Kinesthetic Foundations of Spatial Concepts and Configurations

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

This paper focuses on the kinesthetics of human bodies, whether engaged in generic everyday movement or in ritual formations. It attempts to articulate how such kinesthetics constitute a layer of experience which, while ephemeral and barely-conscious, is deeply informative of the conception and configuration of building space.

To link the ephemeral grain of kinesthetics to spatial configuration, the argument refers to Rudolph Laban’s Effort-Shape theory of movement (Dell 1977). Laban distinguishes between movements that the body directs at itself, and movements directed towards other objects and bodies. The latter, termed spatial-movements, construct nearly-imperceptible forms of social interaction, as demonstrated by systematic analyses of dance forms in various cultures (Bull 1967). The fleeting, ‘fine-grain’ of encounter suggested by moving and gesturing bodies, underlies conceptions of space.
This is particularly emphasized in mass gatherings within building enclosures, which amplify issues of generic movement and stasis, and attendant kinesthetics. The paper examines two different building types: Muslim mosques and Soviet assemblies. While different in many respects, both involve synchronic and diachronic spaces meant for large crowds in ritual formations.

Generating a range of kinesthetic movements and sensations, the different crowd formations in both species of buildings construct subtle patterns of encounter, besides proposing models for framing the sense of things (bodies and objects) and of the enclosing boundaries. During Muslim ritual, it is the reliance on subtle spatial-bodily gestures between physically contiguous bodies to communicate a feeling of unity that
permeates Muslim ritual space with an overall sense of transparency. In Soviet mass assemblies, diachronic movement is more crucial. The Soviet Rationalists’ manipulation of building floors as curved surfaces (the Palace of Soviets, 1931), generates a choreography of rhythmic gestures synchronized across the mass of moving bodies (after Meyerhold’s theatrical Biomechanics (Law 1996). A flow of rhythmic spatial-gestures (after Laban) conjoins the attending crowd in a pattern which scaffolds shifting
attention. Self-awareness of the body’s we ight and movement provokes a sense of space as the empathetic projection of weightiness, complemented by the Rationalists’ tilted building masses and play on gravitational pull. Centered on this kinesthetic crowd, Soviet architects shaped spatial boundaries as ‘floating’: visually detached from the
ground and from a conclusive resolution to their structural forces.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, İstanbul, 2007
Place of PublicationIstanbul
Pages053.01-053.16
Number of pages16
ISBN (Electronic)9789755613048
Publication statusPublished - 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Kinesthetic
Crowds
Gesture
Muslims
Conception
Diachrony
Ephemeral
Rationalist
Social Interaction
Bull
Stasis
Self-awareness
Choreography
Transparency
Conscious
Layer
Manipulation
Reliance
Dance
Unity

Cite this

Ziada, H. (2007). Kinesthetic Foundations of Spatial Concepts and Configurations. In Proceedings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, İstanbul, 2007 (pp. 053.01-053.16). [53] Istanbul.
Ziada, Hazem. / Kinesthetic Foundations of Spatial Concepts and Configurations. Proceedings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, İstanbul, 2007. Istanbul, 2007. pp. 053.01-053.16
@inproceedings{1effb5301cb0495e91e3285436472e31,
title = "Kinesthetic Foundations of Spatial Concepts and Configurations",
abstract = "This paper focuses on the kinesthetics of human bodies, whether engaged in generic everyday movement or in ritual formations. It attempts to articulate how such kinesthetics constitute a layer of experience which, while ephemeral and barely-conscious, is deeply informative of the conception and configuration of building space. To link the ephemeral grain of kinesthetics to spatial configuration, the argument refers to Rudolph Laban’s Effort-Shape theory of movement (Dell 1977). Laban distinguishes between movements that the body directs at itself, and movements directed towards other objects and bodies. The latter, termed spatial-movements, construct nearly-imperceptible forms of social interaction, as demonstrated by systematic analyses of dance forms in various cultures (Bull 1967). The fleeting, ‘fine-grain’ of encounter suggested by moving and gesturing bodies, underlies conceptions of space. This is particularly emphasized in mass gatherings within building enclosures, which amplify issues of generic movement and stasis, and attendant kinesthetics. The paper examines two different building types: Muslim mosques and Soviet assemblies. While different in many respects, both involve synchronic and diachronic spaces meant for large crowds in ritual formations. Generating a range of kinesthetic movements and sensations, the different crowd formations in both species of buildings construct subtle patterns of encounter, besides proposing models for framing the sense of things (bodies and objects) and of the enclosing boundaries. During Muslim ritual, it is the reliance on subtle spatial-bodily gestures between physically contiguous bodies to communicate a feeling of unity that permeates Muslim ritual space with an overall sense of transparency. In Soviet mass assemblies, diachronic movement is more crucial. The Soviet Rationalists’ manipulation of building floors as curved surfaces (the Palace of Soviets, 1931), generates a choreography of rhythmic gestures synchronized across the mass of moving bodies (after Meyerhold’s theatrical Biomechanics (Law 1996). A flow of rhythmic spatial-gestures (after Laban) conjoins the attending crowd in a pattern which scaffolds shifting attention. Self-awareness of the body’s we ight and movement provokes a sense of space as the empathetic projection of weightiness, complemented by the Rationalists’ tilted building masses and play on gravitational pull. Centered on this kinesthetic crowd, Soviet architects shaped spatial boundaries as ‘floating’: visually detached from the ground and from a conclusive resolution to their structural forces.",
keywords = "Kinesthetics, Spatial configuration, Aesthetic language, Rhythms, Body and ground",
author = "Hazem Ziada",
year = "2007",
language = "English",
pages = "053.01--053.16",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, İstanbul, 2007",

}

Ziada, H 2007, Kinesthetic Foundations of Spatial Concepts and Configurations. in Proceedings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, İstanbul, 2007., 53, Istanbul, pp. 053.01-053.16.

Kinesthetic Foundations of Spatial Concepts and Configurations. / Ziada, Hazem.

Proceedings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, İstanbul, 2007. Istanbul, 2007. p. 053.01-053.16 53.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

TY - GEN

T1 - Kinesthetic Foundations of Spatial Concepts and Configurations

AU - Ziada, Hazem

PY - 2007

Y1 - 2007

N2 - This paper focuses on the kinesthetics of human bodies, whether engaged in generic everyday movement or in ritual formations. It attempts to articulate how such kinesthetics constitute a layer of experience which, while ephemeral and barely-conscious, is deeply informative of the conception and configuration of building space. To link the ephemeral grain of kinesthetics to spatial configuration, the argument refers to Rudolph Laban’s Effort-Shape theory of movement (Dell 1977). Laban distinguishes between movements that the body directs at itself, and movements directed towards other objects and bodies. The latter, termed spatial-movements, construct nearly-imperceptible forms of social interaction, as demonstrated by systematic analyses of dance forms in various cultures (Bull 1967). The fleeting, ‘fine-grain’ of encounter suggested by moving and gesturing bodies, underlies conceptions of space. This is particularly emphasized in mass gatherings within building enclosures, which amplify issues of generic movement and stasis, and attendant kinesthetics. The paper examines two different building types: Muslim mosques and Soviet assemblies. While different in many respects, both involve synchronic and diachronic spaces meant for large crowds in ritual formations. Generating a range of kinesthetic movements and sensations, the different crowd formations in both species of buildings construct subtle patterns of encounter, besides proposing models for framing the sense of things (bodies and objects) and of the enclosing boundaries. During Muslim ritual, it is the reliance on subtle spatial-bodily gestures between physically contiguous bodies to communicate a feeling of unity that permeates Muslim ritual space with an overall sense of transparency. In Soviet mass assemblies, diachronic movement is more crucial. The Soviet Rationalists’ manipulation of building floors as curved surfaces (the Palace of Soviets, 1931), generates a choreography of rhythmic gestures synchronized across the mass of moving bodies (after Meyerhold’s theatrical Biomechanics (Law 1996). A flow of rhythmic spatial-gestures (after Laban) conjoins the attending crowd in a pattern which scaffolds shifting attention. Self-awareness of the body’s we ight and movement provokes a sense of space as the empathetic projection of weightiness, complemented by the Rationalists’ tilted building masses and play on gravitational pull. Centered on this kinesthetic crowd, Soviet architects shaped spatial boundaries as ‘floating’: visually detached from the ground and from a conclusive resolution to their structural forces.

AB - This paper focuses on the kinesthetics of human bodies, whether engaged in generic everyday movement or in ritual formations. It attempts to articulate how such kinesthetics constitute a layer of experience which, while ephemeral and barely-conscious, is deeply informative of the conception and configuration of building space. To link the ephemeral grain of kinesthetics to spatial configuration, the argument refers to Rudolph Laban’s Effort-Shape theory of movement (Dell 1977). Laban distinguishes between movements that the body directs at itself, and movements directed towards other objects and bodies. The latter, termed spatial-movements, construct nearly-imperceptible forms of social interaction, as demonstrated by systematic analyses of dance forms in various cultures (Bull 1967). The fleeting, ‘fine-grain’ of encounter suggested by moving and gesturing bodies, underlies conceptions of space. This is particularly emphasized in mass gatherings within building enclosures, which amplify issues of generic movement and stasis, and attendant kinesthetics. The paper examines two different building types: Muslim mosques and Soviet assemblies. While different in many respects, both involve synchronic and diachronic spaces meant for large crowds in ritual formations. Generating a range of kinesthetic movements and sensations, the different crowd formations in both species of buildings construct subtle patterns of encounter, besides proposing models for framing the sense of things (bodies and objects) and of the enclosing boundaries. During Muslim ritual, it is the reliance on subtle spatial-bodily gestures between physically contiguous bodies to communicate a feeling of unity that permeates Muslim ritual space with an overall sense of transparency. In Soviet mass assemblies, diachronic movement is more crucial. The Soviet Rationalists’ manipulation of building floors as curved surfaces (the Palace of Soviets, 1931), generates a choreography of rhythmic gestures synchronized across the mass of moving bodies (after Meyerhold’s theatrical Biomechanics (Law 1996). A flow of rhythmic spatial-gestures (after Laban) conjoins the attending crowd in a pattern which scaffolds shifting attention. Self-awareness of the body’s we ight and movement provokes a sense of space as the empathetic projection of weightiness, complemented by the Rationalists’ tilted building masses and play on gravitational pull. Centered on this kinesthetic crowd, Soviet architects shaped spatial boundaries as ‘floating’: visually detached from the ground and from a conclusive resolution to their structural forces.

KW - Kinesthetics

KW - Spatial configuration

KW - Aesthetic language

KW - Rhythms

KW - Body and ground

UR - http://www.spacesyntax.net/symposia/

M3 - Conference contribution

SP - 053.01-053.16

BT - Proceedings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, İstanbul, 2007

CY - Istanbul

ER -

Ziada H. Kinesthetic Foundations of Spatial Concepts and Configurations. In Proceedings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, İstanbul, 2007. Istanbul. 2007. p. 053.01-053.16. 53