Unit 1 Methods of Investigating Written response
The nature of observation is, traditionally speaking, a passive action. As visual practitioners we aim to understand the nature of space and its inherent communicative qualities further than the average viewer. However, it is only with active criticality that we are able to separate ourselves from our previous notions of what it is to see. Perec, G (1974, p 50) summarises this best, stating ‘Nothing strikes you. You don’t know how to see’
In practice this requires a series of critical exercises. The aforementioned Perec, G (1974) provides a guide in ‘Species of Spaces and Other Pieces’. The reader is asked to consider the nature of their most mundane surroundings – ‘The Street’ being my primary source of instruction. Here, Perec asks us to consider the physicality of our chosen space – for myself, ‘The Good Mixer’, a pub billed as ‘a proper London boozer’. Observing, one becomes aware of the inconvenient use of space, speaking to the necessity of constant reinvention in London. Today, regulars and tourists spill over to isolated on-street tables, gated from the commercial centre of Camden only by portable metal. And yet, as Perec reminds us, ‘You still haven’t looked at anything, you’ve merely picked out what you’ve long ago picked out’ (p50).
It is necessary, in order to truthfully see such a place, to observe people. Where Perec advocates for objective recording – ‘People in a hurry. People going slowly. Parcels. Prudent people who’ve taken their macs.’ (p52) I find myself observing how they use the space. Here: a man using a windowsill as a cigarette holder. To his right: two women in short skirts huddling under a small canopy from the light drizzle. And everywhere there is conversation. It overlaps and fills the endless outside. There are old interactions and new, and this space has made them possible. As people leave, they go their separate ways – the proximity of the place necessity to their continued conversation.
We see this reflected in Izenour, S, Scott Brown, D, Venturi, R (1972) Learning from Las Vegas, a text that celebrates the nature of the functional everyday. Venturi, R et al. argue that ‘the Strip includes it includes at all levels, from the mixture of seemingly incongruous land uses to the mixture of seemingly incongruous advertising media… These show the vitality that may be achieved by an architecture of inclusion’. This expands upon what I found in my own independent observations – the beauty and value of observing a site can be boiled down to the human experiences we see happening there. The disorder of a site has no impact on the value it holds to its patrons. The Good Mixer may have an odd use of space, however this is not what I took from the site. The value of this space, and my observations here, were in the community found there.
The act of seeing ultimately ask us to consider the value of the ‘boring’. The value inherent in conventionality of experience, be that architectural or human, cannot be understated when observed closely. In recording and recentring the value of communication present at The Good Mixer, my investigations have asked how we, as people, move through familiar spaces. It is now my active decision to understand the act of observation as a critical practice, rooted in interaction with the everyday.
Bibliography
Perec, G (1974) Species of Spaces and Other Pieces London: Penguin
Izenour, S, Scott Brown, D, Venturi, R (1972) Learning from Las Vegas. Revised Edition. Massachusetts and London: The MIT Press