The meaning of urban space has been transformed by spontaneously organized collective forces. The discrepancy in between form and use has been discovered and considered as one of the most imaginative paths for architectural creation.
This space in between form and use appeared as “Spatial Practice” in the book Production of Space written by Henri Lefebvre. It is introduced as the third concept in the process of spatial production in an opposition between two concepts, “Representation of Space” occupied by Users, and “Space of Representation” occupied by architect and urban planner. Lefebvre’s understanding of the Production of Space can be diagrammatically described as a revolution of the triangular relation between these three concepts of space.
Due to this triangular diagram, the barricades in Paris in 1968 could be described as a passage revolving from “Representation of Space” to “Space of Representation” through the “Spatial Practice” which is the occupancy of the public space by individual citizens.
This methodology was basically well perceived but at the same time controversial for the architect who is responsible for the “Space of Representation”. The production of space necessitates an inverse approach in order to respond to today’s dynamism in the “Production of Space”. The architect takes over the role of producing lively space.
Architectural Behaviorology is introduced. Behavior cannot be only explained by use, not only by form (sic). Behavior could be situated in between form and use. In that sense, behavior corresponds to Lefebvre’s Spatial Practice.
The observed range of “Architectural Behavior” in and around a building is broad, varying from human behavior and physical phenomenon to building typology and effects on nature. We can make architecture more delightful and organic by compiling these distinct elements into a cognoscente synthesis. This is the method of “Architectural Behaviorology”.