Last Sunday, I took a visiting friend (a Masters in Criminology Student at Nottingham Trent) to site to attempt to increase the scope of the memory map exercise, incorporating potentially, a perspective of the area informed by a different background of knowledge; not versed in architectural theory or traditional site analysis. I retraced and altered my second route through the site, approaching by car again this time, but from north of the site, to then looping around Little London Road to eventually park at the top of Smithy Wood Road.Experiential.
Prior to walking the site, I was particularly interested in his responses and initial analysis of the site in regards to Defensible Space theory, potential signs of the environment that may have been suggestive of anti social behaviour and any other insights about the kinds of activity that may take place within these spaces.
During the visit however, (whilst being slightly worried about the prospect of having to draw a map from memory and it not being accurate!) he took a note of the presence of CCTV around the site but showed more of an interest in the traces of filled in/blocked off doorways and the hidden subterranean entrances down the sets of stairs [2.].Most interestingly, however, was in response to these observations and questioning the sequence of the construction of the site (whether the entrances to these basements were added retroactively once the warehouses were being used), was the way he followed these questions up by saying “There’s hidden treasures everywhere”.
Following our visit, he produced a similar drawn map from memory, which appeared to focus primarily on the Centenary Works courtyard space and the Nursery Works, despite walking most of the area extensively [3.].I wanted to explore this drawing briefly, to see if his observations and intrigue with the subterranean nature of the structures would manifest somehow in his drawing, as well as continuing the warping idea from the last post with another footprint diagram, searching for further potential traces of trends.
The stairwell was actually included in the drawing of the main courtyard, as it was also in Anna’s drawing of the site, although I would like to find out where the addition of this landed in the sequence of his drawing, with Anna adding it in as a final detail within her memory map.
Within the Footprint Diagram [1.], the courtyard seemed to be drawn in consideration of having a stronger relationship with the rest of the site, not being as isolated or ‘floaty’ as suggested in other drawings within the previous post. However, I began to notice a small trend in most of the drawings of the disconnection of the actual structures that border the courtyard. The distance between these buildings, where they are in fact connected in reality, is interesting in regards to how he may have felt within this space [4.].
This may imply a greater connection to the external environment of the site beyond the almost introverted courtyard space. This may be visual, with a view of something beyond the buildings bringing the surroundings closer with an awareness of elements of the environment beyond the courtyard [5.].[Note: I would have liked to have visited on a day with greater activity on the site, as being a Sunday there was no industrial atmosphere from Robert Sorby and those contributions to the site environment were absent from the visit].