Reading Socio-Spatial Interplay - Arkitektur- og designhøgskolen i ...

R E A D I N G S O C I O - S P A T I A L I N T E R P L A Y – C O N C L U D I N G R E F L E C T I O N Siconographical aspects of public streetscapes and its related commercialspaces (home decoration and refurbishment of private apartments are thus notincluded my analysis here).By maintaining a structural-morphological focus on relational orders andsystems, the implication is that one must investigate how observable newmicro-architectural patterns relate to previously existing architecturalpatterns, systems and structural elements, as well as investigate how theyrelate to variations in emerging socio-spatial practices.The analyses of recently developed micro-morphological andiconographical patterns (chapter 5) shows a greater multiplicity in patternsthan what’s usual to find in analyses on the level of morphological systems.These analyses of multiple patterns also reveal interplay between the variousnewly produced patterns, at the same time as we can see how the newpatterns play up against possibilities and constraints given by the localarchitectural system as well as relational dynamics between patterns ofdifferences in the existing architectural structure (chapter 4).b) Spatial dialectics empirically observed and in theoryCentral issues in the post-structural critique of structuralism and of greatmodern theories in general, are their explanatory limitations related tounderstanding interplay, complex dynamics of differences, multiplicity andotherness, as well as interrelations between individual spaces of action andstructural boundaries. In my search for an approach to understand socioarchitecturalinterplay I found the analytic perspectives of Deleuze &Guattari, De Certeau and Lefebvre clarifying. Their discussions of how allsocieties or processes of societal development must be seen as related todynamic interplay between different kinds and aspects of human territorialagency, were particular useful for developing an understanding of thelimitations of a structural-morphological approach.By the use of synthesising theoretical discussions these theorists elucidatehow such dialectical patterns develop and also how different aspects anddimensions of social and spatial production are interrelated. In thesetheoretical discussions the term “spatial” refers to a power- and practicerelatedfeature that is not directly related to, nor in no way limited to,concrete aspects of architectural space. All the mentioned theorists make useof pairs of metaphorical concepts in order to elucidate interrelations betweendifferent elements of the dialectics they have set out to describe. Their pairsof metaphorical concepts – Nomad vs State, Tactics vs Strategies, Spaces ofrepresentation vs Representations of space, etc. – are all used to describeuneven power-relations, as elements of a political critique of capitalism, statepolitics or the reductionist practice of professional actors in urban and spatialdevelopment.321