Applied Science, Faculty of
Architecture and Landscape Architecture (SALA), School of
DSpace
Wall : A wall of Curious Interactions
UBCV
Hong, Jinki
The current model of housing is ill-suited to address the epidemic of loneliness and isolation. The top – down approaches to the built environment serialize the social needs of the urban metropolis as an issue of density. As such, the housing has turned to a highly marketable and easily organized model of tower housing. However, highly organizational models struggle to design for the nuanced and messy aspects of social interactions, resulting in an overly isolative and oppressive form of living. Architecture can no longer afford a typology that discourages means of spontaneous interaction. Instead, this project argues for a dwelling that encourages connections in the form of co-op housing. Designing for a non-isolative privacy and interactions of curiosity, it positions the wall at the center as means to develop relationships. Therefore, it is a reaction against the isolative wall typical to the current forms of tower housing. The project aims to redefine the wall as an interface for curious interactions that facilitate engagement with one’s neighbor.
Jinki HongWa(ll):A Wall of Curious InteractionBy Jinki Kevin HongB.A. of Psychology With Art and Design Minor University of Alberta, 2018Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Architecturein The Faculty of Graduate Studies,School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture,Architecture ProgramCommitteeMatthew Soules, Inge Roecker, Roy Cloutier© Dec 2021iiAbstract: The current model of housing is ill suited to address the epidemic of loneliness and isolation. The top – down approaches to the built environment serialize the social needs of the urban metropolis as an issue of density. As such, the housing has turned to a highly marketable and easily organized model of tower housing. However, highly organizational models struggle to design for the nuanced and messy aspects of social interactions, resulting to an overly isola-tive and oppressive form of living. Architecture can no longer afford a typology that discourages means of spontaneous interaction. Instead, this project argues for a dwelling that encourages connections in the form of co-op housing. Designing for a non-isolative privacy and interactions of curiosity, it positions the wall at the center as means to develop relation-ships. Therefore, it is a reaction against the iso-lative wall typical to the current forms of tower housing. The project aims to redefine the wall as an interface for curious interactions that facilitate engagement with one’s neighbor.iiiTable of Contents:Abstact - iiList of Figures - ivAcknowledgements -viiiPreface - 1Density, Strangers, Island - 2Density - 3 Strangers- 7Island - 8Performance, Division, Secrecy, Prison - 16Performance - 17Division - 23Secrecy - 28Prison -30Veil, Abstraction, Metaphor - 35Veil - 36Abstraction -38Metaphor- 42Architecture - 46Galician Centre for Contemporary Arts - 47Various Installations by DS+R - 53Wa(ll) - 58Bibliography - 75ivList of Figures:Figure 1. Frank L. Wright, Sketch for the Broadacre City Project, 1932, sketch, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadacre_City#/media/File:Wright_Sketches_for_Broadacre_City (Page 3)Figure 2. Le Corbusier, Model for Ville Radieuse, 1930, photograph, https://images.adsttc.com/media/ (Page 3)Figure 3. Jinki Hong, Section Diagram of the Shangra la Vancouver building in relation to niches and access to amenities, (Page 4)Figure 4. Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners, Diagram illustration showing non intersecting views from units, https://www.rsh-p.com/projects/residential/one-hyde-park/ (Page 7)Figure 5. Jinki Hong, Illustration of Permeable Interactions in Skyrise Condo Units (Page 10)Figure 6. Jinki Hong, Repetition of the Grid at Different Scales. Concord Pacific ‘s The Ark Overlaid on the City of Vancouver.(Page 12)Figure 7. Jinki Hong, Series Photographs of Various Housing Towers and Their Expressionless Door (Page 14)Figure 8. Jinki Hong, A Walk Down Two Blocks of Suburbia, A Catalogue of Every Window (Page 18) Figure 9. Fujiwara Muro Architects, The Front Facade of the Windowless House, 2021, Japan, Photography by Katsuya Taira. https://www.dezeen.com/2021/01/28/house-with-light-void-fujiwaramuro-architects-hyogo-japan/ (Page 19)Figure 10. Urbanscape Architects, The Front Facade of the NY House, 2017, Photograph by Revelateur Studios. https://www.archdaily.com/901582/ny-house-urbanscape-architects?ad_source=search&ad_medium=projects_tab (Page 19)vFigure 11. Acton Ostry Architects, Photograph of The Atrium of the Duke Housing with Colorful Facing Doors.2018, Photograph by Michael Elkan. https://www.archdaily.com/918646/the-duke-housing-acton-ostry-architects?ad_source=search&ad_medium=projects_tab (Page 20)Figure 12. Jinki Hong, A Non-Exhaustive List of Filters Afforded by the Wall.(Page 25)Figure 13. Jinki Hong, A Section of Different Drywall Constructions and The Reflection of Sound.(Page 25)Figure 14. Bjarke Ingels Group, Interior Render of a Penthouse in the Vancouver House. Photograph by Virani Real Estate Advisors/ Westbank. https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-house-penthouse-1480-howe-street (Page 28)Figure 15. Jinki Hong, The Uncertainty of Who is Listening (Page 31)Figure 16. Erik Conover, Inside New York’s Smallest Apartment for 24 Hrs, Footage from Video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFqMF0zIk2s (Page 32)Figure 17. Jeremy Bentham and Rafii Architects, Comparison Between the Panopticon and 1055 Homer Street. Floor Plan Drawn by Jinki Hong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon#/media/File:Panopticon.jpg (Page 33) [Plan]Figure 18. A Medieval Ottoman Window, photograph by Berkay08 https://www.123rf.com/photo_75395236_old-window-architecture-from-the-ottoman-times-in-istanbul.html (Page 36)Figure 19. Robert Neff Collection, A Korean Palanquin.https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/opinion/2021/08/721_255905.html (Page 36)Figure 20. Giuseppe Maria Crespi, The Confessional, oil painting, Galleria Sabauda, Turin, Italy. SCALA/Art Resource, New York.https://www.britannica.com/topic/confessional-religious-architectureviFigure 21. Nick Cave, Sound Suit, 2011. https://www.moma.org/collection/works/156386 (Page 37)Figure 22. Tim Wiscombe,The Comsumable Orca and the Uncomsuable Russian Quarry, Lecture Slide, Duel + Duet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGpaix4LrII&t=222s (Page 40)Figure 23. Jinki Hong, Non-Reciprocal Shadow Projection (Page 44)Figure 24. Jinki Hong, Gallery Precedent Study (Page 48)Figure 25. Jinki Hong, Hall Precedent Study (Page 50)Figure 26. Jinki Hong, Lobby Precedent Study (Page 52)Figure 27. Jinki Hong, Smell Apparatus Precedent Study (Page 54)Figure 28. Jinki Hong, Plant Wall Precedent Study (Page 54)Figure 29. Jinki Hong, Wine Wall Precedent Study (Page 56)Figure 30. Jinki Hong, A Clip from the Diptych Looking Down (Page 59)Figure 31. Jinki Hong, A Wall (Page 61)Figure 32. Jinki Hong, A Wall with an Opening (Page 61)Figure 33. Jinki Hong, A Lamp (Page 61)Figure 34. Jinki Hong, A Collection of Curious Walls (Page 63) [Diagram]Figure 35. Jinki Hong, A Series of Video Diptychs Capturing Moments of Curiosity, https://youtu.be/AYjCjgax3aw (Page 65)Figure 36. Jinki Hong, Overall Section Delineated By Color (Page 67)Figure 37. Jinki Hong, Overall Plan Delineated By Color (Page 67)Figure 38. Jinki Hong, Section Diagram of Unit Subdivisions and Circulation (Page 69)Figure 39. Jinki Hong, Plan Diagram of Unit Program and Interactions (Page 69)Figure 40. Jinki Hong, Section D.1 (Page 71)Figure 41. Jinki Hong, Section D.2 (Page 72)viiviiiAcknowledgements:I would like to thank those who have supported me until this point.I would like to thank Matthew Soules for being my Chair who has guided me through out the projectI would also want to thank my committee members Inge Roecker and Roy Cloutier for their immense wealth of knowledge and guidence.I would also like to thank my friends and family. I would not have been able to make it to this point without them.Mom and Dad My Brother Jenny PannDavid LawKaili SunArnold Jungix1Preface:The layout of this thesis is a collection of isolated unit sections as part of a larger reflection on the isolating wall. The thesis is to be read as segregated but related elements.This thesis aims to redefine the walls that separate us into those that connect us in new and interesting ways.2DensityStrangersIslands 3Density: The densification of the metropolitan cities is an increasing challenge of scale overshadowing individual consideration. This is resulting in increasingly dissociative architecture with those who inhabit it. As of 2005, global urbanism has overtaken ruralism at a parabolic rate, resulting in an unprecedented rate of metropolitan development.1 This rapid urbanism has led to cities struggling to deal with the influx of populations and simply expanding city borders proves to be an unsustainable strategy forward. Instead, attempts at exploring densification models of urbanism have become the focus of many urban metropolises, populating the skies through tower housing. However, the amount contemporary model of housing has changed in the 90 years since the introduction of tower housing is comparatively small. Classic models such as Wright’s 1932 Broadacre City’s or Le Corbusier 1930 Radiant City are not radically different from current models thus, similar issues of social inhospitality still to occur (Fig 1 & Fig 2). Newer metropolises as Vancouver propose Vancouverism, a form of housing where towers are positioned over commercial and public infrastructure podiums as an attempt to create socially vibrant communities. Compared to the Radiant City’s green spaces, Vancouverism’s podiums are a programmatic change to commercial and retail spaces, thus this model still struggles to radically address issues Figure 2. Model for Ville Radieuse, 1930.Figure 1. Sketch for the Broadacre City Project, 1932. 4Figure 3.Section Diagram of the Shangra la Vancouver building in relation to niches a nd access to amenities.4 5of social connectivity. Among many issues of this model is the bias of amenities situated on the tower’s base, which may correlate with studies that reveal upper floor inhabitants as having fewer relationship than those below.2 It suggested that as buildings increase in height, they develop niche-like divisions similar to bird behaviors of inhabiting specific elevations of space (Fig.3). However, it is arguable if repeating amenities at each niche would remediate the underlying cause of feelings of isolation as amenities themselves seem not to be the catalyst for relationship formation. Amenity programs typical to tower housing like pools and gyms have tendencies to be dominated by preestablished friendships or facilities meant as individual functions. This is not to say the amenities are unused but are relatively ineffective as a respite from isolation; instead, amenity programs seem to cater to groups of individuals inhabiting space rather than a collective or formation of new relationships. However, the issues of developing personal and community relationships may not be a fault of the overall organizational structure of the built environment but the top-down process of design. Many of the issues seemed to be a continuation of earlier examples, such as the Radiant City, creating untenable density situations and social segregation.3 Comparatively, a bottom-up approach could 6begin to examine the smaller microcosms of interactions that happen between spaces and units. Currently, halls and separations walls are largely unconsidered in favor of space efficiency and ease of organization. Therefore, despite the ease of the top-down approach to planning, one must question the scale at which we approach the design of density and towers in relation to metropolitan feelings of loneliness.1 United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision, (ST/ESA/SER.A/366). (2015), 21.2 Gifford, Robert. “The Consequences of Living IN High-Rise Buildings.” (Architectural Science Review, 2007), 2-17.3 Duel + Duet: Patrik Schumacher & Tom Wiscombe April 13, 2016. (SCI-Arc Media Archive, 2017.) 7Strangers: In sociologist Jane Jacobs’ In the Life and Death of American Cities (1961), she writes, “to any one person, strangers are far more common in big cities than acquaintances. More common not just in places of public assembly, but more common at a man’s own doorstep”.4 Jacob’s quotation encapsulates the alienation and isolation in the urban dwelling compounded by the current digital and financial age. With the advent of digital technologies and social media, people and engagements are increasingly efficient: adventures to meet strangers happen online and physical journeys fulfill single tasks. There is now little opportunity or reason to engage with those nearest to oneself, but this has immense ramifications on newer generations’ social health. Rates of loneliness are at an epidemic rate, compounding with each generation. According to the Cigna 2020 Loneliness Index, a sample survey of 10 400 people, 71% of millennials, and 79% of generation Z experience loneliness compared to only half in baby boomers; however, the study also stated that face-to-face interaction could remediate the issue.5 Despite this, there is an immense emphasis on isolated privacy from neighbors. Projects like Hyde One Park specifically utilize views that create illusions that no other unit surrounds it (Fig. 4).6 Projects such as these may be due to an economic shift to increase housing liquidity. Housing has begun to transcend the idea of home and into investment capital.7 Image of Hyde ParkFigure 4. Illustration showing non intersecting views from units. 8This era of home liquidity has led to a state of rapid movement, where neighbors are rapidly changing or may not exist at all. The concept of temporary housing and investment property is more commonplace as technologies like Airbnb make short-term rent processes more accessible. Vancouver’s 2016 census data suggest nearly 25 502 homes are unoccupied or temporarily occupied.8 Compared to older generations, time can no longer catalyze neighborly encounters. Thus, architects must reevaluate the social ethics of housing that emphasize isolation in light of the growing inability to connect. Isolative architecture places the burden of forming relationships on the individual to start promptless interactions. In turn, strangers more easily maintain their titles, and the struggle to form new relationships seems to be no longer worth the effort. Jacobs proposed an embracing of the metropolitan stranger.9 However, it seems too immoral to concede neighborly bonds for an individualistic existence, nor is such an existence is feasible. Instead, one must turn to the urban environment and current housing models to address the metropolitan strangers while arguing for more connective architecture.4 Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. (Netherlands: Vintage Books, 1992.) 30.5 Douglas Nemecek, “Loneliness and the Workplace 2020 U.S. Report” (Cigna, 2020.)6 Jacobs, 31.7 Soules, Matthew. Icebergs, Zombies, and the Ultra-Thin: Architecture and Capitalism in the 21st Century. (United States: Princeton Architectural Press, 2021.)8 Rezel, Rohana. “Vancouver Empty Homes Crossed 30,000 Mark This Year.” (Open Housing, December 30.) 9Islands: In the current era of increased loneliness, it becomes apparent that the metaphor of isolated islands is becoming a speculative reality for the newer generation. The metaphor of the island as housing reveals how urban housing approaches the idea of co-inhabiting space. Based on Architect Rem Koolhaus’ Delirious New York, the island is an analogy to the grid and skyscraper.10 He discusses the freedom brought about by the grid and metropolitan syntheticism.11 However, the eventual fusion of skyscrapers and the grid in the tower housing typology has become a catalyst for social deficiencies. The inner workings of housing towers mirror the organizational structures of cities where units fill the spaces instead of city blocks, halls are likened to streets, and the façades of housing are the sea of white fire separation drywall. However, the scale of the unit archipelago limits the means of separation and over-relies on the wall. The wall is unable to insulate units from the effects of neighboring units; in turn unable to provide a satisfying amount of synthetic isolation (Fig.5). Firstly, it is essential to recognize that synthetic islandism is not the cause of isolation or loneliness but a contributor. Rem suggests that the preexisting condition of metropolitan loneliness is what Manhattan spectacle and syntheticism attempts to solve. He states, “If the metropolis creates loneliness and alienation, Coney Island counter attacks with ‘Barrels of Love.’”12 Coney Island 10Figure 5.Illustration of Permeable Interactions in Skyrise Condo Units 11could temporarily solve the social issues that plagued the metropolis. The ‘Barrels of Love’ he refers to provide a brief reprieve from isolation by positioning strangers in momentary connection. They ride down a watery tunnel which gives individuals an opportunity to convince themselves of a genuine connection with one another before exiting the ride. However, this atypical mindset set is only afforded by the aura of complete syntheticism of Coney Island and its separation from the city.A complete detachment from typical urbanism enables individuals to adopt different behaviors and expectations. It is a form of catharsis provided by artificiality. Therefore, Koolhaas argues that the metropolis embraced a similar level of artificiality by adapting the city grid.13 The separation afforded by the grid is the freedom to allow blocks to act exclusively from the other. Each block is an attempt at a miniaturized Coney Island. However, as housing started to adapt to the tower typology, the unitary grid further reproduced internally (Fig.6). Each unit was an attempt to further subdivide spaces into artificial islands, suggesting another layer of freedom. Marketing also supported this notion, encouraging individuals to believe their unit as private islands free to decorate, inhabit and establish personal paradise. Real estate postings often present ‘unit only’ floor plans and no images of the units in relation to others. Furthermore, designs of residency levels had no points or places of socializing space between inhabitants. The unit was to be 12Figure 6.Repetition of the Grid at Different Scales. Concord Pacific ‘s The Ark Overlaid on the City of Vancouver. 13 But the hyper isolation promised by the tower unit falls short as it is nearly impossible to insulate each unit from one another completely. There are an infinite number of small interactions that permeate between units: like the physical transference of sound, smells, vibrations, but also non-physical concepts like the hyper-real, the digital, and consciousness. However, each exchange between units threatens the illusion of the “synthetic self-contained enclave,” in turn violating the conditioned perception of housing. Other spectacles such as city views and material luxuries are insufficient distractions compared to the illusion of the island, but rather than changing the meaning of housing, individuals were forced to self-abdicate in a broken system of isolation. House rules for multi-family residences often stipulate a strict control on activities that cause noise, smell, or ‘disrupt the tenant of any of the strata lots.’14 Often inhabitants must be overly self-regulating, showing effects in children that grow up in such environments. Children who grow up in overly controlled tower environments struggle to perceive environmental affordances and to explore and be inspired by the spaces they inhabit.15 Furthermore, the self-abdicating island inhibits individuals from attempting to change the isolation between neighbors because to develop connections would require an invasion of the private enclave. The faceless 14Figure 7.Series Photographs of Various Housing Towers and Their Expressionless Door 15white walls provide nearly no prompt to the virtuality housed within, nor do the walls allow one to judge the degree of welcome they would be received by; therefore, the current expression of the wall increases personal required effort and risk to reach out to neighbors (Fig. 7). Even if one musters up the courage to meet neighbors, they may be greeted by an empty dwelling exhausting their efforts. It would be unreasonable and invasion of privacy to expect one to track the daily habits of a yet associated neighbor. Instead, the idealized ‘good neighbor’ is often the quiet neighbor, rarely seen or causing trouble—the typical expectation of neighborly exchanges to be an annual exchange of holiday cards, if any at all. Yet, the model of isolated living is at the detriment of the individuals as studies show that more interaction with neighbors is associated with better mental health outcomes at all ages and an increased sense of safety and community. Then faced with the inevitability of interactions, the island isolationism model seems an unattainable fallacy for the typical dweller that comes at the cost of connectedness and neighborliness. 10 Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York: A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan. (United States: Monacelli Press, 2014.)11 Koolhaas12 Koolhaas, 35.13 Koolhaas, 95.14 Living Shangri La. Rep. STRATA PLAN BCS 3165 “LIVE-WORK SHANGRI LA” Schedule of Bylaws. (Living Shangri La, 2016), 5.15 Modi, Suruchi. “An Analysis of High-Rise Living in Terms of Provision of Appropriate Social Spaces for Children.” (Journal of Urban Design and Mental Health 5, no. 4 2018).16 Kislev, Elyakim. “Know Your Neighbor, Especially Now | Psychology Today.” Psychology Today. June 20, 2020.16PerformanceDivisonSecrecyPrison 17Performance: Anthropologist Herzfeld suggests a new paradigm of privacy in his essay “The Performance of Secrecy: Domesticity and Privacy in public spaces. It suggests privacy is of performance which is a departure from classical understandings of privacy.17 The performance of privacy is a public declaration and structure of interaction rather than the actual violation of information. He distinguishes three instances where privacy is breached without information being revealed. Firstly is the ability to retroactively realize and act on moments of invasion of privacy.18 Though the information has already been revealed, it is the need to act on the notion of privacy rather than the protection of the information itself. In this instance, privacy is detached from the concept of information.19 Secondly, the social hierarchy involved in privacy as privacy of information establishes a series of in and out groups that form a sense of belonging. The information is purview to specific individuals where privacy is only demonstrated against out-groups, but not in groups. Lastly, privacy must be performed to be privacy as the shift is from the material of secrecy to auditing of rights.20 This notion of privacy comes in a digital age where material privacy is already freely traded by the company and institutional systems to the point that material secrecy is near impossible to maintain. In the new climate of 18Figure 8.A Walk Down Two Blocks of Suburbia, A Catalogue of Every Window 19free-flow information, the implementation and examination of architectural privacy must change accordingly. For example, compared to many trends in eastern practices, the western form of suburban housing values the front-facing window, despite nearly every home covering them up with curtains (Fig. 8, 9 & 10). What is the purpose of windows that are covered for most parts of the year? If their purpose were to allow light, skylights would provide more light and privacy. If their purpose were for ventilation, larger vents would be an acceptable solution, but despite this, the front-facing window is often the largest window of the house. Simultaneously, there is a correlation between front-window size and the home price, the number of opportunities to violate privacy, and the money spent to maintain privacy. It can be argued that the front-facing window is a performance of privacy, a carefully crafted ritual of balancing opportunities to pry into the home while simultaneously demonstrating the ability to enforce and maintain privacy. Often the subject hidden by the front-facing window are of the mundane, like simple dining, and the uninteresting, like a typical living program, but through the great lengths of performing privacy, they become intensely mysterious. Then the front-facing window may be integral to a suburban exchange that generates neighborly interest by the degree of simultaneous Figure 10.The Front Facade of the NY House.Figure 9.The Front Facade of the Windowless House, 2021, Japan 20revealing and concealing the home. It was the German Sociologist George Simmel that suggests that the cycle of exchange of fragmented information created curiosity and reason to interact.21 Along with odd suburban objects like lawn objects, décor, material or color uniqueness, and choice of lawn, the curtained window presents a fragmented concept of the inhabitant. Secrecy is maintained through a performative privacy, but it is not isolative like an isolative privacy. Then on the issue of multi-family housing, the typology near eliminates the performative privacy of the façade; as stated by Koolhaas, the tower is the lobotomy of the exterior from the interior.22 The immense density of the urban environment conglomerates housing into mega structures of consistent repetition. On the other hand, the internal divisions of units are similarly blank. The obsession by the system of governance to maintain the expressionless wall is an assault on performative privacy. Inhabitants cannot decorate or reveal aspects of themselves, inhibiting the social exchange of architectural expression and curiosity for one another. That is not to say there are no architectural attempts to remedy the blank unit. Acton Ostry Architects’ Duke rental residents allow individuals to customize a color for the unit’s atrium facing door as a means of expression, and the units are inwardly facing to allow individuals 21to observe the daily motions of other residents (Fig. 11). However, it is arguable how much a colored door can express the individuality of its inhabitants. The walls still retain an intense uniformity masking any program behind it, resulting in the same isolative privacy. 17 Herzfeld, Michael. “The Performance of Secrecy: Domesticity and Privacy in Public Spaces.” Semiotica 2009, no. 175 (2009): 135-162.18 Herzfeld19 Herzfeld20 Herzfeld21 Simmel, Georg. “The Sociology of Secrecy and of Secret Societies.” The American Journal of Sociology 11, no. 4 (1906): 441-452.22 Koolhaas, 100.22Figure 11.Photograph of The Atrium of the Duke Housing with Colorful Facing Doors.2018 23Division: An isolative privacy is often unsatisfying and disturbs the means to develop social connections that a performative privacy affords; instead, those in the hierarchical position prefer to divide and retain the near-impossible illusion of artificiality as a means of power and control. The French philosopher, Michel Foucault’s views in Discipline and Punish, discusses the power of visibility and division, where architecture modulates individuals by implementing hierarchized surveillance and managerially information biased unit separations. He states, “its aim is to establish presence and absence to know where and how to locate individuals, set up useful communications, interrupt others.”23 Efforts by the governing councils to keep divisions ensure a favorable balance of power and discourage the formation of independent collective identities. They assign numbers to inhabitants rather than names and enforce rules for architectural uniformity. By enforcing strict uniformity and anonymity, those in power maintain a sense of collective obedience and suppress individuals’ curiosity for another. Even balconies, which are part of the unit private dwelling, are strictly controlled to what it can or cannot have. The Shangri La designed by James KM Chang architects, a firm often sighted as forerunners of Vancouverism, stipulate against modifications or changes to window coverings; displaying objects or activities apart from those of an approved list; modifying any 24exterior part of the unit; or even draping, hanging or storing any personal items on the balconies.24 Notably, the administrative bodies have a legal claim to any part of the interior unit permeable from outside places high priority of administrative control over any individual claim to the synthetic island of living. Then from its onset, the hegemonic model of isolated synthetic housing is an imposed condition rather than actualities caused by spatial conditions. Then the hegemonic island conditions are in contradiction with the permeable wall, where instead of facilitating separation, it causes conditions of tension and further division between neighbors. The building expectations stipulate non-interaction between the inhabitants and the architecture signifies the same non-interaction. However, the actualities of the wall rarely afford the separation stipulated by the building rules. The activities of daily inhabiting are at best muted by the wall rather than wholly contained. The wall is only a filter for interaction (Fig. 12). Sounds, smells, vibrations are permeable by the typical construction of the separation wall in urban dwellings; therefore, the specifics of the building rules are in tandem by the degree the wall can insulate activities. Moreover, estimating the threshold of 25ObjectSmellSoundSightTouchFigure 12.A Non-Exhaustive List of Filters Afforded by the Wall.Figure 13.A Section of Different Drywall Constructions and The Reflection of Sound. 26permanence is increasingly confusing as the typical construction of drywall is immensely varied but visually uniform. Depending on the number of drywall layers and the density of insulation, the properties of the wall can range from amplifying certain stimuli to near isolation (Fig 13). For example, a construction left as a void can resonate with sound, amplifying the noises transferred to other spaces. On the other hand, a fully insulated wall with dense foam and multiple layers of drywall would create an acoustic barrier eliminating sound transference. Time of day and situations also affect the perception of permeance; if one unit is silent and attempting to sleep, even the slightest noise can be considered disruptive. Then it can be considered unfair to expect individuals to discern the drywall and its affordances; consequently, it also negatively biases the interactions between neighbors. The frequency of encountering “bad neighbors” may be more attuned to architecture, creating ideal conditions to bias our perceptions. Individuals tend to over-estimate environmental factors for themselves and personal factors for others. 25 Architecturally, unsure about the level of transference, people may unfairly find neighbors at fault for noise, smells, etc., instead of the unsustainability of the isolative architecture. Instances such as these create many of the social tensions that perpetual want 27for architectural divisions, but then architecture must redefine and address the perception of wall permeance to change the dominant housing model.23 Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. (United Kingdom: Vintage Books, 1995.), 143.24 Living Shangri La.25 Kislev, Elyakim. “Know Your Neighbor, Especially Now | Psychology Today.” (Psychology Today. June 20, 2020.) 28Secrecy: The tower promises freedom afforded by secrecy and belonging to secret societies, but it is at the cost of individuality and submission to hierarchical powers. Upon examining the propositions in Simmel’s essay The Secret and the Secret Society, it begins to outline the means and methods used in the organization of tower housing. The first proposition of interest is the tight control of the objects, value, or sentiment that rallies its members.26 The tower housing promises personal privacy and separation from the metropolis. Housing is traditionally associated with escape from the noise, the public, and the busyness of the metropolis, which tower housing takes advantage of despite not entirely fulfilling its promise. It convinces the masses by utilizing the hegemonic forms of isolationism unaffordable to most other than the ultra-wealthy (Fig.14). Unlike the normative units that share permeable walls, the marketing of the tower housing uses the penthouse as its focal unit. Penthouses are the closes realization of the island isolationism. Those on the top can throw lavish parties and convert spaces into their wildest fantasy as the walls of interactions are removed. Many of the rules that inhibit behaviors are compensated by the architecture rather than the individual. In comparison, the typical units of the tower housing are left struggling to achieve the same degree of freedom and isolation. Figure 14.Interior Render of a Penthouse in the Vancouver House. 29 Eventually there is centralization of power in groups of unknown leadership and inward sublimation of the society’s members.27 As secret societies initiate this stage, both members and leaders disguise themselves with masks to suppress individuality and personality. The disguises in question are the management groups and standardized drywall clad units. The tower often has an organization that governs the tower, but rarely is there a recognizable individual that leads the housing group. Often letters and emails are signed by either “management” or the management group. On the other hand, individualized spaces are hidden by uniform walls and assigned numbers to make units virtually indistinguishable from the other. The decoupling of the individual and the secret society enables the ascension of secrecy above individuals. Both the governor and governed are then in service of maintaining the status quo of the housing complex. As a result, individuals are forced to self- abdicate to maintain the fallacy of isolation while it becomes easier on management as the societal body obtains a level of autonomy. Individuals no longer expect the expression of housing to change, but they behave in ways to accommodate the insufficiencies of the space instead. This shift in behavior is contradictory as spaces become overly restrictive. Ironically, individuals then force other members to abdicate in hopes to achieve the freedom alluded to by the tower housing, thereby creating a perpetual system of self-regulation.26 Hazelrigg, L. E. “A Reexamination of Simmel’s ‘The Secret and the Secret Society’: Nine Propositions.” Social Forces 47, no. 3 (1969): 323-330.27 Simmel, 496. 30Prison: The question is, how different is the tower home to prison? At first glance, the home and prison seem like a far-fetched metaphor, but as the typology of living is increasingly compartmentalized, isolative, controlled, and surveilled, it would indicate that housing and prison are more of a spectrum than separate categories. Both prison and tower housing are foremost a place of dwelling, with regulated schedules and rules. There are controlled access points, restricted and unrestricted space, and an overarching governing body, but it would be unfair to suggest that the degree to which control and punishment are implemented are the same. Instead, one end of the spectrum is the home, where individuals are highly self-regulated per the greater society, and the other is where institutions highly regulate individuals. However, it is essential to notice that only the methods of regulation change, whereas the subject of regulation is constant. The home is subject to regulation by social pressures. As previously mentioned, individuals often self-abdicate in case of disturbing those around them. Neighbors act as autonomous surveillance on behalf of the governing body, reporting or directly issuing punishment and rewards for behaviors. In the tower housing, despite the visual separations of space, the wall’s permeability is as revealing. Contrary to Jacobs argument, which suggests social surveillance is beneficial for creating positive community spaces,28 the spaces between units become nearly 31Figure 15.The Uncertainty of Who is Listening 32inhospitable and oppressive (Fig. 15). The communities that Jacobs often observed desired community interaction whereas the societies of tower housing refute it as a contradiction the ideals of isolative housing. On the other hand, prisons are a continuous layering of surveillance. The home can be converted into a prison by simply the increased surveillance. House arrest often assigns individuals a digital tracker that monitors their location. Individuals may still go to work, go shopping and retain most daily functions with some restricted regions and activities. This is only slightly different from their typical routines to certain individuals. Many individuals who feel more isolated and socially distant may feel similarly trapped even without additional measure. Minimal security prisons are even comparable to micro-apartments. Individuals of minimum-security prisons are placed into small cells, at minimum of 70 square feet.29 They can still be allowed to venture out for work, learn and do certain activities.30 Comparatively, micro-apartments in New York can be as small as 61 square feet, aguably only differentiated from prison by the rules and enforcement established by the governing party (Fig. 16).31 Spatially, prisons and tower housing are similar as they act as easy means of organizing, surveilling, and controlling populations (Fig. 17). Both the panopticon and Figure 16.Inside New York’s Smallest Apartment for 24 Hrs33Figure 17.Comparison Between the Plan of the Panopticon and 1055 Homer Street 34tower housing use a system of unidirectional anonymous surveillance to assert control and begin the process of normalization.32 Essential to the project is the one-sided mirror guard tower at the center, which allows one guard to observe all units simultaneously and the unidirectionality of the glass makes it difficult for individuals to determine specific moments of surveillance. By doing this, the observed are always conditioned to act as observed. Similarly, the tower housing uses this concept but in slightly different means. The tower benefits from self-regulating inhabitants; thus, much of the surveillance relies on social surveillance. Position similarly in a circle; each unit becomes its own one-sided mirror and through the multiplicity of units, one is unable to discern who is listening or not. Then it is arguable that the difference between prison and home is not of architecture but the means of regulating the individual. More accurately, both the home and prison are varying degrees of implementing control to establish a hierarchy of power.28 Jacobs.29 Government of Canada, Correctional Service of Canada. “Security Classification and Penitentiary Placement.” Government of Canada, Correctional Service of Canada, (Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector, Multimedia Services, Director, February 8, 2021.)30 Government of Canada.31 Conover Erik, “Inside New York’s Smallest Apartment for 24 Hrs, 60 Ft.² Micro Studio.” YouTube, (2021.) 32 Foucault35VeilAbstractionMetaphor 36Veil: In light of the overwhelming systems of control of the tower typology, how does one approach redefining the built environment of housing? Interestingly, veils potential propose a means of circumventing overwhelmingly concrete societal expectations while being subtle enough to deter heavy opposition against it. The veil is a politically contentious object as it is considered a tool of subjugation and liberation. It is both used by the powerful and the oppressed, but regardless of its political underpinnings, it can be argued that the veil comes about in times of oppression because it affords opportunities to engage where societal rules would otherwise prohibit. Architecturally, technologies like the ottoman windows afforded women to peer and observe those below when otherwise trapped (Fig. 18).33 Likewise, the Korean palanquin was used as transports for nobles and women (Fig. 19).34 Lastly, catholic confessional boxes used veils to ease the burden of confessing ones’ sins (Fig. 20). In each situation, the veil visually obscured the form of the individual and enforced a unidirectional exchange of information. Interestingly, the veil establishes a new balance of power by biasing the exchange of information to its user regardless of ones’ position on social hierarchies. Veils then may be effective tools to establish interaction against the isolative unit dwelling. Instead of strict separations, parts of the wall can become veils to allow and encourage interaction. The veil naturally relies on the obscuring Figure 18.An Medieval Ottoman Window.Figure 19.A Korean Palanquin, 1890.Figure 20.The Confessional, oil painting by Giuseppe Maria 37of vision and unidirectional interactions already present in current practices of the wall. Furthermore, the veil increasingly invites intrigue as interactions persist. Those who are unveiled experience a constant exchange of incomplete information, which one needs to fulfill with speculations and conceptions. Curiosity draws others to the veil. However, consideration and implementation of the veil are of what and how. Contemporary artists of marginalized racial and sexual groups have already embraced the veil. For example, the Sound Suit by Nick Cave is a collage of materials that obscure the individual and represents what he believes to be his more authentic self removed from the prejudice and gaze of the greater public (Fig. 21).35 Obscuring himself while presenting something of himself enables the veil to take a performative stance on privacy. Further still, the suit ventures into the realm of abstraction, inspiring curiosity about its meaning and the person underneath.Figure 21.Sound Suit, 2011.33 Herzfeld34 Hee-sook, Han. “Women’s Life during the Chosŏn Dynasty.” International Journal of Korean History 6, (2004): 113-160.35 Nick Cave. Art21. 38Abstraction: The beauty of abstraction is its ability to reveal the intangible while concealing the obvious so that it fuels an ongoing series of interpretations and reinterpretations. The veil is a form of abstraction as it conceals the physical form while highlighting other attributes of one’s character. Unable to see the clarity of form, a face veil may focus attention on the voice and speech of individuals. Interestingly, interacting with the veiled and unveiled form two different entities; relationships formed by one do not necessarily coincide with the other but exist tangentially. In the philosophy of object-oriented ontology, Harmon discusses a flat ontology that places both figurative concepts as equal regardless of the physical actualities.36 This similarly applies to relationships developed through the veil of architecture. The walls that fragment interactions between spaces create new understandings between people. It could even be stated, the distorted ways of interaction are the only conceptions that can be formed as it is impossible to observe objects in their entirety and from every vantage point. Understandings of people from brief contact in halls and elevators are as incomplete as long-term committed relationships; people react differently depending on who, what, or how they interact. Reversely, it can be argued that designing for interaction is 39curating what versions of objects interact with one another. For example, in massively online multiplayer games, the games abstract the person in physical form and context allowing players to exist as a new virtual being based solely on the player’s personalities. Although the character of the game and player form independent networks of connections, the emotional attachment and meaning of the relationships are part of the same being. In the virtual world EA-land, players took up a veil of a ‘Sims’: an avatar of people who inhabit and engage with other avatars in a virtual city. Players communicate through the preprogrammed gestures and made-up words of the sim’s world. Players create virtual neighborhoods and architecture while throwing online parties and events. These players never met physically or knew how one another looked, but the connections and attachment to each other were as real as the physical world. Interestingly, the virtualization of the architecture and its interaction with the Sims. The players of the game surprisingly maintained the expression of architecture similar to that of contemporary times. Tower housing and suburban neighborhoods made up most of the typological dwellings in the game. Tower dwellings likewise maintained the isolation signifiers like uniform drywall and standardized units. Even walls and objects cost in-game currency and can be broken or stolen, but 40game community was more open to interaction. Abstraction of the player offered a level of distance while allowing free interaction. In an interview with a player, he described how the virtual avatars enabled him to express himself in ways truer than the physical world. The abstraction afforded by the avatar disconnected his circumstances from his behaviors. To those in the game, he was his Sim instead of an individual taking care of his sick wife.37 Beyond abstraction by virtualities, the abstract can also evoke endless curiosity. In the act of fragmenting and distorting the object remains mysterious to those who engage with it. In a lecture by the architect Tim Wiscombe, he states that the most successful architecture prevents objects from being fully consumable as it holds on to its mystery and curiosity (Fig. 22).38 Curiosity is explicitly vital for architecture because it is an incredible driver for interaction. Viewed from a Simmel perspective, curiosity is generated by the fragments of information that lead to an endless generation of conceptions for one to want to test its validity. Therefore, architectural abstraction must generate a significant amount of curiosity to allow the built environment to transcend overwhelming isolation with an overwhelming curiosity. By doing so, the argument Figure 22.The Comsumable Orca and the Uncomsuable Russian Quarry. 41for multi-residential dwelling unwittingly shifts from isolationism for privacy into retaining privacy that can still satisfy curiosity.37 Mars Roman, 99% Invisible. “What Happens When an Online Video Game Shuts down?” Slate Magazine, (February 18, 2015.)38 Duel + Duet. 42Metaphor: However, one has yet to discuss the methodology to design with abstraction. The methodology must simultaneously be clear in an objective but not so clear to lose the essence of abstraction. A metaphor does both, by describing the object tangentially. This is because metaphors inherently infuse two different objects of inherent inessential likeness to an impossible new one.39 This notion plays into Harmon’s flat ontology, where figurative new relationships are considered as real as relationships with the physical object. This notion is essential to establishing an easy transition from isolationism in the built form. Often, criticism for interactive living depends on neighbors’ mutual compatibility. Yet by perceiving metaphors as a third entity, it is decoupled from the original characters thereby disentangling individual compatibility from interaction. Furthermore, Harmon also discusses the non-reciprocal nature of metaphor.40 The object of metaphor is not affected by the metaphor; only the new entity and metaphor relate with the perceiver. Unlike the mutually shared experiences of direct interactions, non-reciprocal interactions offer a degree of separation between individuals It does not require both parties to consent to the metaphor, but individuals to accept a form of the metaphor; therefore, individuals are not restricted in 43action or need to self-abdicate (Fig. 23). Another area where metaphors are vital to interactive architecture is because of the theatrics of the metaphor. The theatrical nature of metaphor, Harmon refers to, is the requirement that metaphors can captivate and envelope the listener.41 Architecturally the design of metaphor can draw in individuals and allow them to inhabit the space of metaphors. Individuals are then extending their consciousness beyond their own space by imagining virtualities on the opposite facet of the wall. Although interactive architecture still may divide spaces similarly to isolative architecture, the context of wall permeability is changed to encourage individuals to interact rather than isolate.Lastly, the metaphor is an act of coupling where the metaphor becomes its own entity when coupled with objects.42 The metaphor abstraction by architecture no longer depends on the actuality of the input. Instead, the architecture takes a new form of both metaphor and architecture. Elaborating on the example of shadows, it no longer matters what the cause of the shadow may be. It could be moments of intimacy or other behaviors often considered taboo, but as architecture abstracts the motion into an unrecognizable shadow. The act is removed from the abstraction, and shadow becomes its own entity. 44Figure 23.Non-Reciprocal Shadow Projection 45 Examining architecture as metaphoric abstraction allows a frame of designing interactions that operate within current housing typologies but subtly changes it into interactive architecture. Often, architecture approaches design from a top-down approach assuming programming can address the burden of solving social wellbeing, but to truly change the built environment, architects must focus on the intimate scale of housing and using metaphor can start to outline the nuances of each space and interaction.37 Mars Roman, 99% Invisible. “What Happens When an Online Video Game Shuts down?” Slate Magazine, (February 18, 2015.)38 Duel + Duet.39 Harmon, 61-102.40 Harmon41 Harmon42 Harmon46 Architecture 47Galician Centre for Contemporary Arts Alvaro SizaSpain 1993The center for the arts utilized curiousity as a means to encourage exploration of spaces. The gallery is composed of non-orthogonal masses that serves to establish a continous flow. Inside the structures is an ensemble of curious design decisions. Spaces sometimes lead to non-functional spaces, internal windows preview other spaces that individuals do not have direct access to. The precedent study examines 3 spaces that evokes curiousity through architectural features.Figure 24 The first space is a gallery space with a unprecedented door centering on a wall. The non-foreshadowing and odd scale of the door compared to the hanging ceiling create an interesting dynamic that emphasis the door as an object over circulation. The emptiness of space and confusing scale of both objects evoke questions about movement and their connection. The light shelf’s scale suggests potential accessible and usable space while the door suggests a possible route. Curiousity then encourage visitors to explore both objects independently as well to establish a connection between them. 48Figure 24.Gallery Precident Study 49Figure 25 The second space is a circulation space with an opening to a gallery space below. A drywall bulkhead drops down conceal most of the gallery space while reflecting light into the opening. The denial of direct circulation and full visual access to the gallery presses vistors to venture further through the circulation. Furthermore, there is a secondary opening to another series of halls establishing a secondary queue of mysterious spaces to find. 50Figure 25.Hall Precident Study 51Figure 26 The third space is a small cavity of a lobby with a window. The window acts as a generator of curiousity. From the outside facade the nook and window is given special attention by extruding into an otherwise flat surface. It begins to allude to a unique spatial layout hidden by the overall mass of the structure and acts as a treasure at the end of the gallery. On the otherhand, the hand the window is a dead end and at a height too high to view the outdoors. However, the window is accented with a unique ceiling undulation and a glimpse to the entry. By framing an atypical perspective of the entry and a suggestive formal ceiling, it instills doubt in ones memory, thus revitalizing interest to already visited spaces. 52Figure 26.Lobby Precident Study 53Various InstallationsDS+R and Various ArtistsFigure 27 The various installations by DS+R use the wall interfaces of interaction. Not only are the objects of art hung or positioned in front of the wall, but they inhabit the space between and behind the wall. In the Art of Scent 1889 - 2012 exhibition, the apparatus of smell is organically bowled inwards. The inwards shape and small opening for olfactory smells spur a curiousity for what is beyond the wall. Is it only a small canister of scents or a mechanical room to refill the apparatus. The position and form of the smell device invites individuals to enter into the wall. For a moment they are in a different realm seperated from the rest of the gallery and invited to focus on the smell.Figure 28 The exhibition Are We Really That Different? also inhabits the wall, but uni-directionally. One side plays a projection video while the other is a plant installation. However, by floating the wall and positioning buckets underneath, it displays a fragmented preview of the other facet of wall. The formal move invites viewers to both watch the project, establish thematical connections between video and buckets, and provokes curiousty to circle to the other side. 54Figure 27.Smell Apparatus Precident StudyFigure 28.Plant Wall Precident Study 55Figure 29 Lastly, is the exhibit How Wine Became Modern: Design and Wine 1976 to Now. This exhibit uses two walls, the first to mask and the second to contextualize the wine apparatuses behind it. The two walls in tandem layer the experiences, giving a preview of the space without divulging the actual forms behind it. 56Figure 29.Wine Wall Precident Study 57Architecture Realizing a metaphorical abstraction of space provides opportunities to change the expression of space subtly. With continually rising rates of loneliness, architects must begin to reconsider the built environment in how it affords or inhibits opportunities. Simply implimenting program is insufficient to design for the nuanced moments that make up social wellbeing. To approach architecture from top-down approaches has immense ramifications on the city scale, but smaller-scale examinations of architectural elements such as the wall provide subtle shifts that impact perceptions of space as a whole. 58Part 2 - wa(ll)59Figure 30.A clip from the diptych Looking Down60Wa(ll) of Curiousities The design portion of the thesis is a reaction against tower housing and the isolative wall. The project aims to redefine the wall as an element to connect people and build relationships. The wall is a facilitator for interaction and curiousity that extends the consciousness beyond the limits of physical bounds. Becoming cognizant and curious of what is beyond the wall enables one to mentally inhabit spaces physically unaccessible. The wall also filters and presents an abstract version of people that can incubate and recontextualize understanding for one another. Therefore, the project aims to create a multi-family dwelling where the wall is central to facilitating curiousity and interaction to bring about a more connected form of living.61Figure 31.A WallFigure 32.A Wall with an OpeningFigure 33.A Lamp62Curiousity Curousity is the catalysist to draw people to the wall. The wall inherently causes curiousness by denying access.However, the expression of the wall must signify denial, otherwise it is unknown to the observer they are being denied. By revealing small fragments of an object, the wall is reframed as an obstacle protecting a mysterious object of desire. But if the wall does not conceal the object’s true nature, the object loses it mystery and no longer afford curiousity. Therefore, the wall must simutaniously reveal and conceal to make objects unconsumable; where one must venture beyond the wall to have their curiousity satiated.63Figure 34.A Collection of Curious Walls64Collections of Curiousity Often it is difficult to describe and encapsulate all that makes an object curious. Instead, it is easier to create a collection or series that contain curious moments. As a process of designing the wall, the project needed its own cabinet of curiousity.65Figure 35.A Series of Video Diptychs Capturing Moments of Curiosityhttps://youtu.be/AYjCjgax3aw66Moments of Curiosity Curiosity was then explored by a series of diptychs. They were an attempt at discovering moments of daily inhabitation that could spur Curiosity. Each set took into things such as odd positions and forms or incompleteness and fragments among other generators of Curiosity. The measure of sucess was dependent on establishing a singular moment where there is a subtle realization of consciousness beyond the wall.673A : 2B1A: 1B11 232 3BBBBB AAAAAS tiBA231 12 30m 2m3m4m Scale 1:7510mA A A AB B B B B1A: 1B GroundD.2PlanD.13A : 2BB A1m 5mAFigure 36.Overall Section Delineated by Color Figure 37.Overall Plan Delineated by Color 68Wa(ll)- A Multi-Family Co-housing Development The project is a co-housing project where groups of individuals agree to co-exist inside a single unit. In the center is a large wall formally articulated to evoke moments of curiousity. The project is built in two stages, where the architect designs the central wall followed by a secondary fit-in in cooperation with the inhabitants. The interactions of the wall and position of the floors are fixed, but the programming of the interactions are not. As the program is fit into the interactive spaces, the interaction is further modified by objects of each space. For instance, curtains are hung to block sight, glass panels are installed to block sound, or cabinetry change the spaces that voids have access to. 69ReadingSittingReadingEntertainingRecreationingRecreationingRecreationingSightSightSightMaterialMaterialSightSightSightInteractionUtilitySoundLightCirculationSightSightFigure 38.Section Diagram of Unit Subdivisions and CirculationFigure 39.Plan Diagram of Unit Program and Interactions70 Although the design of each unit can be custom for each cooperative, the project has 3 units as models of possible living. Each unit can hold various different households and in different configurations. Inhabitants traverse up the circulation on one side of the unit, entering into each other spaces.This allows individuals to engage and discuss interesting moments shared through the wall. However, privacy is maintained in the design of the stair railings and the programming that seperates the circulation from the intimate spaces. For example, the shelving of books become partitions or partition for washrooms extend to hide sightlines.71Figure 40.Section D.172Figure 41.Section D.273 As the walls are inhabited the moments of sound, smell, and sight permeate through the wall. They start to develop fragmented conceptions of one another. The interactions between dwellers are not an active process but a passive one. Through adjusting, revealing ,and concealing daily acts of inhabitation, inhabitants are performing privacy that can establish relationships rather than disencouraging them. The abstraction afforded by the wall also inhibits the opportunities to violate one’s intimate moments, while recontextualing the means of interaction. The wall itself is designed with odd positions and continuous denial. It only reveals fragments and clues. There are openings that only show more wall. Some interactions are only made possible through intentional efforts but even then only reveal glimpses. The wall filters and translates the activities of daily living: sight into shadows, sound into light, and smell into sight.Lastly, the wall itself is curious. The formal articulations and myriad of interactions inhibit the wall from being consumed. However, that is the point of the wall. It is not supposed to be understood and thus remain endlessly curious.7475BibliographyBandara, W. H. M. S. Devmini, Rangajeewa Rathnayake, P. K. S. Mahanama, and Naduni Wickramaarachchi. “An Investigation on Community Spaces in Condominiums and their Impact on Social Interactions among Apartment Dwellers Concerning the City of Colombo.” Social Sciences & Humanities Open 2, no. 1 (2020): 100043.Conover Erik, “Inside New York’s Smallest Apartment for 24 Hrs, 60 Ft.² Micro Studio.” YouTube, 2021. Accessed December 28, 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFqMF0zIk2s&ab_channel=ErikConover.Duel + Duet: Patrik Schumacher & Tom Wiscombe (April 13, 2016). SCI-Arc Media Archive, 2017. Accessed December 28, 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGpaix4LrII.Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. United Kingdom: Vintage Books, 1995.Gifford, Robert. “The Consequences of Living IN High-Rise Buildings.” Architectural Science Review, 2007, 50, no. 1, 2-17, DOI: 10.3763/asre.2007.5002Government of Canada, Correctional Service of Canada. “Security Classification and Penitentiary Placement.” Government of Canada, Correctional Service of Canada, Communications and Citizen Engagement Sector, Multimedia Services, Director, February 8, 2021. Accessed December 28, 2021. https://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/acts-and-regulations/705-7-cd-eng.shtml?fbclid=IwAR2w1qHNL1p_UX0IM8TSwYZXlVv1T0F8vmG9iQtu9tgxdbaEI8BCcRbdqAs.Gunther, Anna. “Younger Generations Are Lonelier and Social Media Doesn’t Help, Survey Finds.” CBS News. CBS Interactive, January 24, 2020. Accessed December 28, 2021. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/younger-generations-are-lonelier-and-social-media-doesnt-help-survey-finds-2020-01-23/?fbclid=IwAR1m-3scCGe_2xKbLYxBTJYpwBa7PB3b8nxsxoxDnYPwOqhraF24kdxRc90.Harman, Graham. Object-Oriented Ontology: A New Theory of Everything. London: Pelican Books, 2018.Hazelrigg, L. E. “A Reexamination of Simmel’s “The Secret and the Secret Society”: Nine Propositions.” Social Forces 47, no. 3 (1969): 323-330.Hee-sook, Han. “Women’s Life during the Chosŏn Dynasty.” International Journal of Korean History 6, (2004): 113-160.Herzfeld, Michael. “The Performance of Secrecy: Domesticity and Privacy in Public Spaces.” Semiotica 2009, no. 175 (2009): 135-162.Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Netherlands: Vintage Books, 1992.Kislev, Elyakim. “Know Your Neighbor, Especially Now | Psychology Today.” Psychology Today. June 20, 2020. Accessed December 28, 2021. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/happy-singlehood/202006/know-your-neighbor-especially-now.Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York: A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan. United States: Monacelli Press, 2014.76Living Shangri La. Rep. STRATA PLAN BCS 3165 “LIVE-WORK SHANGRI LA” Schedule of Bylaws. Living Shangri La, 2016. Accessed December 28, 2021. https://vancouverextendedstay.com/wp-content/theme-documents/Shangri_La_Bylaws.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3wSBbNGO7VavBVgUK13Q6tZQn2-DRIUij_4cXjeejGt7TjWmaLs2bdNMg.Mars Roman, 99% Invisible. “What Happens When an Online Video Game Shuts down?” Slate Magazine, February 18, 2015. Accessed December 28, 2021. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2015/02/18/the_sims_online_ea_land_what_happens_when_an_online_game_goes_dark_on_99.html?fbclid=IwAR2f-VkvzqQ0gcfA6hSqoGPJoW_ZKno5CSmOZgcWAQtQyyxg8D4KApacsxs.Modi, Suruchi. “An Analysis of High-Rise Living in Terms of Provision of Appropriate Social Spaces for Children.” Journal of Urban Design and Mental Health 5, no. 4 (2018). Accessed December 28, 2021. https://www.urbandesignmentalhealth.com/journal-5---high-rise.html?fbclid=IwAR0ZdVyee2WM01sYY542gi0MZjzI4ufJyPluJn4be11pv_IiEjvowLayPH0.Nemecek, Douglas. Rep. Loneliness and the Workplace 2020 U.S. Report. Cigna, 2020.Nick Cave. Art21. Accessed December 29, 2021. https://art21.org/artist/nick-cave/Rezel, Rohana. “Vancouver Empty Homes Crossed 30,000 Mark This Year.” Open Housing, December 30, 2020. Accessed December 28, 2021. https://openhousing.ca/2020/12/30/vancouver-empty-homes-crossed-30000-mark-this-year/?fbclid=IwAR1M3hkjL-pRcoZQoSG8kDFkS8SJJoL7shg-wqPN-5v7K2ut8T1y-wjf8JE#easy-footnote-bottom-1-886.Ross, Lee. “The Intuitive Psychologist and His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 10, (1977): 174.Simmel, Georg. “The Sociology of Secrecy and of Secret Societies.” The American Journal of Sociology 11, no. 4 (1906): 441-498.Soules, Matthew. Icebergs, Zombies, and the Ultra-Thin: Architecture and Capitalism in the 21st Century. United States: Princeton Architectural Press, 2021.United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision, (ST/ESA/SER.A/366). 2015. Accessed December 28, 2021. Vancouver Foundation. Connections and Engagement: A Survey of Metro Vancouver. 2012. Accessed December 28, 2021. https://www.vancouverfoundation.ca/sites/default/files/documents/VanFdn-SurveyResults-Report.pdf?fbclid=IwAR37H_UGF_BXSkxrzf291RK-J2uE6tEKOO3WnxnEewz7ic4oWUkLzEtjwa4
Graduating Project
Vancouver (B.C)
eng
Unreviewed
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Graduate
University of British Columbia. ARCH 549
Walls
Curiosity
Interaction
mutlifamily housing
Coop Housing
Wa(ll) : A wall of Curious Interactions
Text