In this class the thing that caught my attention the most is Rem’s definition for the junk space. According to him the Junk space is
“the body double of space, a territory of impaired vision, limited expectation, reduced earnestness. Junk space is a Bermuda triangle of concepts, a petri dish abandoned: it cancels distinctions, undermines resolve, confuses intention with realization. It replaces hierarchy with accumulation, composition with addition”
( http://www.scribd.com/doc/29833010/Junk-Space-Rem-Koolhaas)
I actually agreed with him that these types of the space which is not specific is not a very good space. It is just like the empty space, which is not a designed space. However these spaces might not be a good designed spaced but it would be a good financial space. We can’t say that these spaces does not give good experience to the people, it actually does, it provides more convenience to the people. As these types of space grown according to the need of the people and the convenience of the people, therefore it would benefit the people!! It would also be a more flexible use of the space and use the limited amount of the space in more efficient way. So these junk spaces might be a useful one where as the designed space might be a junk space instead!! The designed space, which is a well-designed environment for a very specific event, might not be very useful for the people who it is meant for. The space might be giving a good set of experience to the people, but if it not very convenience for the people and doesn’t not benefit the owner very well then, is it a good space? There would be also a lot of space wasted when designing space for a very specific event or to give specific experience, therefore it would make a lot more space a waste, therefore the designed space would be the one which destroyed the usage and the important of the other spaces.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น