Dear DRS colleagues:
Due to my mistake, the following mails could not be sent last night. Three
answers/comments together.
Satoshi Kose
************************************************
Dear Stephen:
Yes, it is one possibility although space is needed.
With me, I chose to have my step-mother's room (bedroom and studio combined)
into two levels, with bed area made into tatami finish about 40 cm higher.
In case of need, tatami finished area be used as quasi-bed. Care giving will
be definitely easier than sleeping directly on the floor (without level
difference) for us.
Satoshi Kose
Building Research Institute
[log in to unmask]
At 12:29 +0100 99.4.28, Stephen Bailey wrote:
> Dear Satoshe and all,
>
> A friend visiting her elderly friend in Japan was intrigued to find his house
> adapted to include a pit around the dining table. This allowed comfort
> combined with an apparent continuation of tradition ..... surely an example of
> innovative design?
> Regards,
> Stephen
>
> --
> Stephen Bailey
> Institute of Design
> School of Law, Arts and Humanities
> University of Teesside TS1 3BA
> 01642 342362
**************************************************************
Dear Jean:
I do not agree with the second part of what you write, about open system and
closed system.
It is not whether the system is open or not, but rather whether the
residents accept an alien design (appearance, concepts, etc.). They will not
unless the new one has clear advantages. And, unfortunately, such
advantages are not readily visible or accepted. I will respond to another
mail on this.
Satoshi Kose
Building Research Inst.
[log in to unmask]
At 14:13 +0300 99.8.28, Jean Schneider wrote:
> >The crucial fact about design is that electronic dproducts and bikes etc.,
> >are just a tiny part of one's life while housing/dwellings/home is the
> >integral part of one's life.
> Thanks for acknowledging the difference. From the "product design" point of
>view, one of the burdens that limits fresh and innovative approaches to theory
>is the legacy of a century of conceptual blurring between architecture and
>objects.
> >Few would ever wish to have one's life rotate around an innovative housing
> >design. Innovativeness in this contemporary world means something quite
> >alien to everybody.
> Possibly. But 1/ the visibility of technology in the house is quite low,
> 2/ there is a significant proof that already accepted form
>languages allows for more diversity then what we are confronted with.
> It seems to me that part of the problem comes also from the willingness to
>"close the system" of construction within arbitrary, if not artificial, units
>(the pseudo-village, the neo-piazza etcノ), rather than adopting an "open
>systems" approach to the process of occupying and using space. There are
>probably already (at least in some European countries) enough elements of
>regulation: land-prices, maximal height of buildings, color schemes of
>facades, distance to the street etcノ And these do not restrain creativity in
>design (do they?).
>
> Regards
*************************************************************
Dear John:
Sitting directly on tatami floor is more comfortable for her, of course.
What we have to think of (in the future) is that when she loses her
abilities to stand up by herself. The burden to her family will be far more
than they can bear. (The mismatch between ideals and realities.)
What is acceptable for her is not necessarily acceptable forever, and we
have to go back to basics. (Few people lived up to that age, so we called
our aged, "the respectable seniors." Who would call the baby-boomer
generation so when they override the younger generation in actual number.)
Satoshi Kose
Building Research Insititute, Japan
[log in to unmask]
At 20:44 +0900 99.4.28, John Shackleton wrote:
> Satoshi Kose <[log in to unmask]> wrote
>
> >Dear Conall and all:
> >Sorry, it looks as though we have changed a lot seen from the outside, but
> >the reality is quite different.
> >The Japanese still stick to the traditional way of living and thinking. The
> >most awful mismatch is the traditional design assumptions and ageing of the
> >rersidents (i.e., their functional capability degradation). Stiing/sleeping
> >direct on the floor does not match care giving, for example.
>
>
> Certainly, Conall, far fewer Japanese live in western style than you might
> imagine, but I would also take Satoshi to task here; a few months back I was
> visiting some Japanese friends (who do, as it happens, live a mainly western
> style house). I was quite taken aback when their elderly mother apologised
> profusely and asked if I would mind if she didn't sit at the (western style)
> dinner table, but on the tatami (floor) in the adjoining room; she'd had a
> long day and was tired! She then slid back the screen an chatted happily all
> evening.
>
> Would it have been more caring to make her sit at the table? How much is the
> designer's role to give people 'what is good for them'?
>
> John Shackleton
> Department of Design and Architecture
> Chiba University
> Japan
****************************************************************
Satoshi Kose, Dr.
(The following is effective as of 1st April 1999)
Director, Housing & Building Economy Department
Building Research Institute, Tatehara, Tsukuba 305-0802 Japan
tel.+81-298-64-6611; fax.+81-298-64-6771; [log in to unmask]
http://www.kenken.go.jp/5bu/skose/TG19.html
http://www.kenken.go.jp/universal/7UDP.pdf (Sorry, this is in Japanese)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
