibrium lost, bifurcations can cascade until they threaten or spin out of control. The more bifurcations proliferate, the more decisions become possible, and the more decisions are made, the greater the changes in system.

... Order --> Complexity --> Chaos --> Complexity --> Order ...

which applies to our case as:

... Library --> Problem Space --> Computers/Technology --> Problem Space --> Library ...

Referenced from Mark C. Taylor's Moment of Complexity pg.146

Case Study

Gender

-Head Count

-Rough count of how many people are in the library

Buzz and Noise Levels

-If we could record audio from a digi cam for this that would be great

Technology Used

Laptops

-Are people bringing technology into the library that replaces their need to use the library resources?

Games – Handheld, laptops etc

Cell Phones – Hear any? See any in use?

Computer Terminals

-Are interactions occurring between people at these terminals?

Environment Deconstruction

-Visibility (Open space with high levels of visibility for finding people / book sections)

-Signage/Wayfinding

-Lighting

-Color

-Textures

-Seating

-Meeting areas

-Human Response to Environment

-Flows through space

-Group Behavior

When groups enter the library, do they stick together? Or part in an effort to take care of individual tasks, does the space encourage social activity or facilitate it in any way?

- Hot Spots of Activity

- Externals

- Number of entry points

- Accessibility

- Entrance Count

Stand at an entry point to a library, for 1 minute, do a quick count on the number of people entering,do the same for exiting in another test.

External Signage that brings people to the library, are there trails throughout the campus that bring people to the library? How long are those trails? Do they extend from main campus entry points and parking lots?

Revisions from Oct.5, 2006

Concept: Architectural spaces facilitating emergent social climate systems

Is there any higher order intelligence evident in the flows - can the gorupings and movements of people be seen as akin to life forms with a higher order organizational motivation or tendency which may not be intended or even evident to the individual community members involved?

Description:

Each individual contributes their identity to an environment, whether intentionally (consciousness > identity > marketing) or unintentionally (passive, silent). Architecture and space design are capable of manipulating human movement (flows) and facilitating hotspots for interaction and gathering (clustering).

Clustering and flows influence the perception of spaces, in facilitating activity, architecture and design create a sense of buzz. Buzz leads to personality, attitude, and overall activity (popularity), all of which create energy; life.

This leads to:

An analysis of the ways that the social systems anticipate and respond to their architectural conditions.

In an effort to:

Study how participants organize themselves based on the buzz created by designed spaces.

Which in our case is:

Examining how social systems currently cope with space design variability (SFU Surrey, SFU Burnaby).

Link to our mock up of our analysis/discussion space:

http://www.johnowen.com/401/framed.jpg

Drafts

Link to the draft page - LDD

References

Article on Canadian Design - http://www.core77.com/reactor/canadesign.asp

Online based community development tool for organized systems - www.sutori.com

Weaver "Science and Complexity" - http://www.ceptualinstitute.com/genre/weaver/weaver-1947b.htm

Mark C. Taylor - Moment of Complexity

Steven Johnson - Emergence

Article on Responsive Architecture - http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/008511.php

TalkSFU.ca Forum for SFU students surrounding various issues - http://www.talksfu.ca/

IAT 401 TA, Vicki Moulder, Comments 09/28/06

Your project points out the tension between architecture and the physical use of space. The interesting challenge will be to see how can you conduct a “usability test” on a physical site? Or can we remodel something that’s physical and present it in a virtual form to test how people would navigate the space differently i.e. if the library was in a different location?

toyo ito may or may not be of interest to you?

toyo ito is one of the world's most innovative and influential architects.

ito is known for creating extreme concept buildings, in which he seeks to

fuse the physical and virtual worlds.

http://www.designboom.com/eng/interview/ito.html

IAT 401 Niranjan Rajah, Comments 10/03/06

So what aspects of the social movement will be tracked. And how will you compare and contrast them. Will you develop an analysis of the movement graphically, dynamically perhaps. What are the qualities you will be looking for – For instance - will you try to identify structures or processes like

1. Grid vs Network

2. Clustering and Coping

to build in some complexity/emergence based criteria in your comparative analysis -of the flows. An interesting question is if there is any higher order intelligence evident in the flows – can the groupings and movements of people be seen as akin to life forms with a higher order organizational motivation or tendency which may not be intended or even evident to the individual community members involved.

If something like this can be established – what are the implications for space design in the future – what about responsive architectural structures. Eg. http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/008511.php

Looking good so far but no movement since original post. lets see more of what you have been doing posted here on the WIKI.