Architectural Design

1. What are examples of architectural design that you consider to be epic failures?

A lot of the time, doors and handles of all sorts are epic failures. In regards to handles, many times there aren't any visual clues as to which way you turn the knob to get the desired outcome. For example, faucets. Some faucets are just epic failures because you have to turn it the wrong way before you turn in the way you wanted to in the first place. Any many times, you'll find yourself making these mistakes over and over because it's bad design that should be fixed. It's not the type of design that someone should get used to if other faucets all have a same general rule on how to turn to get hot or cold water. Doors can be frustrating as well if there aren't signs that say push or pull, so you end up pushing when you should pull and making a fool out of yourself. Some doors are clearly labeled, but there are also so many that are not. While many would disagree, I consider revolving doors to be epic failures, at least a lot of the time. I cannot remember how many times I have seen people get stuck trying to slip their way in, either because each segment isn't large enough or because people just push the inside walls so hard that you're forced to jump out so you don't get kicked in the foot by the door.

2. Good, Bad, and Ugly. Choose a building on K campus and analyze its behavioral and visceral usability.

Upjohn Library Commons--I think the library is a very well-designed building. I like the layout and how it just so happens that the higher up you go, the quieter the environment is. I don't know if that was what the designer had attempted to create. The library serves its purpose as a place to study, but it's also a place to socialize if that's what someone wants. On the first floor, you have Bigby's (which was a brilliant idea, for those students who need coffee to stay awake late hours), which really keeps in mind social aspects of architecture. It's a great place for people to meet and relax, and in that way the building serves its purpose as a place for social means. On the second floor, there's the reading room. It's always quiet in this room, and students know it's a place you can go if you want to concentrate. The room is very well-designed in everything from visceral appeal (green light fixtures, fireplaces, couches) and in the behavioral sense (the room is a place to study and really concentrate). The third floor is mainly tables and computers. It doesn't really have the sort of layout and environment for people to socialize, and it's not extremely visceral. But it serves its behavioral purpose as place to work, and I feel like that was what the designer was attempting to create.

3. What is the flaw in the current design process? How could this problem be fixed?

The major flaw, according to the reading, is that there really isn't a feedback stage in architectural design. The success of a building cannot really be determined until its been used and until people can experience the good and bad aspects of the design. Determining the social success of a building, and getting feedback about the social aspects, is something that takes a lot of time, and it may not be obvious if a building has succeeded for quite some time.

Emily's Wikipedia Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Pilsen%27s_Murals