If there is one thing that struck me upon coming to Rome, it was how much Romans INTERACT in their piazzas. The word INTERACT is capitalized for emphasis. Before coming to Rome, when I used the term “public interaction” while describing my architecture projects it was to describe a gray, listless world in which imagined crowds of faceless people came to
gether on chipboard models. There was a big open space, and people would fill that space, and the world would somehow be a better place because group A would meet group B.
I understood the public as an IT, not as groups of people, big and small, and individuals, who interacted or not, who each used the space differently, at different times, who came for different reasons, and who appreciated different things. The spaces I designed “generated human interaction”, or so I claimed. Since coming here I have learned that people do not go through this world yearning to meet new people in every public space they enter. Sure, it is great to meet new people, and providing humanity a space for this to occur is admirable, but what people really need are places to delight in being alive.
This delight comes from the program that occurs in a space. That may be a place to enjoy a beautiful view or an interesting event, a place to relax, a place to watch others, a place to eat, etc. To a certain extent, it is possible to design for these things, but by attempting to design these experiences we decrease the scope of opportunities that could occur in the space. By designing an amphitheater to capture a view we create a hierarchy which often directs people downward to the bottom of the geometry. But creating a flat piazza leaves a space non-hierarchical and deters crowds from being able to enjoy the same spectacle. The best answer is often somewhere in between the two possibilities.
Everyone’s opinion of what is delightful is different, so our goal should be to allow for as many delightful experiences as possible to occur in a space. Our job as designers is to create spaces which embrace the pragmatic needs of the human, of thermal, visual, audible, and tactile comfort, and allow the delightful experiences to occur and engage as freely as possible.
In the above paragraph I listed visual delight as one of the pragmatic needs of the human. And it is true that a space must be visually pleasing, but not at the expense of tactile, audible, and thermal comfort. A fountain is not something to just look at but provides a cooling breeze in the summer, and a pleasant audible backdrop, a set of steps provides seats to rest weary legs, and colonnades provide shade.
Piazza San Pietro makes use of these three elements decisively to create a space that is at once delightful and functional. Programmatically, Saint Peters is designed for a massive group of people to great god on the doorstep of heaven. Functionally, it is designed in order to accommodate the maximum number of people to hear the pope give his blessing. It is so successful because it humbly creates a space for delight to occur while maximizing human comfort and following a prescribed program.
I originally believed that a specific program would hurt a public space. That by defining a specific use the space would suddenly become unusable for other functions. But after coming to Rome I believe that specificity is absolutely indispensible to an active, exciting piazza. Out of specificity comes a sense of purpose. That purpose is the core of the space, and the other functions fill in around it, like fruit growing around a seed in order to protect it.
My current studio project shows strong influences from the things I have learned in Rome. It incorporates three different piazzas, each designed for a different program and user. There is a public piazza which drastically changes elevation and provides a number of places for tired shoppers of the Porta Portese market to rest, as well as a direct entrance to the cafeteria which serves Temple University’s new Rome campus. Its focus on the river draws the public out and promotes individual reflection rather than public interaction. The semi-public piazza acts as a place for educated individuals to enjoy the exhibits in the main building, as well as for students to move between the studios and classrooms. There is little hierarchy or directionality in order to allow for flexible patterns of movement and for groups and individuals to navigate the space even when it is full, and to interact or not depending on their mission. This piazza is designed to allow students and gallery viewers a place to decompress from their individual pursuits. The private piazza designed just for the students is completely flat, and designed for the students to lounge on in private. The space is non-hierarchical and focuses on the users rather than the surrounding or spaces within it.
The outdoor spaces were designed first, each with their own feel, user group, program, and design scheme. The architecture was then allowed to fill in around these spaces, framing and protecting them. For the first time I see public space as more than just an important part of designing, but in many ways the foundation of design, with architecture coming afterwards.
No comments:
Post a Comment