Personal space.  A term that we all understand, yet constantly misinterpret.  Perhaps it is because we all define our own personal space differently, changing those definitions with place and time and, well, general whims of fancy.

I walked past a small apartment complex earlier today and noticed something unusual- its residents were actually using their communal courtyard.   At first, I wrote them off as a bunch of communal hippies.  But then, in a second, more fruitful thought, I wondered what about the space encouraged such extensive sharing.  Even hippies are still affected psychologically by imposed physical boundaries and can be territorial- yet here, there were no boundaries- rather the space itself specifically encouraged community.

Americans typically don’t share space very well.  Our quintessential family homes attest to that- very rarely now do you find even siblings sharing rooms.   Our homes, while private, are really a series of boundaries- from the public walk area, to a threshold, to guest areas and private beds and baths.  Much of the fun in home design is about navigating these boundaries, pushing them backwards and forwards according to both the designer and the client’s whims.  The same holds true in multi-household residences such as this apartment complex.  I have found that residents rarely occupy the landscaped gardens and public hallways so typical of apartment complexes throughout our nation; rather these semi-private spaces act not only as a boundary to the public-at-large but also amongst the residents themselves.  There is no feeling of ownership to be had in these semi-private areas except by that of the nameless landlord.  It is private space, but not for real use.  Each apartment is abruptly cut off from these places by doors, and lack of visual and physical access.  Even hippies that live in these sorts of places rarely occupy these them in a permanent manner such as what was happening at the particular complex that I passed.

The answer as to why this place as opposed to others is simply because this complex had a more successful, and less harsh, series of boundary markers.  Although the complex itself was L-shaped with its courtyard fronting the road, the yard was fairly well enclosed.  Physically separated from the street by a vine-covered brick wall, this courtyard had one access point- an arched opening containing a staircase.  Change in elevation has long been proved as another way of forming physical boundary, just as good as walls.  With both of these forms of boundary acting together, the courtyard acted more like an interior courtyard of a home in the Mediterranean style.

Its residences, numbering under 10 had a communal entry boundary that successfully yet subtlety transitioned them from the street, and once again from the courtyard to the residences, the boundary line, while present, was blurred. Each residence had been given a large porch area covered by a communal trellis with vines.  The trellis acted as a subtle separation of outdoor space versus courtyard for the residences; yet it was not so harsh as to not still encourage interaction.  Instead, it allowed the semi-public space of the courtyard to smoothly transition into a porch-like area for each residence, and then the residence itself.  The subtle separation of street from courtyard, then courtyard from residence is what makes this apartment successfully encourage community- something typical American apartment complexes lack.

Although boundary lines are subject to change, proper clarity and smooth transitioning along them can make spaces more successful.

If someone offered you a substantial reward for a good deed you preformed for them, would you take it? Would your value system stop you?p>

this story I recently read by Oscar Wilde, the main characters, an American family, turn down an expensive piece of jewelry on the premise that such extravagance does not fit their hard- working, Puritanism-based American values. Despite the fact that the scene was meant as a jest by the author upon these Americans who had taken up residence at a British country estate, it started me thinking. America’s values shifted profoundly in the late 19th century and early 20th century, from that of a sparse lifestyle fulfilled by hard work to that of the consumer-based society. By the 1950s, consumerism had become the American norm. And now that this lifestyle is coming to haunt us in the current crisis, will there be some sort of shifting in our core values again?

Most likely, there will be some changes. We have long known that consumption at the rate we have been achieving cannot be sustained. I do not see us transitioning back into some primitive form of life- globalization and modern technology have achieved too much good for that ever to happen- but I do foresee a balance occurring between the two outlooks, thus creating a brand new value system.

The shift is already becoming evident in many of the ways we approach our lives now.  “Green” and “sustainable” are certainly the catchphrases of the day. In an area a little closer to my own expertise, there is a definite shift in demand for the types of architectural spaces. For example, in imitation of the first shift where the family farm foreclosed to the suburban home; the urban condo is the current hottest commodity, and perhaps the only item selling. Although this residential space still supports the consumer lifestyle Americans know and love, it does so in a way that doesn’t require major expenditure in order to reach the places in which we love to consume, thus cutting out a good portion of our consumption. It is not a return, but rather a step towards the next shift in our value system.

Perhaps another shift we will see, or at least one I hope to see, is a desire for quality over quantity.  Rather than consuming everything in sight, Americans will simply have to get pickier about how they spend their money. I’m hoping they will learn to invest in quality spaces as well as goods. However, this may be simply a pipe dream on my part.

What sort of changes do you see occurring in the ways Americans live? What do you hope for?

I was walking down the street near my house one beautiful day, lost in thought.  At the time, I was marveling at the beauty of the brightly colored turn-of-the-century homes that fill my neighborhood when my attention was caught by the juxtaposition of some brand new infill.  This new house was just as nice as the older homes on the street, quite well done with obvious ties to some of the more prestigious local firms. I would safely categorize it into the “successful infill” category in my architectural file.  Yet, despite its overall success, I still have one slight complaint to make, a point I would like to call to attention as a plea to my fellow architects.

It is an absolute necessity to make a good front porch.

On all of the older houses surrounding the new piece of infill, large, comfortable, and obviously well-used front porches existed.  On the new home, a small, harsh platform had been tacked on to the front of the dwelling, and looked as though it had never been used.  Not even a deckchair had been placed upon it.  Upon noticing this fact the otherwise beautifully designed dwelling immediately went on my personal “uninhabitable” list.  Perhaps the home would not have made this list if it had not been so surrounded by successful front porches, but as it was, I could not help but compare. Plus I knew that if I ever actually lived there, I would daily be jealous of my neighbor’s porches.

It is not that contemporary architects do not know how to make good front porches.  The criteria for the development of outdoor spaces, like indoor spaces, is well-taught in the architectural curriculum.  Even so, it seems to be a modern trend to overlook the importance of the front porch.  Instead the porch is treated it as an afterthought, as it was in this particular new home.  It is added, and some of the design necessities met, but not all, and as a result, the porches fail. 

Good porches incorporate thoughtful location/orientation, sizing, separation, and sight lines.  It takes all of these criteria, not just some, to create a successful space that will be utilized by its inhabitants.  Older homes always have good porches, most likely due to the need of cool, well-lit spaces in times before electricity and its sibling, air-conditioning.   These spaces are large enough to comfortably sit multiple people, like a living room.  Successful porches, in fact, are literally outdoor living rooms.  Like other living spaces, they are oriented to provide the best light and views.  They are often sheltered from the elements by roofs, and elevated off the ground.  Both of these architectural moves separate the space from the street, thus providing its occupants with a sort of transparent shield.  Everyone, both porch and street dwellers, are still seen but fail to interact “on common ground,” thus providing privacy for both parties. Even without a roof or a raised platform, porches are provided with other means of separation, such as fences or vegetation.  Often, many of these moves are employed at once, in endless variety.  Yet sight lines, particularly with the street, are always maintained.  These sight lines enliven the room, providing it with ever-changing scenery, like a television.  Thus, with these criteria met, a successful porch arises.

With the rise of modern amenities, successful porches are less of a necessity than they have been historically.  Yet their necessity in the creation of a vital street has never disappeared.  Successful, occupied porches extend the warmth and vitality of the home onto the street, thus creating a warm and vital neighborhoods, places where people want to be.  Successful neighborhoods then create vibrant towns and cities, which contribute to successful states, and so on.  When you think about it, so much of the success of our space depends upon the public front we put on our private spaces, such as porches.  And somehow, afterthoughts just never cut it.

Over the past few weeks, energy sourcing has become a hot topic.  With oil costs on the permanent rise and a draining war in the mideast, it seems everyone is suddenly eager to research and invest in alternatives.  Every magazine, blog, etc. has something to say about where we should be looking for energy to power our modern lifestyles.  It certainly makes for interesting reading- one business magazine that I recently read had articles on everything from ethanol production to the future of plastics and hydrogen fuel.  Since the magazine was targeted at the businessman, the articles mainly focused upon the investment opportunities and risks, and the people already leading the charge for each source.  While incredibly informative and smartly-written, this magazine, like many other discussion of this topic that I have recently crossed, still failed to address the underlying cause of our energy crisis- our energy-intensive lifestyle.

We depend upon energy.  We live far from the things we need/desire, preferring to ship ourselves and the items hundreds and thousands of miles.  Our networks of mere existence are incredibly far-flung.  Imagine, for a second, if these were somehow interrupted; where would you get your food, your water, your clothes and books?  How far do you go on a daily basis for work, or even simple groceries?  How far do those people and things travel to get to you?

Here’s an short experiment that I encourage everyone to try:  for two days, eat only local food.  Define local for yourself, then go shopping, and try to think about where even the ingredients that make up your food purchases originate, and see how well you can do.

A few of my friends are enrolled in a class where this simple experiment is one of the assignments.  I joined them for breakfast one day, and despite how abundant local food production is in our valley, my friends were getting quite frustrated even putting together a simple breakfast.

Many companies have begun to track their production in terms of environmental costs, and are using this knowledge for marketing purposes (also a topic covered in that business magazine).  The tides are turning in some portion of the world in regards to a deeper understanding of our energy dependence,  but most of the current discussion still circles around energy alternatives versus reducing dependence.  Instead of talking about the need to live closer to the things we need, such as grocery stores and schools and offices, we are focusing our energy on cars that get 100mph.  Although this is also an important step, it is not a well-rounded approach and does not in the end, solve much more than the oil dependence.  What happens when the cost of electricity begins to skyrocket because everyone is plugging in their cars?  The emergence of ethanol has already helped to drive the cost of corn, and therefore general food, up, thus contributing more problems to the crisis than its production is solving.  Despite which prevailing energy source wins this current clamoring to be the next energy source, we still are dependent upon it.  Not enough time and thought is going towards also providing a solution to this portion of the energy crisis.

For those of you who have been reading my blog from the beginning, you know it has been sort of an experiment for me in regards to relating my thoughts and designs to people both within and out of the architecture field.  Now that the site is over six months old, I thought it time to reflect on its successes and failures.

As far as giving me a public outlet for my thoughts, it has certainly been successful. Those who have read it seem to have a much better understanding of my interests within my field, even sending me articles and other items they feel I would enjoy.  I am especially pleased by the interest it has aroused in those around me who have little architectural or design background.

On a less successful note, the blog is not nearly as well read as I would have thought I could achieve, and I am somewhat at a loss as to how to expand its readership at this point.  The site is also not visited outside of potential employers, school colleagues, family, and friends.  However, I feel these particular goals are much more long-term and of much less importance than improving my writing skills and supplementing my visual portfolio with written thought process.  Since I feel my writing has greatly improved (along with my day-to-day speaking abilities) and this supplemental written material has been very  much of interest in my recent interviews with potential employers, this blog is therefore a success.

The online portfolio has acted as a great introduction to potential employers, though I have found it difficult to discuss projects over a computer monitor.   I have had to also create a tangible hard copy version to pour over in interviews.  It simply seems to be more comfortable for all involved, surprisingly myself included.  I imagine this would hold true if pitching yourself in person to a client as well.  So saving paper has not been achieved, although this site’s role as a paperless introduction has been a resounding success.

Thus far this website has garnered me one unsought job interview, a long-term goal which I was delighted to have achieved so early.  It didn’t work out due to location and timing issues, but it was nonetheless extremely encouraging.  I have no doubt this website is and will continue to be very beneficial to me, and therefore a very good, if slightly time-consuming, venture on my part.

Thank you to those who have been supportive of my experiment here.  I do plan to continue it well into the future.  I think it will always be a fabulous place for me to “play” and “think,” especially as I enter the much more serious real world of architecture.  I hope you continue to read and give me feedback, I really do love it.

Yesterday I was riding around Portland with a friend when I commented upon the large number of homes for sale around us.  My friend, who is currently looking to purchase, explained to me how homeowners are refusing to acknowledge the market depression and still advertising their homes for the same prices they would have pulled a year ago.  Hence why so many were for sale- the typical number go on the market, and then stay on the market due to overpricing.  So when the next round go for sale, they join an already overpopulated market, making my short ride through the city look as though the place was turning into a ghost town.

The amount of homes available within the city certainly alarmed me.  I began to wonder how the suburbs were faring, if this was the state of decent neighborhoods within one of the most desirable U.S. cities.   I imagined whole new suburbs appearing by these massive construction corporations who cannot afford to stop building sitting there and rotting due to lack of clientele.  My friend joked it was the turn of reverse gentrification, with the suburbs now becoming the place for squatters and crime.

Although it was meant as a joke, the comment made an impression on my mind.  Reverse gentrification, as she put it, has already started happening in quite a few cities since the nineties.  The yuppies are purchasing cheap parcels in downtown, fixing them up, and moving in.  The poor get pushed out, and currently there is little thought or effort to figure out where these multitudes go.  In Portland, where virtually all neighborhoods have been gentrified, the “trouble areas” literally have moved to the suburbs.

It will be strange to see the problems that will arise.  The suburbs are not built for people without plenty of spare cash.  They require a significant amount of gas money in order to drive to work, the grocery store, entertainment.  Those who cannot drive, namely youth, already suffer from lack of stimulation, often turning to petty crime in their idleness.  Once these become the homes of multitudes without the cash to constantly fill up their gas tanks, what will happen?  Will the class divide become literal as the rich have no need whatsoever to venture into the outer lands of the poor? Or will many choose to refuse the suburbs, staying within the cities as homeless?

The gentrification of cities is currently a celebrated subject.  It has made inner cities vibrant again.  But when revitalization fails to strike a balance with all the social classes, I wonder what its future holds.

Wintertime in the Northwest is a wonderful time for reading. Among the books I recently unearthed in my local library was REM Koolhaas’ Delirious New York, an urban architectural history of the city that he penned in 1978. I mentioned this publication earlier as a unique example of a book making an architect a star long before his building career. It also chronicles a city that I recently spent some time in, and examines it on the level of urban design, a subject I have always found engrossing. As such, I thought to pick up this odd little history and give it some first-hand thought. I am not nearly done yet, but I thought to go ahead and mention it for reasons other than its actual content. That analysis shall be left for a later entry.

I find this work worth more immediate mention because of the way it managed to capture my attention by the end of the first chapter. I already understand why this particular book elevated its author to the level of architectural celebrity upon its publication. It accomplishes a task that many non-fiction writers fail to deliver- it is well written enough to be entertaining. Not only are his theories of the city unusual and intriguing, but they are presented in a way that is clear, concise, and engrossing. And well-reasoned, of course. I find myself getting drawn into the book in the same way I get absorbed into some completely ludicrous statement that I cannot reason away simply.

Not to say that the theories presented in this book are ludicrous. They are more surprising. Trends that I never noticed seem so blatantly clear that I wonder how I ever missed them before. The true trademark of a convincing argument, and a good read. I highly recommend it to anyone with an interest in urban design, New York City, or just plain good nonfiction writing.

No post last week or this week as I have been hard at work on the more technical aspects of this website.  However, I thought to share a group project I did for one of my classes last week.

The class is a seminar on Green Building Structures, and for this project we had to invent a green structural component and then speculate on its performance.  My group invented the EcoPaper Beam, a supposedly light,strong and easy to recycle spanning alternative.  There are lots of inherent problems as it was a initial idea meant to spur discussion in class, but take a look and see what you think.

I recently started watching this DVD series, Architectures, and was so impressed that I thought to share.  Architectures is a 5-disc series of a television show that used to be recorded in France, and it is absolutely one of the best educational programs I have watched in quite a while.  Unlike many of the educational programs out there on television now, this show does not just skim the surface, noting the architect and showing pretty pictures, but really delves in deep to each project.  If the architect is still alive, the producers have interviewed them.  They also model each building, and most episodes use still shots of these during various times of construction to illustrate spatial or structural sequencing.  Even the issues surrounding the way each project was commissioned, funded, and sited are explored, as these issues play a heavy hand in the resulting project.  Then, if the project has been around for a substantial amount of time, they explore its cultural acceptance- how people have actually used the building (usually different than the architect intended), its maintenance problems, etc.  The best part is that the producers are not afraid to be critical when needed.

The buildings chosen for the series run the gamut of construction from the past 150 years, ever since the introduction of modern materials and non-classical thought.  Most of the buildings are located in France most likely due to limited funds, but some are international.  A featured building is chosen not necessarily due to its greatness,  but because of its substantial effort in tackling modern architectural problems.  These problems include social agendas (how buildings create interaction/isolation), structural ingenuities, and spatial organization.

It is definitely a low-budget production.  For example, at one point during a sweep of one of the buildings on the first disc, the cameraman runs into a door, and the producers have to keep it in the final cut.  Honestly, the mistake was funny, although it was obviously not meant to be.  But, despite the pitiful funding, the show is extremely well-done, incredibly informative, and fascinating to watch.  It is most certainly on my recommendations list.

Last night I attended a panel discussion about the cultural phenomenon Facebook.  The event, sponsored by University Housing, promised to be interesting- a mix of ex-social revolutionist, baby-boomer faculty and undergraduate student panelists set to discuss the topic with a predominantly undergraduate audience (the main users of the website).  The 2-hour long discussion hit on a number of interesting questions pertaining to the privacy and security of the users, the cultural implications large online communities have on the value of friendship and personal relations, and its place in the business world, particularly marketing.

The discussion began with the panelists throwing out a multitude of numbers astounding enough that I would like to share them- Facebook boasts 60 million user profiles, with 250,000 new members being added each day.  On college campuses, the place where this phenomenon originated, 95% of students have profiles.  Since it expanded its membership opportunities a year ago to those beyond university settings, 85% of incoming freshmen already have profiles.  The number of older member profiles is still small due to its youthful origin, but those numbers are growing as well.  Also, due to its ability to upload photos for sharing, it is the largest online repository for personal photo albums, with an average 44 photos per user.  The most astounding fact I have saved for last- this site has only been around since February 24, 2004.  All of this has occurred in just four years.

The question that was burning on my mind for most of this discussion was what happens when this site, and its users, mature?  Currently, it is mainly a youth phenomenon, a place to display and share your private self with friends.  Its main body of users are either still in college, or just graduated.  Much of the information shared pertains to general likes/dislikes. Photos display friendly outings, vacations, or parties attended.  These are sorts of things that everyone does, now and forever, generation after generation.  But for the first time, it is being publicly documented in an extremely personal way.   As its users age, it becomes a mini-biography, a public account of who, what, when, and where a particular person has been over the years.

The cultural implications have already been showing up.  Although no major social revolution has thus far been attempted, minor protest groups formed by users have caused universities to think twice about certain decisions, such as changing collegiate logos.  Students have been ousted from academic settings due to photo documentation of such actions as drinking in the dorms or tearing down goal posts after big games.  Even the face of dating, as one of the audience members demonstrated last night, is changing.  Now, because it is common when meeting someone new to become “Facebook friends,” much of the small talk that usually occurs on first dates becomes obsolete, as the information has already been provided online.  A level of prescreening occurs before the first date even happens.  The same is often true on the friendship level.  This site, and others like it, has the potential to impact the very core of how we relate to one another socially.

The world of big business, already so engrained in modern life, cannot be counted out of this social phenomenon much longer either.  The bevy of personal statistics and networks are much too desirable for marketing companies looking for the next way to gain customers.  Already there have been attempts by corporations to infiltrate the site, and some have been successful despite user protests.  Facebook, after all, is not just a social community site- it is a publicly traded company.  As such, Facebook has made deals with other business to track such things as user’s online purchases and then release the information to the users friend networks (Project Beacon).  Currently, due to user protests, the onslaught is being implemented in optional stages such as with this project.  However, it is the next level of marketing and as such the aggressive world of business will only be held off for so long.

On a another business note, as Face book’s users age and enter the professional world, the implications of sharing your personal life publicly become potentially detrimental- a tell-all biography available to not only your friends but also your boss and clients.  As this reality sets in along with the knowledge information is being used by business for marketing purposes, does the use of Facebook change?  Do people get more guarded?  Or does the plethora of personal documentation cause a shift in social values?  Since the 1920’s, public morality as determined by an overarching societal code has been continually disappearing, heading instead towards a society where truly “anything goes,” and each individual must rely upon himself or herself to create a code of personal ethics.  Is Facebook, and its potential implications, another step in that process?  Although I personally see this latter thought as a far-fetched as it would require a massive shift in societal values even still, I am interested to see how this phenomenon develops into maturity

Community sites like Facebook truly are part of the shift to Internet 2.0, the next phase of the information age’s transformation of modern society.  Such Internet use penetrates to the core of our social interactions and lifestyle choices.  Its implications have yet to completely manifest themselves due to their youth, but they could spell major change.  It will be interesting to watch.