"The Anthropology of Space: An Organizing Model" written by Edward T. Hall informs us on the importance of SPACE. However, this isn't the typical kind of space most architects are aware of. Instead, he focuses on the differences between WHAT one sees, and HOW one sees. For example, a room or space may look aesthetically pleasing, but is it's functionality appropriate for the peoples expected experience in the room?
There are a couple types of spaces that are important to man. There is the "fixed featured space", where man is territorial. Whether we realize it or not, we have both invisible and visible lines of territory. It's a proxemic level of space that is very important to our comfort.
There is also the type of space that applies differently to different cultures, but one that allows people to 'let their guards down' or one that provides privacy. For instance, a house and an office allow people to have two separate and incompatible personalities throughout their lives. The office space creates a different environment where the person may have a 'facade', while their house is where they can be themselves without worry.
A house also provides SPACE in another way. It has defined rooms (or spaces) for different purposes. This may be taken for granted by us, but it is a relatively new idea. Even spaces there may effect the moods of people according to their own personal tastes. Some people like really high ceilings and open spaces, while others might feel more comfortable with a low and 'homey' design.
More importantly though, large and crowded places are effected by the designed space. This is because if there is no sense of space it can be dangerous. Also, I thought a funny quote was "People who 'live in a mess' or a 'constant state of confusion' are those who fail to classify activities and artifacts according to a uniform, consistent, or predictable spatial plan." Also, "To be disoriented in space is to be psychotic." So true.
Humphry Osmond's studies and designs in this article are what made me see the relations between Babette's feast and the sense of design and space. Osmond studied the relationship between furniture and communication. For instance, is the space designed so that people will have good conversations? One of his discoveries was that people who sit corner to corner have the most conversations, rather than people facing eachother or side by side. In the film, the table hardly had any conversation. There were a couple possible reasons- one because the food was incredibly tasty and distracting- another because the table was designed in a manner that did not consider communication- and three because of the cultural differences between the people.
Hall mentioned that there are pieces of information that we leave out when we communicate and we take those unsaid things for granted, where as another culture would be completely confused by that missing information. In Babettes Feast the general would often say something and then everyone else would just nod their heads or get the wrong meaning. Design should be able to fill those gaps so that it is not awkward, it should be able to speak for the unspoken words- which is the function of Hall's classification system.
Design and space are definitely present though in the area that Babette was working. Similar to the importance of separate areas mentioned above, Babette had her own space for cooking. She was able to prepare a large feast and move extremely fast without worrying about her appearance, while her guests were able to enjoy a relaxing, and calm setting in a separate space. I think babettes feast was designed well, but could have definitely improved on some of the above issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment