In the city of Norwich in the 1800s, the overcrowded streets had a major problem.
There weren’t enough public restrooms, leading to many instances of public urination on the sides
of buildings. Instead of quickly building more urinals however, the problem was handled by
constructing discrete anti urination devices in places known to have problems with urination.
These structures discouraged men from urinating by being at an angle that would cause
anyone urinating to be splashed all over their feet and legs. This trend of adjusting architectural
design to dissuade a certain behavior isn’t only seen in the 19th century however. This is a
current issue that still offers an avenue for politicians to cut corners when it comes to solving
serious issues.
There weren’t enough public restrooms, leading to many instances of public urination on the sides
of buildings. Instead of quickly building more urinals however, the problem was handled by
constructing discrete anti urination devices in places known to have problems with urination.
These structures discouraged men from urinating by being at an angle that would cause
anyone urinating to be splashed all over their feet and legs. This trend of adjusting architectural
design to dissuade a certain behavior isn’t only seen in the 19th century however. This is a
current issue that still offers an avenue for politicians to cut corners when it comes to solving
serious issues.
Unpleasant design, also known as hostile architecture, is design used for punishing a behavior
or excluding a group of people from a location in ways that most of the population won’t even
notice. Unpleasant design is hidden almost everywhere. Often, this design is hidden as natural
parts of the architecture put there to make it look appealing. Even on campus, there are examples.
Have you ever seen these random metal bars jutting out from a stone bench (image below)?
These are used to dissuade skateboarders from grinding on them.
or excluding a group of people from a location in ways that most of the population won’t even
notice. Unpleasant design is hidden almost everywhere. Often, this design is hidden as natural
parts of the architecture put there to make it look appealing. Even on campus, there are examples.
Have you ever seen these random metal bars jutting out from a stone bench (image below)?
These are used to dissuade skateboarders from grinding on them.
However, the more nefarious parts of unpleasant design are when politicians use it to hide
problems from the public eye by kicking the can down the road for someone else to solve. In
city parks, benches made with an extra arm rest in the middle or constructed out of metal
wouldn’t make people like us notice them, but to someone just looking for a place to sleep,
it appears to be very hostile. The extra arm rest makes it nigh impossible to rest on them, and
those constructed of metal become far too hot in the summer, or far too cold in the winter for
people to spend too much time on them. This ends up leading to the homeless looking
elsewhere for a safe space, out of the public eye, conveniently working out for the people
whose job it is to deal with the homeless and give them a safe space.
problems from the public eye by kicking the can down the road for someone else to solve. In
city parks, benches made with an extra arm rest in the middle or constructed out of metal
wouldn’t make people like us notice them, but to someone just looking for a place to sleep,
it appears to be very hostile. The extra arm rest makes it nigh impossible to rest on them, and
those constructed of metal become far too hot in the summer, or far too cold in the winter for
people to spend too much time on them. This ends up leading to the homeless looking
elsewhere for a safe space, out of the public eye, conveniently working out for the people
whose job it is to deal with the homeless and give them a safe space.
Not all forms of hostile design are inherently cruel. There are cases of it being used to
protect the population, such as strange blue lights being installed in public bathrooms.
They are used to make it harder for drug users to find their veins. Or, on the opposite
side, these blue lights are only used by business owners so they don’t have to deal
with the bad publicity of one of their customers dying of an overdose in their store. It can
be difficult to catch cases of real unpleasant design because there are often so many
plausible explanations to why something is built in a specific way. It could simply be
that the person who designed the steel bench just wanted to make something modern
looking, and wasn’t considering the comfort of the people sitting on it, or perhaps the
homeless problem isn’t something that ever should be considered in the context of the
environment. MTSU doesn’t have benches in most of their bus stops, but this isn’t an
example of unpleasant design since the campus doesn’t have a homeless problem in
the first place.
protect the population, such as strange blue lights being installed in public bathrooms.
They are used to make it harder for drug users to find their veins. Or, on the opposite
side, these blue lights are only used by business owners so they don’t have to deal
with the bad publicity of one of their customers dying of an overdose in their store. It can
be difficult to catch cases of real unpleasant design because there are often so many
plausible explanations to why something is built in a specific way. It could simply be
that the person who designed the steel bench just wanted to make something modern
looking, and wasn’t considering the comfort of the people sitting on it, or perhaps the
homeless problem isn’t something that ever should be considered in the context of the
environment. MTSU doesn’t have benches in most of their bus stops, but this isn’t an
example of unpleasant design since the campus doesn’t have a homeless problem in
the first place.
However, when unpleasant design is recognized, it can create a real stink in the
papers about the politician doing it. Recently, in Seattle, there were a whole bunch of
new bike racks installed directly under a bridge that was scheduled for demolition.
These bike racks were not placed there for cyclists however, but they were put there to
keep the homeless out of one of the few dry places left to rest in Seattle. This was very
clearly their purpose due to there literally being no reason for cyclists to even stop there.
When one citizen recognized the situation, he put in a public disclosure request with his
local Department of Transportation about the bike racks, and confirmed his suspicions.
The citizen went to his local paper with the story and they ran it, causing public outcry
and the bike racks to eventually be taken down. Below I have two comparison images
of the very bridge in Seattle.
papers about the politician doing it. Recently, in Seattle, there were a whole bunch of
new bike racks installed directly under a bridge that was scheduled for demolition.
These bike racks were not placed there for cyclists however, but they were put there to
keep the homeless out of one of the few dry places left to rest in Seattle. This was very
clearly their purpose due to there literally being no reason for cyclists to even stop there.
When one citizen recognized the situation, he put in a public disclosure request with his
local Department of Transportation about the bike racks, and confirmed his suspicions.
The citizen went to his local paper with the story and they ran it, causing public outcry
and the bike racks to eventually be taken down. Below I have two comparison images
of the very bridge in Seattle.
We all take part in designing the world we live in. As designers, we must always be
conscious on how our creations affect the world, and fix it when it has unintended
consequences. There are countless examples of unpleasant design that range from
country music played in stores to drive away loitering youths, to literal spikes placed
on the ground to keep people from sleeping in a specific spot. In all these cases,
context matters, and all perspectives should be considered. This is an invisible double
edged sword that can be wielded to great effect in every aspect of our lives.
conscious on how our creations affect the world, and fix it when it has unintended
consequences. There are countless examples of unpleasant design that range from
country music played in stores to drive away loitering youths, to literal spikes placed
on the ground to keep people from sleeping in a specific spot. In all these cases,
context matters, and all perspectives should be considered. This is an invisible double
edged sword that can be wielded to great effect in every aspect of our lives.
Questions
1. What city had an overcrowding problem?
2. How had that city dealt with public urination?
3. What is unpleasant design?
4. Is hostile design inherently cruel?
5. What are the strange blue lights in bathrooms used for?
6. In what city were bike racks installed to keep out homeless people?
7. Who did the citizen go to in order to find out why the bike racks were placed there?
8. If what we create has unintended consequences, what should we do?
Discussion Question
1. Was the citizen right to call for the bike racks to be removed?
2. What are examples of hostile architecture you can find in hospitals? Private practices?
3. Does MTSU discriminate against a certain group of people?
This is the video that turned me towards this subject. Personally I find most of hostile architecture to be paranoia, like wearing a tinfoil hat, but in the cases where it is used aggressively, I find it a disgusting use of power and manipulation.
Fascinating, Joseph. I'll never look at a bikestand or spiky median the same way again. There's an important distinction between "hostility" that serves the general public good and that which targets specific classes just because they're perceived by the more advantaged majority as a nuisance or an embarrassment. Humane public design is a must!
ReplyDeleteI really liked your post/presentation due to its rather unique nature. I never really considered diving factors or implications of "hostile" architecture. I recognize that hostile architecture is not inherently malicious, I think it does make it possible to put a band-aid on an issue without providing a solution, specifically in regard to homeless individuals. In the instance of Seattle doing this by unnecessarily installing a bike rack under a bridge, two ethical issues come to mind. First is that this was done as a political move in order to combat homelessness and provide a solution by the city. A solution to a problem should always result in a net improvement for a given situation but this was little more than moving the problem out of sight. This leads me to my second point, not only was there no improvement of the situation, what little shelter the homeless individuals had was removed without providing alternative accommodations leaving them worse off than before just for the public perception of a decreased number homeless individuals. This was nothing more than a failed attempt at trying to hide responsibility on the city's part.
ReplyDelete