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 SAs seductively easy as it may seem, the idea of the sensitivized rhythmanalystand his/her skilled technique of instantaneously mapping observed aspects ofan urban situation have, as I see it, critical shortcomings when it comes tothe data-basis for understanding interrelatedness in dynamic and relationalpatterns (or in other words: the complexity of the rhythms). To discoverunexpected forms of interplay between multiple socio-spatial patternsrequires quite broad and detailed knowledge of how such patterns havedeveloped. This again depends upon a rather systematic investigation ofrelational patterns and systems within the urban structure. For this purpose,the structural-morphological approach (with necessary modifications, asdiscussed in the beginning of this end section) represents, as I see it, anindispensable point of entry in order to investigate observable socio-spatialphenomena and analyze dynamics of relational patterns in the urbanstructure.Compared with mapping techniques that are based on more intuitive andsubjective judgments of immediately observable architectural as well associal characteristics of an area, the relational focus on socio-spatialpatterns and systems within an urban landscape provides importantknowledge of contextual environmental characteristics that observablefluctuations can be discussed up against.The focus on socio-architectural relatedness in structural-morphologicalanalyses provides an essential basis for understanding qualitative variationsin architecture, both as preconditions for, agents in, and as products ofsocio-spatial everyday life.d) Architectural affect and social “space”Bourdieu’s concept of social “space” describes a pure social construct: It is a“space” consisting of patterns of notions about social values and meanings inrelation to one’s own and other peoples’ choice of life course and everydayaction. Bourdieu’s “space” is not physical in the sense that it has specificlocation, size or extent. It’s only a space in a figurative or metaphorical sense.The “space” contains patterns (of notions?) that can be said to be formed intwo-three directions (or dimensions): individuals and groups of peoplemanoeuvre and position themselves within and in relation to suchexperienced patterns by making choices and acting in ways that are believedto set them in an assessed direction. Through such processes the actors situatethemselves in closeness to someone or something (homologies) or inremoteness to others or other things (distinctions). In a large empirical studyof consumption practices and acts of aesthetic choice in 1970s FranceBourdieu himself gives detailed explanations of the mechanisms thatconstitute and regulate such spaces, and just as detailed representations ofhow the practice patterns come about. As accounted for earlier, one of the334