My investigation of Lilac Lane began with an interest in how an estate communicates control through signs, fences, surveillance and restrictions on access. Through photographing, annotating and mapping the site, I realised these systems overlap to shape how the space is experienced, while some forms of control remain unnoticed. Two readings helped me reflect on this: Perec’s Species of Spaces and Other Pieces (1997) and Venturi et al.’s Learning from Las Vegas (2007).
Process: Perec
Perec tells the reader to “force yourself to write down what is of no interest” (1997, p. 50). Following this approach, I photographed signs, bins and locks, including overlooked details such as fencing and graffiti. Like Perec, I recorded where I was and the order in which I noticed things, documenting a walk as well as a place.
Perec reflects on how easily we focus on unusual occurrences rather than ordinary details (1997, p. 53). My project revealed a similar tension: the overflowing bin beside “keep bin locked”, the blacked-out sign and graffiti on a commissioned mural initially stood out as exceptions. Yet these disruptions became meaningful only after I documented the surrounding patterns. Seeing “more flatly” (1997, p. 51) helped establish the norm.
Theme: Venturi and Scott Brown
Venturi and Brown argue that on the Strip “the sign is more important than the architecture” (2007, p. 13), treating the landscape as a communication system. Lilac Lane shares this subject, but at walking pace rather than thirty-five miles an hour. My fence analysis complicates their claim: fences, gates, locks and intercoms communicate authority without text, making architecture and graphic design inseparable. While commercial signs persuade customers, the estate’s signs and barriers regulate residents’ movement and behaviour. Both communicate through the environment, but establish different relationships with those who encounter them.
Venturi and Brown suggest that withholding judgment can make later judgment “more sensitive” (2007, p. 3). My categories of restrict, control, surveil, navigate and disrupt began as neutral sorting. My interventions challenged this neutrality. “WHO SAYS?” shifts attention towards who has the authority to determine these messages. Adding my own words to existing signs transformed the map from a record of the estate into a way of questioning it.
Where this leaves me
Perec makes the street strange, and my zine ends with “or have you?”. Perec helped me notice overlooked details, while Venturi and Brown helped me interpret how the environment communicates. Mapping made overlapping systems visible; my zine and altered signs questioned their authority. This leaves me asking: can people who inhabit a controlled space challenge the messages through which it is defined?
Word Count: 430
.
REFERENCE LIST
- Perec, G. (1997). Species of spaces and other pieces. Penguin.
- Venturi, R., Denise Scott Brown, Rattenbury, K. and Hardingham, S. (2007). Learning from Las Vegas. Abingdon: Routledge.
Leave a Reply