Reaction to Production of Space

A reaction to Henri LeFebre, “Plan of the Present Work,” “Social Space,” and “Openings and Conclusions” from The Production of Space.

The reading made me realize more deeper aspects and a difference to the normal artistic paradign. It is unorthodox of me as I proceed to the sessions that my perception in aesthetics in the world of fine art and design is different what i percieve to be thus make me experience a greater appreciation to the subject in hand.

The concept of the difference between work and product. The whole concept revolved on the notion that the only difference for work and product is the involvement of a human factor; labor. Labor is the main constituent for the said piece to be a product. While work is said to be natural in occurence, spontaneous in its design, free-flowing, hindered or unhindered like the works of nature and the divine, product is more artificial, built of intention and desire.

For me to convey this concept, I would say the City of Manila, is a product of imperialistic colonial Spanish rule. Its design is but a colonial state, a central locus of trade, economic exploitation and territorial expanse. For it to be a colony of Mother Spain, it has to abide to a system of infrastructure, hiearchy, and architecture, to mirror the presence of the mother nation which is remote of it power and authority. However its design, governed by political will, a concious attempt by Spanish rule of elitists for that particular time hold true.

However, the local revolutionaries deemed otherwise. Taking power, with great force, the locals removed the Spanish rule, and unconciously give power to the masses to freely do as they may, of the space once occupyied by tyrannical system. The deliberate power of colonial assertion and its original intent for the city of Manila is removed, and the people, its inhabitants, decide to do as they want. The city changes for that particular instant, and because of the resistance of greater forces, off no real intention of design, results the once product to a peice of work.

LeFebre also pointed out as big forces change, smaller forces also in play. As large forces, such as opposing sides of war, revolt, or just conflict make thier way to the fruition of work, smaller forces are then absorbed, embraced and incorporated to itself, not easily predicted but can be speculated to take form.

As time surfaces, objects of art hide their in their forms, the history of its developing nature, its production, but this excludes works of art. Again relative to the eyes of the viewer, works of art conveys a sensation of messages unique to its viewer, thus deeper aspects such as transparency and realistic illusions can be removed through how the viewer percieves it. Education, social class, experience and exposure may be variables that make the viewer achieve such perception.

The use of space, is of social relation to its usage or stakeholders. It is a social product that is defined by the activity or entrophy of social relations. These relationships may merge or clash to communally deliver is purpose for its design.

Design Process Application:

A social dimension for the aspect of political and cultural association as a influencing factor for design, exhibit or practice can be created. The idea is to incorporate these as attributes for designing artwork, or exhibit space, to fully utilize the perception and optimize the space for audience reaction.

Another application can be the contingency of free flowing work, forces and energies that develop artwork or the design of the spaces, can collide and negate, while smaller energies can absorb and merge. The magnitude of changes creates resistance among teams, and will either shape the work or hinder its progress. Perhaps placing changes and creative energies in sizeable chunks for absorption will allow faster progress and development, rather than huge leaps that most creative teams will take time to react and constructively move for projects.