室内设计外文翻译-作为公共空间-图书馆设计和公共空间的创建

PAGE2–PAGE18–本科外文翻译作为公共空间：图书馆设计和公共空间的创建BecomingPublic:LibraryDesignAndTheCreationOfPublicSpace学部（院）：建筑与艺术学院专业：环境设计学生姓名：学号：指导教师：完成日期：2015年4月10日BecomingPublic:LibraryDesignAndTheCreationOfPublicSpaceByMeganClarkAbstract：Publiclibrarydesignisanimportantrealmwithinwhichtheroleandphilosophyofthepubliclibraryasapublicspaceiscommunicated.Thispaperanalyzesvariousreadingsofpubliclibrarydesignsandfurtheranalyzesthetopicbyconsideringtheuseofthesebuiltspacesbylibrarypatrons.Theinteractionbetweenlibraryusersandthelibrarydesignisrevealingofboththecontradictorynatureofpublicspaceandthewaysinwhichthelibraryisbeingunderstoodandimagine.Thepublicinterpretationoftheprinciplescommunicatedthroughlibrarydesignisrevealingofthevalueofcontemporarypublicspace,whichiscurrentlybeingchallengedbytheencroachingroleofcommercialestablishments.Thispaperconcludesthatlibraries,aspublicspaces,playasignificantroleinthecreationofcivicsociety.Keywords:library;publicspace;designIntroductionThedesignoftheominousandimpressiveLibraryofCongressincludesacentralreadingroomcontainedinadomedenclosureattheheartofthebuilding.Thereadermusttraversetothecenterofthebuildingtocalluponitsresources.Collins(2009)notesthatdepthconnotespowerandthedeeperthereadersgointothebuildingtheclosertheygettoaccessingthefullpoweroftheinstitution.ThisbuildingdesignliterallyreflectsthephilosophicalgoalsandcharacteroftheLibraryofCongress.Intheaveragecommunitybranch,itisnotlikelythatpatronswillbedemandingaccesstothecentrallylocatedfurnaceroominthebasementinordertoharnessthepoweroftheinstitution.Yet,evenonthesmallestscale,librarydesignplaysasignificantpartintransmittingthevaluesandrolesoftheinstitution.Inthecaseofthepubliclibrarybuilding,contemporarydesignhassoughttospeaktofreedomofaccessandcommunity.Butthisnarrativeisnotthepropertyofthedesignalone.Thepublicinteractswithandinterpretsthespacewhichinturnaffectsthedesign.Togetherthedesignandtheusercreatealibraryspacethatishometoanumberofcontradictoryclaimsregardingidentityandpurpose.Itisthisinteractionbetweenthepatronandthepubliclibrarydesignthatwillbeexploredinthispaper.PublicSpaceandthePublicLibraryBeforeconsideringlibraryarchitectureanddesign,itisimportanttoexplorethelibrary’sroleasapublicspaceasthissignificantlyimpactshowthelibraryisdesignedandused.Scranton(1987)definespublicspaceasa,“sphereofbroadandlargelyunplannedencounter”(p.13).Thepublicsphereisaplaceteemingwithunexpectedencounterswhichbringalongwiththemmanychallenges,contradictions,andrevelations.Thesecanvaryfromarudeexperienceonpublictransitorthediscoveryoftheperfectbook,leftwaiting,onalibrarytable.Interactionswithstrangersinpublicspacerequiresadegreeofflexibility,andthisflexibilityisrewardedwiththefruitsofpubliclifeincluding:convenience(streetsandtransit),beauty(parksandarchitecture),andcommunity.Theacceptanceofthepossibilityofsurpriseandtherelatedfreedomthatproducesitencouragesandenablesavarietyofbehavesuniquetothepublicsphere.Scranton(1987)makestheimportantobservationthat“aspaceismadepublicbythenatureofitsboundary”(p.15).Publicisdefinedbythesimpletruththatitisnotprivate.Peoplemayenterorexitatwill,foravarietyofreasonsandperhapswithoutanyjustification.Theyarenotburdenedbytheexpectedroleoftheconsumerortheguest.Insteadpeopleinhabitaspacethatissharedwithstrangerswithwhom,atleastideally,theyexistequally.Thevarietyofpeoplethatmayinteractinthisspaceismuchbroaderthaninprivatecommercialpropertiesorinprivatehomes,andtherefore,publicspaceofferstheimportantpossibilityofanexpandedperspectiveandofbelongingtoacommunitylargerthanwhatindividualscouldconstructontheirown.Ifweneglectpublicspaces,intheoryandinuse,wediminishthepossibilityofvariedsocialinteractionsandtheexperienceofdiversityassocialgroupsbecomemorecontrolledandsegregated(Sickie&Hopkins,2002).Thisdoesnotmeanthatthepubliccommunityisnecessarilydesirableorevenpalatable.JaneJacobs(1987)emphasizesthespecialrelationshipbetweenmembersofthepublic,writingthatpublicspaces,“bringtogetherpeoplewhodonotknoweachotherinanintimate,privatesocialfashionandinmostcasesdonotcaretoknoweachotherinthatfashion”(p.95).Itisexpected,acceptable,andinsomewaysdesirablethatpublicspacebreedsuncomfortableinteractions,aslongasitmaintainsaveneerofsafety.Suchanenvironmentisoftencreatedbytheself-policingofthepublic(Sickie&Hopkins,2002).Theexpectationsofpublicbehavearethereforereinforcedbysocialmores;although,becausepublicspaceoftenintroducespeoplefromavarietyofclassesandbackgrounds,anindividualmayexperiencebehavestheywouldnotpersonallyperforminpublic.Lees(2001)givestheexampleofahomelesswoman,undressinginordertocleanherself,usingthelibrary’sbathroomfacilitiesandrecognizesthatevenwithinthisuncomfortablesituationtheuniquenatureofpublicspaceallowsthiswomantofeelasenseofbelongingthatpromptshertoundertakesuchanactivity.Regardlessofthisandotherunusualusesofpubliclibraries,arecentsurveyofUnitedKingdomlibrarypatronsconcludedthatpubliclibrariesareseenasasafeenvironment(Dewe,2006).Currently,weareexperiencinganintellectualcrisisoverthevalueandmeaningofpublicspace.Asprivateandcommercialintereststakeprecedenceoverpublicspace,theresourcesprovidedtosupportpublicspacesaswellasadevelopedunderstandingoftheimportanceofpublicspacehasdeclined(Tangelo,2006).Apologistshavearguedthatthelibraryisoneofthefewremainingauthenticpublicspaces(Given&Sickie,2003).Yet,asprivatespacesexpandtoprovidesimilarservices(acoffeeshopasagatheringplace,bookstoreswithcouchesandreadingspaces),publicspacetheoristshavefalteredinprovidingagoodexplanationfortheexistenceoflibrariestothegeneralpublic.Giventhelackofacohesiveunderstandingofthevalueofpublicspaceandwhatmakesitunique,itisonlynaturalthatthearchitectureofpublicbuildingsisalsofacingacrisisofidentity.Wemustfirstknowwhatpublicspaceisbeforeweattempttobuildit(Blazer&Lila,1987).TheLibraryasPublicSpace:TheBuilding“Architecture,byitsverynature,isapublicmatter.Whetherweconsiderbuildingsintheiraesthetic,economic,ormoraldimensions,wemustbeprepared,atthesametime,totreatthosedimensionsinpublicterms:toseethatbuildingscanalsoserveaspublicart,orascivicmonuments,orascontributionstothesociallifeofthecity.”(Blazer&Lila,1987,p..ix)Thecontemporarypubliclibrarybuildingismuchdifferentthanitspredecessorsofthelastcenturyandeventhelastfewdecades.Architecturaldesignstrivestoimbueitsbuildingswiththevaluesoftheinstitutionandactivitiesthatwillbehousedwithin.Itisimportanttorememberthatarchitecturecannot“determinesymbolismovertime”(Vale,1992).Symbolsembeddedwithinthedesignofabuildingwillnotremainstatic.Thebuildingwilllivebeyondthepagesofdraftpaperandtheexcitedordisparagingremarksmadeonthedayoftheopening.Thisisparticularlyinterestingtonotewhencontemporarylibrariesarehousedinhistoricbuildingswheretheouterworkofthebuildingencouragesaweandrespectwhiletheinteriorisradicallyredesignedwithanewopenconceptmodelmeanttoencourageinteractionbetweenthepatronsandthecollection,andpropagatethenotionofthepubliclibraryasagatheringplace.Thepubliclibraryasagatheringplaceisarapidlyadoptedideathatservestoexpandthepurposeoflibraryspacebeyondthetraditionalnotionofitbeingawarehouseforbooksandinsteadintoacentralpartofthecreationofcommunity(Official,2010).Librarieshousedinrestoredhistoricalbuildingscanfunctionwellwhentheycombinetheoldersenseofreverenceforknowledgewiththemorerecentfocusoncommunity.Whiletheoreticallythetwococcicomeintoconflict(theoldandnewphilosophiesofthelibrary),thesecontradictionsarehousedcomfortablywithinthepublicspherewhereavarietyofinterpretations,opinions,andindividualsareexpectedtoreside.Thestrikingdifferencebetweentraditionallibrarydesignandmodernlibrarydesignrevealsanattempttocommunicateanevolvingsetofvalues,frompreservationtoaccess,controltocommunityinvolvement..Fasick(2011)demonstratesthisclearlybyarguingthat“everypublicbuildingcontainsametaphor–avisionofwhatthebuildingrepresents”(p.101).Hegoesontosuggestthatthemetaphorsthathavebeenexemplifiedinrecentlibrarybuildingprojectsincludeexploration,asecureplace,aninformationshoppingcenter,andatheater(p.103).Somelibrarieschoosetoexhibitthevaluesofthelibraryasapublicinstitutionwithintheirdesignplan.Forexample,theSeattlePublicLibrary,builtin2004,employsanexpanseofglasswallstosymbolizeopenness(Fasick,2011).Similarly,newinteriordesignsaimforflexiblelayoutsandmultiplemeetingroomsthatencouragepatronstoviewthelibraryasapubliccommons(May&Black,2010).Theoristsofcontemporarylibrarydesignrepeatedlyemphasizeflexibility(Waldensian,2003).Thisisbecausetheworldofthepubliclibraryischangingsorapidlythatthesolidoaktablesandimmovablestacksofdayspassedarenolongerrealisticordesirable.Inthisway,thepermanenceoftheolderdesignprincipleshavebeenreplacedbothliterally,bymoreflexibledesignsandfurniture,butalsometaphoricallywithlibrarieswhosepurposesandcommunityrolesareinflux.Duringthisperiodofchangelibrarieshavealsohadtocontendwiththeincreasingimportanceoftheinternetandaccesstotechnology.Thisincludesthenotionofthe“librarywithoutwalls”andvirtuallibraries.Whileaninterestingtopic,itisbeyondthescopeofthispaperwhichconcernsitselfinsteadwiththeimpactofarchitectureanddesignontheconceptofpublicspaceandbehavewithinthatspace.Importantly,arecentstudyofNovaScoutlibrarypatronsrevealedtheywere“unanimousintheimportancetheyplacedonphysicalspace”(May&Black,2010,p.23).DesignandInteractioninthePublicLibraryUltimately,itisneitherthearchitecturenorthefactofaplacebeingpublicthatdeterminesitssignificancetoanindividual,althoughbothofthesethingsinfluencehowaplaceisinterpretedandused.Infact,architecturalprinciplesandgoalscansometimesevensubvertthepurposeofthelibrary.Someofthemostcelebratedbuildingshavebeendescribedbylibrariansandusersas“inhuman,”“sterile,”or“simplyuncomfortable”(Cohen&Cohen,1979,p.3-4).Instead,“placestakeonmeaningsthroughourparticipationwiththem”(Lyndon,1987,p.157).Eventhesimplestlibrarydesignscanhaveanenduringimpactontheuser’sunderstandingofthelibrary.Forexample,whenrecallinghischildhoodlibraryWald(2011)describedthe“well-stockedwarrenofinterconnectedsand-coloredbrickbuildings”(p.346).HerethedesignisintimatelyconnectedtotheaweWaldfelttowardsthecollection.Hemaintainsamemoryofthephysicalrepresentationofhisexperienceofthelibrary’scollection.Itisthistypeofinteractionwiththepubliclibrarythatdetermineshowitisunderstoodbythepublicitserves.Boththearchitectureandtheinteriordesigninfluenceuserinteractionandtheycanbecreatedwiththepurposeofcommunicatingcertainvaluesandroles.Yet,theyhingeontheoftenunexpectedformsofinteractionthatareproducedbythepublic.Peoplethereforeconsumethedesignwhileapplyingtheirowninterpretations,expectations,andexperiencesonit.Inthiswaythepubliclibrarypatronsbehaveaccordingtoasenseofbelongingandco-ownershipofapublicspace(tovaryingdegreesabidingbytherulesofthespace).ASenseofBelongingPublicspaceisessentialincivicsocietyasitprovidesaplaceoutsideofhomeandworktowhichpeoplecanattachasenseofownershipandbelonging.Significantly,itisaspacethatdoesnotrequirethemtobehaveintheroleofaconsumer.Instead,itpermitsasenseoffreedomandentitlementtomembersofthepublicviasharedspace.Peopleactoutthissenseofbelongingbydesiringandfeelingentitledtoasmallsenseofterritoryinthepublicplacesthattheyfrequent.Thisfeelingcanbeextendedtocommercialestablishmentssuchascoffeeshops,butwithlimitations,astheindividualisalwaysaconsumerandarenolongerwelcomeiftheyrejectthatrole.Thedesireforsmallpersonalterritoriesdrivespeopletodevelophabitswithinthepubliclibrary,suchasreturningtothesamestudycarreldayafterday.Theywilloftengofurtherandbeginleavingpersonalobjectsormarkersinthatspotandiftheyreturntofindthefavoredspotoccupiedtheywillfindoneasnearaspossible(Cohen&Cohen,1979).Thisdevelopmentoffamiliarityandattachmentstosmallsub-locationswithinthelibraryspaceisincrediblyimportantforilluminatingthesenseofbelongingthatcandevelopandiswelcomeinthepublicspace.Inthiswaythelibrarybecomesthe“thirdspace”describedbyRayOldenburg(1999)inGreat,GoodPlace.Interestingly,althoughBrandenburgideahasbeenappliedtopublicspaces,theauthorhimselffocusesentirelyoncommercialenterprisesinhisseminalexplorationofthe“thirdplace.”Thelibraryintheroleofa“thirdplace”becomesaspacewherepeoplecangatherandsocializeoutsideofhomeandwork.Inmodernlibrarydesignthismaybeaninteractionthatoccursoverthetraditionalstacksofbooksoroneoveracupofcoffeeasincreasinglynumbersoflibrariesbegintoincorporatecomfortableseatingspacesandcafes(Harris,2007).TheUrgeandRighttoDisruptAsaresultofthesenseofbelonging,patronswilloftendisruptorreinterprettheintendeduseoflibraryspace.AnanthropologicalstudyoftheLibraryofCongressundertakenbyCollins(2009)shedslightonthesepocketsofdisruptionwithintheofficialstructureoftheLibraryofCongress.Activitiesincludedsleeping,noisyidleness,andmysteriousindividualshedescribesas“synagoguesengagedinresearchquiteoutsideofacademia”(p.37).Collins’concludedthatsuchdiscordisanimportantpartofthecreationofapublicspace.Despitethepurposesthespacewasinitiallydesignedfor,inthecaseoftheLibraryofCongressquiet,officialstudyandresearch,patronswillfindotherusesandthistypeofbehaveiswhattransformsabuildingintoaplace(Collins,2009).WhilethemissionoftheLibraryofCongressismuchdifferentthanthatofastandardbranchlibrary,thenecessityofamiabledisruptionisequally,ifnotmore,presentinpubliclibraries.Asanextensionof“feelingathome”inapublicspace,individualswillmovefurnituretobettersuittheirneedandleavetheirbelongingsattablesandcarrelsastheyexplorethespace(Cohen&Cohen,1979;Given&Sickie,2003).Anticipatingthisneedhasbeenoneofthegreatestchallengesofpubliclibrarydesign.Librariesmuststrivetocreateflexiblespacesthatcanbemanythingstomanypeople.Thismeansprovidingaspacethatallowsforpatronstointeractwiththedesignmorethantheywouldwhenvisitingaprivateorcommercialsetting.Interestingly,researchconductedontheoppositeperspectiveexploreshowlibrarydesignseekstocontrolthebehaviorofitsinhabitants.FormoreonthisperspectiveseeGriffin(2010).AloneinPublic:IndividualswithinthePublicLibraryTheoriesonpubliclifemaintainthatpublicspaceembodiesthe“paradoxofvisibilityandisolation”(Sennett,1987,p.47).Thisideaisevidentintheuseofthepubliclibrary.Unlikelibrariesofdecadesearlier,silenceisnolongerstronglyenforcedinmostlibraryareas.Theindividualsmaintaintherighttopositionthemselvesinthelibraryaccordingtotheirneeds,andtherefore,onelibraryspaceoftenaccommodatesboththecommunity’smoststudioushermitandmostboisterousperformer.Theconceptofthelibraryasafreeandopenspacewhereavarietyofindividualscaninteractbothwiththespaceandeachotherisauniqueandessentialfeatureoftheinstitution.Librariesareaplaceto“bewithothers,yetalone;tofilltimeinpermissivelyornot;toreflect,relaxorreact”(Dewe,2006).Eventhequietactivityofreadingaloneinthelibraryisessentiallysocialbecauseofitspublicsetting.Asaresultitbecomes“scriptedintotheproductionofthecivic”(Thelma,2001).Simplybeingpresentwithinthepublicplaceproducesatacitacknowledgmentofitsprinciplesandexpectations.Librarydesignreflectsandprotectspatronsagainstthisreality,oftenatthesametime.Oneexampleofthisisthestudycarrel.Studycarrelsallowpatronstomarkoutahumbleterritoryforthemselveswithinthebroaderpublicspace.Thisprovidesthemwiththesecurityofatemporarilyprivatespacehousedwithinthepleasureofbeinginpublic.Atensionexistsbetweentheuseofthelibraryasaplaceforsolitarystudy,reflection,orrelaxationandtheessentialsocialnatureofitasapublicspace.Nowhereisthismoreevidentthanintheuseofmufti-seatedstudytables.Librariesconsistentlyreportthat“unlessalibraryissocrowdedthatpatronshavenootheroption,fourpeoplewillneveropttosittogetheratonetable”(Fetter,2006)AsCohen&Cohen(1979)artfullyrecognize“thereisjustnotenoughpsychologicalroom”(p3).Studiesofroomgeographywhichmapthehumantrafficthroughlibraryspaceconfirmthisbynotingthatindividualswillalwaystrytofindaspotalonefirstandtheniftheyareunsuccessfulwillresorttothespotatthegreatestdistancefromothers(Given&Sickie,2003).Thisphenomenonisconfirmedbyresearchonthepsychologyofdistancezoneswhereithasbeendiscoveredthatthestandardcomfortabledistancebetweenpeopleinpublicspacesisbetweentwelveandtwenty-fivefeetunlesscircumstancesdonotallowforit(Cohen&Cohen,1979).Circulartablesaretheleastdesirableinthelibrarysettingastheylimitthenumberofusersatonetimebecausetheymakeitmoredifficulttomarkoutterritory(Cohen&Cohen,1979).Importantly,publicspacedoesnotcanceloutalltheexpectationsassociatedwithclassandhierarchy.Cohen&Cohen(1979)givetheexampleoftheself-assuredyoungattorneywhowillspreadhisbelongingsacrossanentiretableandthinknothingofthelossofsharedspace.WayfindingAnotherimportantconsiderationforlibrarydesignistheconceptofblinding.blindingreferstothewayindividualsmovethroughoutabuiltspacetofindspecificlocations(Handel,2010).Understandingthepatternsofmovementthroughoutabuildingcanproducesignificantimplicationsfordesign.Ifalibrarydoesnotconsiderpatronblinding,thenitrisksprovidingservicesandmaterialswhicharerendereduselessbyapatron’sinabilitytofindthem(Handel,2010).Alibrarydesignthatiscognizantoftrafficpatternswillemphasizealayoutthatfeelsnaturalorintuitive.Thiscanincludeproperandclearsignageandaneasilyavailablestaff.Intuitivedesignandusefulsignageisbothpracticalandservestocommunicatethelibrary’sprioritiesofimprovingaccessandeliminatingbarrierstoinformation(Mason,1975).Astudyonpreferredentrancesandexitsatamedium-sizedurbanlibrarywasconductedbyHandel(2010)whodeterminedthatblindingstudiesofthiskindcanbeextremelyeffectiveindeterminingkeylocationsfordisplaysandotherlibrarymarketing.blindingrevealsboththewayabuildinginstructspatronmovementandtheunexpectedwayspatronsmaymoveinstead.Theseunexpectedpathscanbeusefulinexposingelementsofthedesignthatarecommunicatingsomethingunintended.ArchitecturaltheorysupportsthefindingsofMandelastudy,emphasizingthemessagesdesigncommunicatestotheuser.Seeminglysimplestructureslikeentrancescanbecomequicklycomplexifnotproperlyemphasizedinthedesign(Arthur&Abyssinia,2002).Onceinabuilding,especiallyonewithamodernopenconceptdesign,thereareinnumerablepathswhichtheusercantake.Onemayperceiveembarkingonthechosenoneanexerciseinwhimsy,butinfactthearchitecturaldesignhasalargeimpactonthisbehave.AsArthur&Abyssinia(2002)explain,“pathsandtheirphysicalarticulationareattheheartofarchitectural…design”.DesigningAccordingtoUseTheworkofH.Faulkner-Brown,acelebratedarchitectnotedforhisworkonNewcastleUniversity’sRobinsonLibrary,isusefulforunderstandingmanyofthebasicgoalsinlibrarydesign(NewcastleUniversity,2008).Faulkner-Brown’stencommandmentsoflibrarydesign,firstdevelopedinthe1970s,andhislaterworkonlibrarydesign(Faulkner-Brown,1999),adequatelysummarizedtheneedsofcontemporarypubliclibrarydesign,andconsideredallofthetopicsdiscussedincludingthesenseofbelonging,theneedfordisruption,solitaryexperienceinpublic,andtheimportanceofBlinding(Dewe,2006).Ithasbeenadaptedseveraltimessinceitsdevelopmentbutstillstandsasageneralguidelineforconsideringlibrarydesign.Thelistofcommandmentsincludesthefollowingqualities:flexibility,compactness,accessibility,flexibility,variety,organization,comfort,consistencyinenvironment,security,andeconomy(Dewe,2006).Thislistcovers,inahighlypracticalway,allofthephysicalandphilosophicalconcernsofthecontemporarylibrary.Itemphasizesaflexibleandfriendlydesignthatiseconomicallyconscious(giventherestrictedbudgetsofcontemporarylibraries)whilenotingtheimportanceoforganizationandcomfort,whichsuggestshowtousethelibraryandwelcomesthepatrontotheuniquesettingofapublicplace.Thecommandmentlisthassincebeenupdatedanumberoftimesinordertoaccountfornewissuesinlibraryserviceandsomeversionsnowinclude:interactivityandsuitabilityforinformationtechnology(Dewe,2006).Thecommandmentsexposetheneedoflibrariestocreatespacesthatexpresstheintangiblegoalsandprincipleswhilefunctioningashighlyusable,flexible,andwelcomingspaces.Oneconsequenceofthisnewemphasisonflexibledesignhasbeenareducedinteractionbetweenthelibrarianatthetraditionalreferencedeskandthepatron,whonowoftenwandersinastateofidlediscoveryanddoesnotthinktoapproachthelibrarianforhelpbecausethespaceisnolongerdirectedorcenteredonthelibrarianandreferencedesk(Dewe,2006).Thisdoesnotmeantheopenspacedesigneliminatesthepossibilityofinteractionbetweenstaffandpatronagebutitdoesrequirenewmethodstoencouragethatinteraction.Infact,the“livingroom”feelingofnewlibrarydesignscanencouragenewandmorepersonalinteractionswithlibrarystaffwherepatronsfeelmoreintimatelyassociatedwiththestaffandlocation,andfeelcomfortablediscussingpersonalmattersbeyondtraditionalinformationretrievalinteractions(May&Black,2010).ConclusionThepubliclibrarybuildingisavesselofcontradictorydesiresandperceptions.Thesevacillatingphilosophiesservetostrengthenthepubliclibrary’srelevanceandnotderailitbecausetheprinciplesofpublicspaceandthecivicsocietyuponwhichtheseprinciplesarebuiltuniquelyallowforthistypeofuncertainty,andevenencourageit.Publiclibrarybuildingsanddesignsaimtoreflectthis.Thesespacescommunicatethevaluesandprinciplesofthepubliclibraryandalsobecomeembeddedwithnewideasthroughthepublic’sinteractionwiththem.Librariesareessentiallyandfundamentallypublic.Thepublicsphereisaspaceofconflictandcollaborationthatcanonlyfindtrueexpressioninapublicspacelikethatwhichisprovidedbypubliclibraries.Theproductofthisdistinctivesettingisanimportantsenseofcommunityinwhich,withavarietyofexpressionstochoosefrom,theindividualfindshimorherselfanactivepartofthepublicsphere.Toquestionthelibrary’sroleinsocietyistorecognizetheshiftingneedsofthepublic.Torejectitsimportistoignorethecomplexnatureofpubliclifeandthreatenthedelicate,criminalspacethatprotectstheindividualfromadichotomousexistenceofshiftingbetweenprivateandcommercialspheres.作为公共空间：图书馆设计和公共空间的创建ByMeganClark达尔豪斯大学硕士研究生摘要：在哲学领域中，公共图书馆作为公共空间交流的载体，公共图书馆的设计是一个重要的角色。公共图书馆设计的各种数据分析,考虑使用图书馆的读者,进一步分析了主题。图书馆用户和图书馆之间的交互设计是揭示公共空间的矛盾和图书馆被理解和重塑的方式。公众沟通的解释原则通过图书馆设计揭示当代公共空间的价值,目前受到了商业机构的侵犯。本文得出了结论:图书馆作为公共空间,在公民社会的创建过程中发挥这重要作用。关键词：图书馆、公共空间、设计简介令人印象深刻的美国国会图书馆的设计是一个圆顶外壳的建筑，包括一个中心阅览室。读者必须阅遍的中心建筑中的资源。柯林斯(2009)指出,代表着权力和更深层次的目的读者越深度研究完整的建筑,他们越接近权力的机构。这个建筑设计确实反映了哲学的目标和美国国会中图书馆的角色。它不太可能平均社区分支,为了利用权力机构，顾客将会要求访问集中炉室位于地下室的区域。然而,即使是最小的规模,图书馆设计在传输中也扮演一个重要部分和角色的机构。公共图书馆的建设,是一种试图提供言论自由区域的现代设计。但这种说法并不单单是设计的价值，公共与和诠释空间进而影响设计。共同设计和用户创建一个图书馆空间,许多矛盾的声明是关于身份和目的的。正是这种相互作用的支持为人和公共图书馆的设计探索铺平道路。公共空间和公共图书馆之前考虑图书馆架构和设计,重要的是探索图书馆作为公共空间的概念,因为这明显影响了图书馆的设计和使用。斯克兰顿(1987)定义了公共空间：“广泛的范围和很大程度上面临未知”。公共领域是一个充满了未知的地方，它们面临许多挑战、矛盾,和启示。这些可以改变可促使人们从一个粗鲁的公共交通或经验中获得完美的发现。交互与陌生在公共空间中需要一定程度的灵活性,这种灵活性获得公众生活的成果包括:方便(街道和交通)、美(公园和架构),和社区。接受惊喜的可能性和相关的自由,它鼓励和支持各种表现独特的公共领域。斯克兰顿(1987)的重要的观察结论：“自然的空间是公开的边界”。公众被定义为简单的事实,这不是私有的。人们可能会进入或离开,出于各种原因,也许没有任何理由。他们并没有受到消费者的预期作用或客人。相反人们的居住空间,是与陌生人共享,至少在理想的情况下,他们同样存在。可能相互作用的各种各样的人在这个空间比私人商业地产或更广泛的私人住宅,因此,从扩大的角度来看，公共空间提供了重要的可能性,使社会比个人可以自己构造。在理论和在使用中,如果我们忽视了公共空间,我们就减少了社交的可能性,变得与社会群体隔离(精神病患者&霍普金斯,2002)。这并不意味着公众社会是必然可取的,甚至是好的。简雅各布斯(1987)强调公众之间的特殊关系：写作,公共空间,”汇集那些不了解彼此的人们,私人社会时尚和在大多数情况下是并不在意彼此了解的”。预计,可以接受的,在某些方面理想的公共空间的是一种不舒服的交互,是只保持安全的单板。这样的一个环境中通常是由公众自我管理(一天的病假&霍普金斯,2002)。因此公众的期望行为强化了社会习俗;尽管如此,因为公共空间经常会汇集各种种类和背景的人,一个人可能会经历的事在公共场合他们不会亲自执行。李(2001)给出了例子,一个无家可归的女人,为了干净而脱衣,使用图书馆的浴室的设施,即使在这种不舒服的情况下，公共空间的独特性质允许这个女人感到归属感,提示她承担这样一个活动。最近的一项调查显示,不论这和其他公共图书馆不寻常的使用方式,英国图书馆读者认为公共