The Nature of Order // Book One // The Phenomenon of Life

[droqen]

P. 349

. . . as I encounter the contradictions and difficulties . . . gradually I start to get rid of all the things which seem good because of images and opinions --- and retain only those which really are full of life. . . . life, as it occurs in buildings or in works of art, can be measured. But it can only be measured, or estimated, in a way which relies on the degree of development, or enlightenment, of the observer.

// I think I prefer the more neutral "nameless quality" name given to what Alexander now calls "life," but I do understand why he does it. I don't entirely disagree but taken out of context it's quite weird.

P. 349
. . . what if, objectively, the phenomenon we call life cannot be measured by any other method? In this situation, the narrow confines of Cartesian method would, arbitrarily, beyond the bounds of what can properly be measured or observed. I suggest that the ugly and lifeless environment which we have been building since the 1950s has come about because public bodies and authoritative opinion have been most comfortable with that which can be measured or discussed within the Cartesian framework. This has then made real quality all but impossible.

// Supposing there is an objective measure of long-term human appeal, which to me is not at all questionable at scale, that is, statistically speaking, and furthermore supposing that only a properly prepared human brain has the capacity to perform such a measurement (so far, and for whatever reason), it stands to reason that an increasing belief in anything other than that measurement tool (e.g. metrics of popularity, or explicable justification) would cause that measure to drop. I am draining every bit of poetry from Alexander's writing here but it is because I am so charmed by it that I must decode it a little before I can really understand what it is I am integrating.

[droqen]

P. 350
. . . the most elementary rules of architecture are (1) ask people what they want and (2) give it to them almost without question, so that the dignity of their inner response is recognized, preserved.

[droqen]

P. 350
I believe that, in all contemporary cultures, people have been robbed of their heritage, not so much because ancient culture has been destroyed, but more because today's prevailing culture robs people of the feeling that is inherent in them, their true feeling, their true liking.

[droqen]

P. 350
. . . true liking is different from one culture to another, still, I am more likely to succeed in creating a thing that a Japanese person truly likes by making a thing that I truly like than by following a handbook of modern regulations in Japanese style. . . . the worldwide advance of money-based democracy has created a profound sameness which is (so far) based on falsehood, on a denial of what it really means to be human.

[droqen]

P. 354-355, under the header TECHNIQUES OF MEASUREMENT, emphasis mine
The essence of the idea behind this measurement is that. . . we ask which one induces, in us, a greater feeling of wholeness. . . .
     Some of the possible questions are:
- Which of the two seems to generate a greater feeling of life in me?
- Which of the two makes me more aware of my own life?
- Which of the two induces (as asked in Akido) a greater harmony in me, in my body and in my mind?
- Which of the two makes me feel a greater wholesomeness in myself?
. . .

// Holy shit it's EMERSION

[droqen]

CHAPTER TEN

THE IMPACT

OF LIVING STRUCTURE

ON HUMAN LIFE

[droqen]

I'm frustrated. I can see Alexander using metaphor to either explain or justify something, going further down this rabbit hole which reminds me so much of The Idea of the World, describing something that I cannot get behind... This continues to come up. I've placed a hold on book two at the library. I simultaneously worry and hope that Alexander will go harder on this -- worry, because then I will not be able to follow where he goes. But hope, because then I can stop reading.

P. 373
The effect [of the geometry of the environment] resembles the effect of trace elements in the human body. . . . they make possible the construction of certain enzymes, which themselves catalyze crucial and highly repetitive components of protein synthesis. . . . they play a catalytic role . . .

. . . The impact of the geometry of our environment---its living or not-living structure---has a similar, nearly trace-like effect on our emotional, social, spiritual, and physical well-being.

//

It needs to be noticed that this is not a line of reasoning but a rhetorical or explanatory device. Probably Alexander employs these quite often, but I can't catch every one... I don't like it. It makes me doubt his evidence.

[droqen]

P. 373
    A healthy human being is able, essentially, to solve problems, to develop, to move toward objects of desire, to contribute to the well-being of others in society, to create value in the world, and to love, to be exhilarated, to enjoy. The capacity to do these many positive things, to do them well, and to do them freely, is natural. It arises by itself. It cannot be created artificially in a person, but it needs to be released, given room. It does need to be supported. It depends, simply, on the degree to which a person is able to concentrate on these things, not on others. . . .
    Of course, it is often said that challenge makes us more alive. . . . The nature of the interference caused by hardship and conflict must therefore be very well understood, and accurately gauged, before we can say that we have a clear picture of its effects --- either negative or positive.

// What? What? Is Christopher Alexander about to talk in some literal game design themes here?

[droqen]

P. 374
     The psychologist Max Wertheimer once wrote a short article called "A Story of Three Days," in which he proposed a simple, and extraordinary definition of freedom. . . . true freedom lies in the ability a person has to react appropriately  to any given circumstance. The perfectly free human is a person who, no matter what she or he encounters, can act appropriately.

P. 375
     Let us consider an architectural example of interference with freedom. Illustrated on this page is a housing project in which the parking lot leads directly to the houses. . . . It creates conditions which make t hard for people to react appropriately to their living experience. There is no common land and therefore no real opportunity for people to experience any sharing or public or common interaction. The desire for this kind of interaction may well e slight. But when it occurs, as a natural impulse, it cannot be satisfied --- indeed it is prevented, frustrated, forces run underground, natural expression of action is modified and curtailed.

[droqen]

Alexander describes the "stress reservoir," a metaphor for understanding human stress and its effect on the human mind. Very simple.

P. 376, "The Stress Reservoir"
     Broadly speaking, the reaction to each unsolved problem, or annoyance, or conflict that is encountered creates in the individual some level of stress. Stress is initially functional and productive. Its purpose is to mobilize the body in such a way that problems get solved. . . . But there is a limited capacity for stress in every human individual. Varying from person to person, it is nevertheless quite finite . . . as the stress reaches the top of the reservoir, the organism's ability to deal effectively with the stress decreases. This then gives rise to the "stress," as used in its popular meaning. . . . When the stress is too great, creative functioning is impaired. . . . stress is cumulative, because it is all in one currency.

[from the notes: see Hans Selye, The Stress of Life]

[droqen]

P. 378
The further the stress reservoir is brought to overflowing, the more people are surrounded by conflicts which make it impossible for them to meet their ordinary striving and aspirations. They struggle, but are undermined continuously by a separation from every reality, and by a separation from the experience of solving problems, overcoming them, and meeting challenges and overcoming them, and becoming, therefore, free.

[droqen]

Alexander is preaching to the choir over here. I'm already on board with this definition of freedom, so I should probably stop basking in agreement. I'll allow myself to indulge in one more quote along this line though.

P. 380
. . . A living environment is one which encourages, allows, each person to react appropriately to what happens, hence to be free, hence to encourage the most fruitful development in each person. This is an environment which goes as far as possible in allowing people's tendencies, their inner forces, to run loose, so that they can take care, by themselves, of their own development. It is an environment in which a person is free to grow, if she wishes to grow, and to do so where, and how, she chooses.

// This assumes something that I also assume, which is stated on an earlier page:

P. 374
One may assume. . . that each person naturally does everything possible, to be alive. The tendency to enjoy life. . . is a natural human force. It is the thing a person most naturally aspires to, and seeks.

[droqen]

P. 380
[A living environment] releases you, allows you to be yourself, allows you to be free. Ease. The yawn, a smile, a perfect ease which allows you, above all, to be yourself. . . This ease, this freedom, depends on configurations which are opposite from the conflict-inducing, stress-inducing configurations I have been describing earlier. Rather it depends in part on "opposite" configurations, those which remove energy-wasting conflict from the environment [and] release human effort for more challenging tasks, for the freedom to be human.
     The 253 configurations in A PATTERN LANGUAGE are of this type. Each pattern . . . describes some conflict --- better said, some system of conflicting forces --- . . . which can be tamed, resolved, when the environment is right.

[droqen]

P. 382
. . . so long as the configuration is wrong, the conflict remains underground. Yet there is no benefit to keeping the conflict under the surface. All that does is add to stress. It does not contribute challenge. It is, in any case, invisible, experienced only in the built-up stress, not as a creative challenge.

[droqen]

P. 392
. . . If the flowers on the trees attract birds, and the singing of the birds then intensifies the beauty of the bench, the birds contribute directly to the wholeness of the bench. The flowers may contribute indirectly, by contributing to the wholeness of the bird-filled trees. Thus the wholeness is a complex living structure: it may be sustained, or not, by countless aspects of the various systems which surround and fill the space where the wholeness occurs.

//

Videogames are a lot. There are none of the material concerns of architecture, but "the various systems which surround and fill the space" are not pre-existing as they are in architecture. I guess level design is in some sense 'architecture for another world of systems'. I love doing this type of work. It's harder when those systems are still in development.