Week 2 Discussion: Learning Environments

[This is a response to a proposed learning space by Anthony Brand]

"I feel like that kind of hyper-responsive space could go right or wrong depending on how it is implemented. In instances where divergent creative thinking is actively involved, like during the brainstorming phase of creative practices, the arbitrariness of this cross-disciplinary feedback may fuel the search for new solutions. However, once one reaches beyond this stage into refining a distilled idea (eg: preparing the final presentation for an Architecture crit, perfecting movements in Dance etc.), this kind of space may render as a distraction.

Regarding the broader topic of the role of surveillance in creativity, I do agree that the element of a one-way observation could impair a student's creativity. The thought that an authoritarian-like eye could pass judgement on my creative actions at any second would shake most people's confidence in trying to create.

In speaking of this though, I do wonder what may occur if the Creatives themselves are given the role of an unseeable observer in the public realm. What if there were a public space where creative minds could manipulate parts of the environment, and see how the occupants may react to these changes (kind of like a guinea pig or mouse habitat). For instance, how would the public react to a walkway that could change at any time? How may this affect the circulation through such a space? Fully conscious of their actions, such a space could illuminate freedom in creativity as a near anarchal process, thus potentially creating an inverse polemic on dogmatic pedagogies restricting creative thinking.

Brand's Response:

"Fun Palace..."

Reflections

[YET TO BE WRITTEN]