The purpose of architecture has always been to modify the environment, so that human activities can be carried out comfortably. Every human activity or function is rich with historical and cultural significance, as well as cause and shape. Whenever the architect has to plan for any activity, it is important that he inquires into the essence and its purpose. On this notion, functionalism in architecture is born.
However, on the basis of functionalism, architecture has to satisfy pre-fixed rules, meaning the program. And such objective requirements have turned architecture into an applied science, closer to engineering rather than art. This distancing of architecture from humanity is not due to the fact that architecture is functional, but because functionalism today is too mindless. Paul Goodman, therefore discusses an elementary problem in planning, seating, to illustrate that an essential humane reference is needed, when designing for any human activity.
The author discusses seating arrangement for four types of therapy, the Freudean session, the Sullivanian face to face therapy, the Character Analysis and the Gestalt therapy. Each requires a specific seating plan, in accordance to each theory, patient and treatment.
Then, the author discusses seating plans for eating, from primitive to civilised society, and to more recent plans like the American banquet and counter. Each seating plan reflects a certain social structure and moral attitude towards eating.
The author, then, analyses religious practices, from the Roman Catholic plan, the Protestant, the Orthodox Jews and the Quakers. Each seating plan reflects religious beliefs and rituals.
Goodman discusses democratic legislatures, mainly the British House of Commons, the French Chamber, the American Senate, as well as other chambers of modern democracies.
Next, he analyses university seating plans, the Seminar, the lecture and the informal group, which differ in the knowledge that is obtained and the mode of accessing it.
Finally the author emphasises the seating plans for theatres, due to the fact that they are often overlooked. He discusses the ancient Greek Amphitheater, the Shakespearean theatre, the Broadway theatre and the movie theatre.
The author notes that all these activities can take place even without such seating plans however the architect is the one who is able to understand the essence of each activity and can modify the environment to fit it. Therefore it is important for the architect to have a broad cultural knowledge, apart from esthetic power, in order to plan for any activity. The author finalises with the belief that the architect must break through stereotypes, with his own human touch and intuition in order to create a link between architecture and humanity.
Comments