Research Summary

“Urban environments as visual art or as social settings? - A review” – by R. K.

Jarvis
Introduction:
The paper talks about the working methods of urban designers and their approach while
designing an urban setting. It is described as a mystery and is compared with a ‘Black Box’ due to
its secretive trait. Whereas the input and output of the process is known by all and kept out open,
the process still remains undocumented. The risk is that if the process is not explored, urban
design will be regarded as mere building architecture instead of planning of a social place. To
meet the current needs of environmental enhancement and small area design approach the
process must be understood properly. The paper focuses on the urban design theories for the
exploration of design process rather than case studies. There are two types of approaches which
are identified by the author, one which emphasizes on the visible form whereas the other one
which talks about public experiences at urban environments. The languages are also different in
these two approaches. The visual approach talks about the aesthetic beauty and the social
approach talks about the behavioural matters. The author has tried to form a positive
relationship between the two methods which are very different from each other but if brought
closer can build up the potential for a better practice.
Method:

The paper is further chapterized into three parts where each of the sub-chapters focuses on the
methodologies followed by the famous urban designers and theorists. The first one is a visual
approach, second one is a social approach whereas the third one introduces a new synthesis of
theory and practice. The sub-chapters are further divided into segments where each segment
talks about a certain designer who has followed that particular approach in his/her designs and
theoretical ideas. A framework for the comparative evaluation of the ideas is also given.
The author begins with discussing the artistic tradition in urban design. Works of various urban
designers like Camillo Sitte, Le Corbusier, Gordon Cullen, Roy Worksett are deliberated in this
section.
Camillo Sitte proposes that to achieve all the beauties of art one must organize urban spaces
following certain principles derived from sensitive observation of ancient, medieval, baroque and
renaissance examples. Most of his ideas focussed on sensual visual impressions that a place
leaves on people’s minds. Whereas he realized the functional problems of day to day
experiences, his principles were based upon the ornamentation of a social settings like plazas,
fountains etc.
The author refers to Le Corbusier as the aesthetic antithesis of Sitte whose ideologies were
different but had its roots growing from the similar visual and formal qualities. Corbusier
reinforced the requirement of interpretation of social needs with reference to symbolic geometry
and paved a road for the designers of future generations. The predominant designs of towns and
villages are evaluated and their pictorial identity is scrutinized for enhancement.
The author implies that the vital essence of Gordon Cullen’s approach lies in its dissolute,
individual and sensitive retort to the design of a space. For Cullen, the basis of design becomes a
limited visual made up of serial vision, place, content and artificial function. Jarvis observes that
Cullen’s ideologies created a huge impact on Roy Worksett’s vision who also believed in the four
‘design disciplines’ as the basis for an urban design framework for conservation.
Jarvis suggests that essential criticism of the values and perspectives exemplified in the visual
tradition is rare and goes on to explain a framework for comparative evaluation. He mentions
that works of Kevin Lynch and Christopher Alexander, develops and reinforces the rationality of
a social usage approach, which treats urban environments as social settings rather than works of
three-dimensional art. From Martin Kreiger’s review of large-scale planning, he identifies three
‘binds’ which is three sets of inevitable boundations of particular attitudes that form the
framework for this comparative evaluation. Kreiger’s first bind is a result of the need for a formal,
general model which will provide a scientific foundation for planning analysis and proposals. The
second bind is the general omission of a person’s feelings and third bind is an immaterial dire
alteration of past practices. Each of the limitations lays an emphasis on the understanding of the
everyday world, an approach which is very different from those of either the established formal
planning models or the architectural aesthetics of most urban design theory.
He identifies designers like Kevin Lynch, Jane Jacobs and Christopher Alexander to be choosing
the social usage approach to urban design.
He terms Lynch’s book ‘Image of the City’ as one of the pioneers of social usage approach. His
evaluation of an urban space is based on people specific experiences which are very relative in
nature. He has given more value to people’s perceptions than the physical forms of places.
Jane Jacobs in her book ‘The Death and Life of Great American cities’ criticizes the results of city
planning and large scale social developments. Her design suggestions are based on a social
approach where she mentions that the necessary design conditions for sidewalks, for instance,
are all social ones, and their details are based on close observations of people’s behaviour.
Christopher Alexander in his works, points to shortcomings in design ideas that considered form
without context, and to the risks of approaching city design in a way that did not permit for a rich
variety of cross connections between activities and places. The basis of his new approach was
the replacement of the idea of generalised and imprecise ‘need’ with that of ‘tendencies’ which
are noticeable pattern of activities.
Results and Discussion:
After discussing the pros and cons of various approaches used by urban designers, the author
infers that there is a need for a more comprehensive framework where he discusses the
proposals made by Constance Perin which urges to make procedural changes in design. Perin
argues that designer’s analysis should focus on human behaviour. She suggests the idea of a
‘Behaviour Circuit’ in order to learn what physical and human resources are needed to support,
facilitate or enable the fulfilment of everyday purposes of various spaces from micro to macro
scale. The author emphasizes that how Arguing from the basis of closely perceived everyday
activities, David Thomas proposed ‘Normal Usage’ as the basis for a new approach to urban
design. Jarvis observes that in recent years theory and research have developed apart from urban
design practice. He notes that methods for incorporating user viewpoints and needs are widely
published and discussed. After scrutinizing the various methodological approaches followed by
the designers as discussed above Jarvis suggests an opening towards a new synthesis of theory
and practice of use and design.
Conclusion:
Jarvis critically examines the ideologies of noted urban designers and their validity in today’s
time. While making way for a new synthesis of theory and practice, he efforts to organize the
sense of a region by focussing on special designed places and spatial effects, and the
disintegrating aesthetics from other aspects of urban life and experience. He applauds the ideas
explored in Christopher Alexander’s book ‘The Pattern Language’ and mentions how physical,
constructional and spatial elements are interwoven and founded on human behaviour and social
experience in a series of ‘patterns’. In the end, Jarvis amalgamates the inputs given by designers
working on social usage method and concludes by suggesting an alternative approach based on
user experience and participation which not only gives scope for a more affluent and more
relevant product, related to use and daily needs, but also results into an explicit consideration of
these social situations in the design and assessment process with a far greater potential for users’
and designers’ experiences that can be conveyed together creatively to make places enhanced
for daily use and amusement.

Submitted By -
Amlan Kar

IIIrd Semester, 2nd Year

M.Arch, Recreational Architecture