Showing 4 posts

Posted Anonymously
KeyPlanet
Jul 23 2006, 1:54 AM EDT | Post edited: Jul 23 2006, 1:54 AM EDT
On discovery of this Cliff Hypothesis (and I found it here, for which I am grateful), I've acquired it and knee deep in the first several chapters, hopefully to discover the primordial reason I'm in the highest building on Rockland, and Victoria. I don't think I can come down into the trees. I have cracked Da Valley Code.

Victoria is coined a Garden City - citta giardino - obviously because almost half the year is spring-like weather; cool and showery. Great for botany, but fatal to evening sidewalk culture. However, in many areas that were cleared at the turn of the last century, it is now returned to a Forest City, with much help from decades of environmental awareness. I look down on a Rockland submerged under 5 to 7 storey trees. I have guests thinking I live next to a park! Many homes in Uplands enjoy neither a sunrise nor set.

My last residence was clinging on the lower slopes of Gonzales Hill. But wherever I abode, I must have a view to the southwest. A view of the sky. Realtors can't fathom the request. Mountin view? Ocean view? No, a blue view. It's a grey winter here and you need to catch the few rays are thrown in the dark months during the cool monsoon.

I need to see the southwest because that's where are prevailing winds come from, that's where the weather comes from, that's where you can literally, see the future.

Skill-testing question; in which direction does the camera pan in cinema to seque to the future? Do you find this valuable?    
Keyword tags: None (edit keyword tags)
Yule
Yule
1. RE: KeyPlanet
Jul 24 2006, 12:32 AM EDT | Post edited: Jul 24 2006, 12:32 AM EDT
In which direction does the camera pan? Why, "go west, young man..."

KeyPlan(et), I'm recovering from an afternoon of concerts and heatwave, so I can't offer anything scintillating in reply because my brain has gone south. But, can I just add (apropos of another website's conversation), that I do think that analysis of media coverage is important insofar as it deconstructs the dominant discourse's framing strategies.

...Oooh, does that sound too academic? Too pinko? Too paranoid? I did explore this (in fine paranoid form, my bad) on my blog's comments board, and will surely pay for it in some way. Bad behaviour on my part, as far as pattern behaviour goes, I'm afraid: biting the hand that feeds, and in such a small -- you might say: terminal -- world...

Meh, whatever.

For further general perusal, here are some additional online links to Larson & urban cliff hypothesis:

http://www.uoguelph.ca/botany/research/cerg/abstracts/urban_cliff.htm

http://www.cbc.ca/quirks/archives/04-05/sep25.html (includes audio stream/ ram file)

http://www.uoguelph.ca/atguelph/04-03-10/articles/urban.html

I think that, together with Grant Hildebrand's _Origins of Architectural Pleasure_, Larson's book is really groundbreaking (?is that the right word) stuff on environmental psychology. As I noted somewhere (on the blog, or else in the wiki's "Linkiography" or "Visionaries" section), it will be useful to think about their approaches in conjunction with Joshua Prince-Ramus's "hyper-rational" approach to architecture. We need, I guess, to understand this from all angles, literally... 1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you?    
Yule
Yule
2. RE: KeyPlanet
Jul 24 2006, 12:48 AM EDT | Post edited: Jul 24 2006, 12:48 AM EDT
Oh, ps: what I also wanted to add to this mix is the concept of "attention" (as addressed in the "Linkiography" section by the link to environmental psychology, which highlights _attention_ as a factor). In particular, take a look however at this paper:
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/468828.html
by Richard A. Lanham, called "The Economics of Attention: Style and Substance in the Age of Information." I won't claim to have digested this in its entirety myself, but I think it's symptomatic of something larger happening in an information-saturated culture (d'oh! -- how's that for a "gloss"?).

Scrambling to define _and_ capture attention is happening in business, that's certain. In that regard, see also Dave Pollard's "How to Save the World" blog, specifically his entries on "Customer Anthropology":
http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2006/06/21.html
also perhaps:
http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2005/11/11.html
and maybe:
http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2006/05/01.html
 1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you?    

Posted Anonymously
3. RE: KeyPlanet
Aug 4 2006, 11:21 AM EDT | Post edited: Aug 4 2006, 11:21 AM EDT
"Oh, ps: what I also wanted to add to this mix is the concept of "attention" (as addressed in the "Linkiography" section by the link to environmental psychology, which highlights _attention_ as a factor). In particular, take a look however at this paper:
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/468828.html
by Richard A. Lanham, called "The Economics of Attention: Style and Substance in the Age of Information." I won't claim to have digested this in its entirety myself, but I think it's symptomatic of something larger happening in an information-saturated culture (d'oh! -- how's that for a "gloss"?).

Scrambling to define _and_ capture attention is happening in business, that's certain. In that regard, see also Dave Pollard's "How to Save the World" blog, specifically his entries on "Customer Anthropology":
http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2006/06/21.html
also perhaps:
http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2005/11/11.html
and maybe:
http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2006/05/01.html
"
Mea culpa my tardiness, thank you so much for the links, I'll get to them when I have a moment. Do you find this valuable?