a conversation about space - physical and virtual - how it shapes our interactions and how our interactions shape it
2 Mar
I wanted to go back to a post Anne-Laure wrote some days ago about drifting along. I agree… not sure we lean more toward the physical space.To me, “Drift” is a word too tied to the aimless wandering of the Situationists. I am not interested in aimless wandering (though you may argue that even in aimlessness there is an aim). To make sense of the eclectic conversation, one necessarily needs to think from the “right brain” (Studies have shown that right brained are global thinkers (instead of left brained who are sequential thinkers) and arrive faster to solutions; they are innovators though may have difficulties to explain why they came to the solution. A quick read for info, a book by BĂ©atrice MillĂȘtre ).Anyway, having a global mind seems to fit our era of overflow of information and channels. I like the word “encompassing” better for that it means to “include comprehensively”; it is “rounded” (has the word “compass” in it), suggests a fluidity, space in-between the things it encompasses; it encompasses the word “passing” which fits the Deleuzian mobile minds (Whom I believe are right brained).What is there to encompass? We are Building Space With Words. It is difficult to encompass how and why we are building a SPACE, which SPACE? WITH, indicating the tool, words, which and what WORDS? In the physical word, building space happens not only through brick and mortar but also through “inhabiting”.Habit-Habitat-Habitude (Habitude is the French word for “habits”; Habit means clothing). So what you wear, how you represent yourself in everyday life (Goffman, 1959) links to rituals and to space making. It is not so different from what happens in the digital world. The WORDS that we blog and exchange, like clothing are also meant to mark a territory, building a (new?) discourse on space and the digital.So what have we been saying?
1. That space making in the digital word isn’t so (it is, but how?) different than space making in the physical world. In fact Anne-Laure mentions rightly the words propinquity and privacy which belong to both worlds.
2. The space we are talking about is multiple:
a. Physical: the installation
b. Digital: the blog
c. Mental: the discourse
3. We build space with words also to advance our knowledge of place making (building) so to suggest spaces/experiences/services that are relevant today.
One Response for "Encompassing"
Thanks Yasmine for this thoughtful post and for picking up where I left the discussion.
I like the word encompassing and I guess it’s the positive perspective… or maybe the answer to my question: drifting along? I was wondering if we have been drifting along… I had in mind a raft drifting on the water with the idea that maybe we were getting lost… although I personally did not see the absence of a single univocal discourse as a problem… (Yet I thought that maybe it could be seen as one…).
However I think encompassing is what I value and what I think research, thinking should aim at.
Thanks for pushing further my questions on the relationships between physical and virtual spaces. I guess if we agree that physical and virtual (digital) spaces are not so different (esp. as one sees physical spaces not only as define by material properties but also by mores, practices and routines), the question remains: How? that’s what I’ve been trying to do by taking some of the affordances we proposed with John Weeks and seeing how one enacts / can enact them in a digital context.
As for the three dimensions of / three types of space you are mentioning - physical, digital and mental, here are a couple of thoughts:
- if we take the installation as being the physical space and the blog the digital one, the interesting part for me is that the installation is created by excerpts from the blog projected (live) on the fabric panels. Hence, the physical and the digital are intermeshed… Discourse becomes in a way the bridge, the link between both… the common element too.
- I think that these relationships also make sense if we think beyond the installation. The intermeshing then happens as you sit in a cafe, in an airport or in a park and you are at the same time sending email, posting on a blog, chatting, or just sending an sms.
- I can see how these three dimensions mirror the three dimensions of mobility that you suggested but I’m wondering how you see discourse as mental. I tend to have a more “materialistic” of discourse, in the sense that I see it as enacted in different contexts, through different media, through different artifacts.
- I think a useful direction to go through would be to explore the relationship between space and place, specifying it might helps us answer some of the questions we raised.
Thanks again for this great conversation.
Cheers,
al
Leave a reply