The Psychology of Architecture, Part 2

That's right. In our first episode, which we do encourage you to go back and listen to if you have not already, we discussed the natural world, and then we discussed the architectural world, this world of artificial shapes and objects and designs and layouts that that we've made out of that natural world, and in many cases we find ourselves living almost exclusively within those environments. Uh, and the

environments of cities especially. Yeah. We discussed studies about the psychological and cognitive impacts of different types of interior spaces, things like uh, color of interior spaces, ceiling height, and all kinds of stuff like that. Today we're taking a turn into the cursed realm. That's right. So, to best to understand the typical functionality of a healthy brain, scientists

often study cases of illness and injury. So perhaps to help us understand better understand the impact of great architecture and uh and even like the different attributes of attributes of every day architecture, we should also turn, uh, you know, away from the world of vaulted cathedrals and pyramids and zigaratts uh uh and instead look at to the dark

sorcery of architecture, cursed architecture, if you will. By the way, if you do a web search for cursed architecture, you'll find a lot of examples of of terrible, usually quite quite insane home and building designs. Uh. This what was this a Twitter account you shared with me? I think cursed cursed architect or cursed architecture is a Twitter thing.

But also if you just look around for like worst renovations and so forth, that there are a number of different websites that will include a host of these photos, a lot of them hosted on like Pinterest or Instagram. But I swear I was looking at some of these less Friday, and I was just I was by myself laughing out loud so hard at them, and sometimes I couldn't even really quite put a finger on why. Yes, but the I know exactly what you mean. I was

also laughing really hard at this stuff you sent me. Uh, the one. I love the ones where there is like a ledge that cannot be accessed in any way. Yeah, it's almost like the places where there's like, you know, a room with the high ceiling and then against the wall up above you know where the second floor would be. There's like a hallway, but there's there are no stairs

leading to it. Yes, stairways to nowhere. Um, you know, weird weird doors to nowhere or doors in the middle of walls, you know, anything where stairs have been have been altered drastically or are a great source of hilarity in these shots. And it it's again it's weird to try and like figure at exactly why some of these are funny, because you know, sometimes people just doing the best with the limitations of an old building, right, an already weird layout, say, or an older, larger building that

has been sliced into apartments. I remember visiting London with my wife like fifteen years ago. I think it's staying you know, weird old hotel where the first thing you did when you entered the room was walked down a flight of stairs. You know, things like things like that. But but then again, like given the limitations of the building, perhaps that was the best way to go about it. Oh I I recently stayed in a in a building in Paris with a hilarious staircase. It was like a

spiral staircase. It wasn't quite a spiral. It was like a rectangular spiral staircase. And there was no stair there that was flat. I mean it was angled one way or another, even outer in and I imagine going up those things after after a night out on the town might be might be quite perilous. We had a work trip we had to do to Chicago once we stayed

in a hotel. If I'm remembering this correctly, on every floor there was a short stairway, stairway to a wall going nowhere, going nowhere except to a painting I think, like a painting of a creepy fairy woman. Yeah, it was. It was weird. So that sort of stuff. There's that sort of stuff. But then there are other examples where it's like so clearly somebody just did not care or did not have time to care, and did not look back to corrected things, where like a toilet can no

longer close because there's an overhanging the way. You know, weird cases where a water faucet comes out over the edge of a small sink or does not come out far enough to actually empty into the sink. Uh. Some of them just had gross implications. I think there was one I was looking at that was just like a bathroom with a ton of urinals and like a thick shag carpet or yeah, any kind of carpeted bathroom scenario

is h it is awful. But yeah, I love the ones though, where where not only did whoever you know renovated this, because clearly there's not really design elements they're not not only did they fail, but someone did this and thought close enough they just leave right um And and this gets back to this idea of design though, like there is this ideal version in mind where an

architect is consulted. Uh, you know, they're they're architects, they're engineers, and there's this there's this process of intentional design before something is built. But of course, historically and even sometimes contemporarily,

that's not always the same. For instance, I was talking with a friend of mine recently about how that when they were younger, they were you know, they were they had this job and they were helping somebody build some buildings, and uh, there was just kind of the sense of like where we're just gonna throw it up. We're just gonna throw up some walls, and you know what goes into a building. You gotta have a floor, you gotta

have walls, roof, you know. Yeah, and and so I guess, you know, certainly with older buildings, and it's going to vary in different parts of the world. You know, there may be less intent in what is being built. It may be more about we need a structure at the end of the week, let's build a structure. And maybe the individuals building and are not not quite you know, the craftspeople that the task requires. But it's you know, it's one thing to screw up a renovation or to

you know, moment monumentally fail on a toilet installation. It's quite another to actually design and construct an entire building or multiple buildings that have a debilitating effect on our mental well being. And the world is is full of examples in which a stark or a less traditional architectural design draws the ire of local inhabitants right often due to the fact that it replaced a more traditional building and or stands alongside traditional examples. Um, And you can

pretty much you can. You can drive around any major city and you can see that you can see all right, traditional building, traditional building, weird modern building, and you can be almost positive that at some point, uh, the neighbors were upset about this, or maybe are still upset about this. Oh yeah. It seems like every major city, if you talk to the locals, they'll have like the one ugly building that they hate. Yeah. Uh. And and blogs are devoted to this sort of thing as well. Now, for

my money, I sometimes find this a bit dumb. Sometimes someone builds a cool modern home alongside a bunch of traditional little boxes, and people with a more traditional taste they get bent out of shape over it, And I think we have to realize that someone us want to

live in weird gothic concrete apocalypse bunkers, and that's ultimately okay. Um. But then I go back to the McMansion example we mentioned in the first episode, the idea that you know, developer comes along and builds a colossal house, as much house as as possible in a given a lot, and that kind of thing I do find obnoxious. But then again, like when somebody comes along it's like, yes, that's it. That's the exact amount of house I want, and I

don't want to mow al on. So to a certain extent, some of these concerns are a bit ridiculous to even get too wrapped up in it. I mean, it's just people's tastes are going to vary. Some people want traditional, some people want modern, some people want ultramodern, and some people maybe want to piss off the neighbors. Oh sure, I mean the spite houses are a whole wonderful thing on their own. Uh, we could come back to that,

but yeah. I mean, I think one thing that's important to keep in mind as we go forward and think about the subject is the difference between just like our esthetic preferences and what actually has psychological effects on people, Like the difference between what kind of school building seems nice to you versus what kind of school building actually has measurable outcomes on children's performance in in their education.

Absolutely so, in figuring it out and trying to decide, like, you know, how much of it is, uh to what ex soon is there's some sort of intrinsically debilitating aspect to certain architectural styles or approaches versus this idea of just personal taste. One has to visit the topic of

brutalist dark texture. Brutal soccer architecture emerged out of Switzerland, I believe, in the nineteen fifties, was especially popular in the fifties and sixties, and you can find it around the world, but especially in the UK, the US, Canada, Western Europe and the Eastern Bloc and in UM the former Soviet Union, and generally with brutalist architecture, you're dealing with, um,

you know, stark, imposing geometric designs built with lots of concrete. Uh. It is often stark, and some of what's classified as a brutalist I see as as as beautiful, creative or even evocative. Uh you know some some of them the designs feel very just ultra modern in in a way, or sometimes ultra modern kind of like a retro fashion, you know. Um. Other examples are are harder for me to love. But again, your mindleage is going to vary

when it comes to brutalist architecture. A lot of what's most recognized in brutalist architecture are these large surfaces of exposed concrete, and in fact that's where the name comes from the name of brutalist architecture, does not come from it somehow being brutal, like a like a brutality in Mortal Kombat? Is that a thing? Brutality? Okay, you're the m K expert here um, But no, it comes from

the phrase betem brute, which means raw concrete. And that's because he has very often has these large raw concrete features. One example I think we mentioned in the last episode is Boston City Hall, which I think is, you know, one of the most famous brutalist structures, which personally, I think is extremely esthetically pleasing. I like it a lot, though I know a lot of people hate it. It's

apparently just a controversial building. I was saying, one of the things I like about it is um, at least from some angles of the building, there are ways that it has sort of like a variable structure that can be like horizontally uh permeated, but then sort of spreads out as it goes up. And in a way to me, it is a concrete structure that sort of mimics a forest. Something about it look kind of like organic, like a copse of trees that you could walk into. Uh. And

I really like that about it. Yeah. I look at this image of it, and it it defies sort of easy identification, Like I look at it and I would not be able to turn and necessarily draw it. You know. Um, there's something that you it asks you to map it out. You know. It feels like an environment of concrete as

much as you know it is a structure of concrete. Yeah, and I think it incorporates some of the elements that we're talking about in the last episode that make for good structures, Like it has some pattern and complexity it. It has this organic feeling type of variability in the structure.

It's somewhat looks like trees. Yeah, there's a sort of mcs er vibe to it to a certain instant, A little bit that too, Yeah, but not in a way that makes it functionally confusing, right, but not in a way where it seems to break the laws of nature, physics or anything. So when when we're when we're dealing with architecture of this, I think there are a few things we have to to realize. First of all, and we'll come back to this later, is that architecture does

not exist in a vacuum like a building. Uh, even just a highly designed building. It is not does not exist independent of say, what that building is for, It doesn't exist independent of history, etcetera. But another big problem is that architecture is an art form, a design medium, and a product or practice. It's not just about form and function and art since it is in part art is not just about making you feel good. I'll admit that most of my favorite visual artists have have you know,

typically not been concerned with making people feel good? Um, I think of like Irving Norman or hr Geiger or Brugal Bosch. You know, I love these artists and you might love them too, But do you want them influencing the power of your physical environment? I mean, I suppose on some of you do if you're attempted to frame a print of it on your wall, But are then you But would you inflict it upon the neighborhood which you looked at, upon a whole city? Do you want

to live in a Bosch painting? So I wanted to discuss a few examples of unpopular buildings, or buildings that at least have been very unpopular with segments of the population. One of them, and I would consider this an extreme example, is the House of Soviets in Kaliningrad located UH in Kaliningrad Oblast, an exclave of Russia on the Baltic Sea. And this is a historically Prussian area, but again is it was part of the Soviet Union and is part

of Russia today. The House of Soviets is built on the grounds, but not the exact site, of the former Konigsberg Castle, which was destroyed during the Second World War. But the House of the Soviets, built in the seventies does not look like a Teutonic castle. Uh. Instead, it looks It is frequently described as looking like the head of a giant robot that has been buried up to the neck in the earth. It looks like almost kind of a gigantic concrete battery. Yeah, yeah, yeah, maybe huge

concrete air conditioning unit with eyes. Yeah. It does appear to have eyes and kind of a mouth and even horns. Perhaps. Some locals have also called it the monster in the past. Again, it's the House of Soviets. If you look it up online,

you'll find plenty of pictures of it. I will note that you will find two different versions generally, and that's because it used to have more of a concrete dark appearance, certainly more brutalist, like clearly brutalist in its appearance, because it is often held up as a great example of brutalist architecture. But it was in two thousand five, i believe, which also coincided with a visit by Vladimir Putin, that

it was paint painted in new color. So now it has this awful blue color, which is even worse because it's it's it's not even it's like you're hiding the fact or covering up the fact that it's brutalist. You know, it's like it's not rack concrete anymore. It is raw concrete that has been painted the color of an easter egg.

So again, critics consider it one of the worst examples of Soviet architecture, though it has also been held up as a solid example of brutalist architecture, and it's it's also, i should add, it's a little unfair to completely judge it even based on the older pictures you'll find of it, because it has never truly been finished. It is technically an unfinished building. It fulfills no purpose as a building to this day. Yeah, so um, again, we have to

realize that architecture is business. Architecture does not exist, uh in a vacuum. Um, it doesn't exist in its own bubble. History, politics, and culture. Color are perceptions of them in its conception. The House of the Soviets was perhaps designed to be, you know, either symbol of modernity or progress progress, but it might also be viewed as a tombstone symbolising Soviet or Russian rule over historically German city, that sort of thing. Or you might look at it and realize that does nothing.

There's nothing going on in there because this was never finished. This is a testament to an unfinished project. But not everything considered brutalist is like a monster level of of of of ugliness, etcetera. One I think, great example that kind of you know bucks. The stereotype for brutalist architecture is Montreal's Habitat sixty seven complex, which was designed by Motion Savty, which you need to look up a picture

this as well, because I can only describe it so well. Uh. It looks like a long horizontal row of randomly stacked boxes at different angles. Um, and it it's it's quite interesting to look at in my opinion, and was actually designed with some of the problems of high density living in mind, I think it actually looks kind of interesting. I mean it, I mean, to me, it's somewhat fulfilled. Is that, you know, it has some complexity on the exterior surfaces, it has it has a kind of organic

nature to it. It feels more like a natural environment. Yeah, it's basically and I'm this is like a very crude summary of it. I'm sure that the the the architect's original words about it. We're far Uh, it's far better expression of it. But it's kind of like, if I have to live right on top of where someone else is living, well, can't I live a little west, little sideways or a little little after the little of the right,

And likewise, does the person above me? Could they maybe be a little further back, a little to the side. Maybe there's some room in all of this for a little courtyards, a little porches. And so it does have that kind of zigarot feel. It has this kind of it looks kind of like it was made by by space age insects. Uh. It turns concrete box living spaces into something more like a you know, like a like a bush of thorns, which that doesn't sound very inviting,

but it looks very cool. Actually, yeah, absolutely, um and I if I'm remembering correctly, I don't think it was mentioned in the book Future Shock, but I think the kind of campy television adaptation of Future Shock that was hosted by Orson Wells, I think they pictured they used images or footage of habitat sixty seven talking about like living spaces of the future. Another quick example that sometimes

brought up concerning brutalist architecture from the nineties seventies. Uh, the it's what Naive nev Brown brutalist department in Rowley Way, London, which has a kind of terrorist look to it, and I think looks quite beautiful. It looks it looks kind of like a stadium turned into apartments, you know. Um and and I rather like it. But again it's one of these where it's not that stereotypical idea of brutalist architecture.

But again not everyone likes it either. Now a huge example of detrimental modern but not brutalist architecture that is often brought up was the is what was known as

the Pruitt Ego Housing complex in St. Louis, Missouri. This was built in the nineteen fifties and designed by Minoru Yamasaki of a World Trade Center fame, and the complex consists of consisted of thirty three apartment blocks, each eleven stories high, and uh, you know it, it actually sums up a lot of the things that Habitat sixty seven was trying to get away from. Like if you look at an aerial picture of what this looked like, I

mean it looked like a graveyard for giants. It's just big slabs of apartment buildings with these big empty spaces in between. And uh, it's it's just, uh it's it's just it's tough to look at. As described by Michael Bond in The Hidden Ways that Architecture Affects How You Feel, written for BBC Future, the complex quote quickly became notorious

for their crime squalor and social dysfunction. Critics argue that the i'd open spaces between the blocks of modernist high rises discouraged a sense of community, particularly as crime rates started to rise. As as a result, these bleak, prison like slabs of housing were demolished in nineteen seventy two.

And this is an example that that is often discussed when people talk about like what's an example of architecture that has a detrimental effect on the people that have to live with it, right, that not necessarily may well, I mean I don't want to describe ill intentions to the architect, but like that is that is not properly tuned with the well being of its inhabitants in mind, right, Yeah, and it's as Yeah, it's also worth pointing at the architect does not have sole power over like where a

building is constructed or whiant is constructed there. Uh, you know, certainly getting into critiques of segregation of course, involving aside like this, but yeah, it also just comes back again that buildings do not exist in their in their own bubble, They don't exist in a vacuum, and they can certainly contribute to or antagonize existing social problems. So these are just a couple of examples. There are certainly loads of ugly and or joyless buildings in cities around the world,

and we keep building them. Uh. I mean, if you look at the current skyline of New York City, you'll see the full spectrum. You'll see uh, exciting buildings, nostalgic buildings, modern buildings that are quite interesting to look out modern buildings that make you a little bit angry to look at, and plenty of other buildings that you barely see it all because they're they're just so lukewarm that your mind

cannot even hold them. But again, coming back to something we talked about in our first episode, um, the importance of having nearby access to green space with natural vegetation. Uh there. I mean you kind of can't think about the architecture of New York City, or certainly think about the architecture of Manhattan without thinking about Central Park. Central Park. I mean, there's a reason that almost every photo you

see of Manhattan has something to do. You know. You either get the skyline down from below or you're looking at part of Central Park. Yeah, or you get a shot that has the river in it like that. You have to have that that natural element. And moving water is another one that is sometimes factored into these these studies, like it, can a body of water be seen by say,

patient's recovering in a hospital, et cetera. All right, on that note, we're going to take our first break, but when we come back, we will get further into this question. Can buildings damage your mental health? Hey, everybody, you know it's a sneaky good holiday gift. Super comfortable Bomba's socks. Most people don't ask for socks, but that is just because they haven't worn Bomba's and I can attest personally.

They send us some socks to try out, and boy, they are my favorite socks I owned now, no lie that these are really really comfy. Yeah, I'm wearing my Bomba's right now. They fit, they're they're comfortable, and they have a vampire muppet on them. I couldn't ask for anything more. It's the best. But did you also know that socks are the number one most requested item in homeless shelters. Bombas Socks were created to change that. For every pair you buy, Bombas donates a pair to someone

in need. Yeah, and bomba Socks provides support in places you didn't even know you needed support, like your arches. Each sock is built with a special arch support system. It's not too tight. It's more like a nice hug for your foot. Okay, I've I've felt that, but I didn't understand what it was. Man. Yeah, it's a good hug alright. So go to Bomba's dot com slash mind Blown today and you'll get twenty off your first purchase. That's Bombas dot com b O m b A s

dot com slash mind blown Bombas dot Com slash mind blown. Alright, we're back. So we've been talking about brutalist architecture. Houses that are in homes and buildings are architectural structures and creations that some may criticize as being ugly or imposing. So I would like to imagine imagine that you know, you you tell go walk in your own neighborhood and suddenly you see that overnight, like the castle from Kral, the monster, the House of Soviets, has has emerged in

your neighborhood. Um, and you might wonder, well, is this this is? This may be ugly, I may not like it. I may uh have questions about what happened to uh you know the park that it that was formerly in that space. But but is it going to actually damage my health? Is it actually going to have some sort of tangible effect on my mental well being? And uh? In looking at this, we've discussed some of our sources

here already. I think I already mentioned Michael Bonds, BBC Future two thousands seventeen article The Hidden Ways that architecture affects how you feel. But another source I was looking at is a piece in The Guardian from sixteen by Emily Reynolds titled could bad buildings damage Your mental health? Reynolds points to some basic stats about urban living, and

this came from a twenty ten meta analysis. First of all, UH, people living in urban environments in large cities percent more likely to experience an anxiety disorder and thirty nine percent more likely to experience mood disorders UH. And then Reynolds also points to a two thousand five study that said people who grew up in a city where are twice as likely to develop schizophrenia as those who grew up

in the countryside. Furthermore, a two thousand and eleven Central Institute of Mental Health at the University of Heidelberg study pointed to a link between urban living and greater stress responses in the amygdala and the singulate cortex linked to emotional regulation, depression, and anxiety. So this could have a lasting effect on brain development and mental illness suceptibility, she writes.

As Bond points out, this points to the idea that quote urban living can change brain biology and some people resulting in reduced gray matter in the right dorso lateral prefrontal cortex and the paraguinea anterior signulate cortex, two areas where changes have previously been linked to early life stressful experiences.

Now Reynolds also acknowledges the rather subjective nature of all of this, such as, you know, drastically conflicting studies on open office spaces like we discussed in our first episode. You know, do they promote pro social working or are they bad for productivity and well being? Depends on which study you consult. Uh. If you consult me, however, I'll tell you that that hell is an open space office. Now it's the way. But I mean, don't you want

to collaborate in hell? Don't don't you really get get your your Jimmy's uh collaborating with the other imprisoned souls. No, I mean I take a more of a Dickensian view of hell. Where the hell is where you experience the chain that you forged in life. It's not about sharing your chain with other people. But of course, things like

this or it's often a careful balance, right. You know, consider co housing, in which private homes are clustered around shared spaces The idea is that unlike dreary apart and towers, they can foster a sense of community through shared spaces. Uh. In some space studies report this, others those say residents can lose their sense of individuality and privacy. Uh. It kind of comes into the ore varied demands for a natural environment. Right, Sometimes we want a place to hide away.

Sometimes we need a place to, uh, you know, delight in the sun and share with others. And the natural environment tends to provide us such variety. But once you you have a like an apartment complex plan in place like that is the environment. And I think this is again another area where you have to take into account the careful balance, uh, you know, among the different types of personalities out there, the ups and downs of human moods.

You might want to stand in the sun, rejoice in the sun one day, but then you may need to hide in the shadows on another. And as just the ups and downs of life. Sure. Reynolds also quotes Layla McKay, director of the Center for Urban Design and Mental Health, whose think tank has tackled complex nature of this problem.

H And you know, try to figure out what are some what are what are some basic tac comes we can we can acquire from it, and she says the following are key uh to having a quality architectural design UH in a living space. First of all, access to nature or green spaces. We talked about that a good bit in the last episode. This is just a no brainer and just it just ties into to study after study after study. Also, she stresses public spaces that facilitate

physical activity and encourage social interaction. Oh yeah, this is, for example, one thing people have talked about in the history of city design when cars became ubiquitous and cities suddenly that streets were no longer a place where people would gather and meet and talk, but instead there were places that were introversible because they were fast moving vehicles going back and forth all the time. Yeah. Absolutely, Yeah, it just needs to be a place where we can

move around and interact with people if we want to. Now, another thing, she stresses living and working in spaces that feel safe, which on one hand is obvious. We don't want to live or work somewhere where we do not feel safe, But that can apply to a lot of things. You know, you can certainly apply that to say, a whole neighborhood layout, but you can also apply to things like in our own building, the building in which you

and I work. There is our office and then there is an extremely long, largely featureless hallway that goes to the elevator bank. It's sort of a John Carpenter hallway. I often think, when watching people walk down and ahead of me, that there should be a Carpenter soundtrack, kind of a doom doom me me, Me, Me me Yeah. I mean, I'm not saying that the whole way that hallway makes me personally feel unsafe or in danger, but

it is unnerving and I feel like it. It does mess with my my perceptions a little bit about potential threats, you know, like like if someone else is coming down that hallway and I don't want to interact with them, I have no choice. I'm just I'm on a train and I'm gonna walk past them, and it makes me feel weird. It makes me want to a void that hallway because on some level I don't feel safe there.

Maybe I feel nine percent safe there, but I would rather feel safe, if possible, in the building in which I work. No, I mean, you're what you're saying sort of connects to what I mean. It feels like a you know, follow the yellow line and escape from New

York kind of hallway. I'm also reminded a friend of mine was telling me about this um the Atlanta based neo futurist architect John Portman, who is generally best remembered for very large, impressive atriums in hotels, which they that this was also something that was fairly controversial because you walk into a big hotel and then someone would look up and say, look at all this wasted space. This is not how you build a hotel. Hotel was supposed

to be. Uh, you know, wall to wall rooms, seeing you get to get the maximum out of the space and uh, and that's certainly not what you find in his in his his buildings, these are the sort of atriums that you'll sometimes find, uh in science fiction films where they they've clearly filmed it in a in an enormous atrium in a hotel. I tend to think these things look really cool. Yeah, I love them as well.

They are very This kind of design is very much about the interior world, however, and some apparently criticized John Portman for using like internal halls and the kind of tunnels to connect buildings to one another rather than using open areas and exposure to nature even but that does make me wonder if there was true nature to expose people too, or if it was a situation where you're

cutting them off from like a dreary street. Yeah. Well, and one thing I like, you know, in in some of these big buildings like hotels that have large atriums, I mean sometimes they will have vegetation within the atrium, having like trees inside there, which is great. Yeah. Absolutely, Yeah, There's certainly ways to bring nature into an indoor environment. Um, and some are very extreme. Like I'm reminded of the the oprus Land Hotel in Nashville, Tennessee, where they have

that the one that's got the rainforest. Yeah, it's like island running. It has the big, big Remember I went there when I was a kid. I loved it. Yeah, because it's also kind of like going to um really Wonka's chocolate factory. I think I remember believing it possible that I could catch a poisoned dart frog the sou in the In this article by by Reynolds, Reynolds points

to a frequently studied example Barbican estate in London. So this is a brutalist development of terrorist blocks and towers built from the nineteen sixties through the eighties, and it's it's barely frequently criticized for all the normal reasons people criticize brutalist architecture, but McKay points out that it actually checks off all the boxes that we mentioned above, you know, the nature in the green spaces, the public spaces, uh,

living and working in spaces that feel safe, etcetera. Uh. They do mention, however, that darkness is sometimes a luxury in in a place like this, which is also interesting to consider, coming back to that idea that sometimes you want the shadows, sometimes you don't want the wide open spaces. And uh and certainly, I mean I I've certainly lived in places where I feel like there's just way too much light pollution and it's kind of hard to find

that dark corner in which to actually just sleep at night. Still, one of the I think the keys here is this. All of this suggests that a building can be ugly and still be good for mental health, but the design is still key. I think likewise, it sounds like it's very possible to have an outwardly built a beautiful building that is would be depressing to live within. Oh well, this goes with something that we were talking about the Sarah Williams Goldhagen emphasized in her book that we discussed

a little bit in the last episode. It was that, um, you know, architects often end up thinking most of all about the overall form of buildings, you know, like the broad sort of like shape and profile of it. But that in fact, for people's direct enjoyment of buildings and you know, the their their emotional reactions to buildings, what are actually more important are smaller scale things like surfaces

and materials and textures and features. So I think it's possible you could actually have a building that a lot of people would look at the overall form of from the outside and think it's ugly, but it might be a better place to live in in terms of interior surfaces and features and that kind of thing. In addition to the major points we were just talking about with like access to green space and social interaction spaces and all that. Yeah, the health advantage of having access to

a scenic environment. Reynolds also points out that neglected environments contribute to mental ill health, making us feel unsafe and they may also quote contribute to anxiety and persistent low mood. Uh. That's from a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study by Jackson at All and others have pointed to the signs of social ills such as graffiti and vandalism as

potentially contributing to this as well. So I think we have to be careful not to veer directly off into the like the broken windows the aory of policing in criminal behavior right. Well, A lot of graffiti is fantastic, and there are there are great graffiti artists. There are parts of Atlanta that are known for their graffiti that uh it, you know, provides a beautiful kind of character

to the place. There have been some fabulous public art programs that have been aimed at at bringing like large scale murals to particularly areas with problems as an attempt to just kind of like beautify things and basically have the beneficial side of these effects we're talking about work their way on the inhabitants, and they they're they're generally been very well received. High rise living Reynolds rights might seem like a great idea, because of course it can.

It can afford that killer view. Right. You can see the river, you can see the park, you can see green spaces in the distance, etcetera. Uh, you know what, wealthy penthouses deliver this. But then also someone in community housing would be able to look out of the river as well in a high rise environment. But the flip side of this is that locations like this can contribute to isolation. It's something where more it's an area where more study is needed. But again it shows that you

can't just have the view of nature. You know, they are all these other factors as well. Uh. And if your view of nature is coming from an isolated tower, uh, it's only going to do so much good, especially if you're you're you're not having the social interaction, you're not having any of these other boxes checked off for you

by the design. And of course this leads us to shopping centers and malls, which we might think of them as sol draining places, but according to the restorative potential of shopping malls ten by Rosenbaum at all, uh, many of these actually have quote mentally restorative qualities because think

about it, they're safe, they're open. Uh. You know, essentially there are a lot of them are like large, uh you know, enclosed environments, the sort of classic mall um which hopefully people are still getting to experience outside of just viewings of stranger things and shopping mall. I mean, some actually have greenery in them, vegetation, and there they may be well maintained. But then the flip side is that is that they are also places that are highly controlled.

And obviously there are places where uh, retailers are using all of their tricks to try and control your behavior influence your behavior as well, and so that can have ultimately an effect on anxiety and other factors. I also can't help but imagine, I mean, when you go to a shopping place, you're going there to engage with decision fatigue,

like whatever your mental state is going in. No matter how nice the greenery, no matter how cool the architecture is, uh, no matter how pleasant the music is maybe uh, you're still going to potentially find yourself in that situation where like I have no idea what to buy anymore, my brain is depleted, and the shopping mall almost by definition, provides a lot of buying options, and having a lot of buying options often contributes directly to those negative feelings

associated with shopping exactly, So Reynolds, ultimately, you know rights that with increased awareness of mental health issues and more work in this design area, quote, buildings and public spaces are being designed or at the very least critically analyzed,

with mental well being in mind. Now. In Michael Bond's seventeen piece, it's not maybe that doesn't quite echo as much optimism for the present, but does seem hopeful about the future, writing the quote, urban architects have often paid scantic attention to the potential cognitive effects of their creations on a city's inhabitants. But he did point out that there's a h every year. The Conscious Cities Conference takes place.

In seventeen, it took place in London. I read that in twenty nineteen place in New York City, with a focus on building resilient communities, healthy child development and parenting, reshaping later life, and urban design for mental health. If you want to learn more, you can check them out at the c c D dot org. That's the Center

for Conscious Design. Yeah. So, Bond points out that that recent studies have used actually wearable devices such as bracelets that monitors monitor skin conductivity, a marker of physiological arousal and smartphone technology just see how we're responding and where we're responding to architecture. And so this makes sense. You can strap people up, send them out in the city

and you can see like what's spiking their activity? Yeah, right, where are people walking when they're getting stressed and stuff Like do they tend to be walking past this one horribly ugly featureless building and that's making them more kind of uh yeah, the the factor and that's that's exactly what they were looking for. Colin Ellard, who researches the psychological impact of design at the University of Waterloo in Canada, is one of the researchers that's using this kind of technology.

And they found that building facades had a huge impact. And they specifically pointed out a quote dead zone of quote long smoked glass frontage of a Whole food store in Lower Manhattan. All Right, so this Whole Foods is directly ruined people's quality of life's story, not so not solely, but yeah, so they walk past this storefront with the frosted glass and like the you are detecting physiological signs of stress and anxiety and unhappiness. Yeah, and it's not

because it's like crazy weird architecture. It's not brutalist, it's not it's not covered with graffiti or anything. It's not like you feel unsafe. It's just it's just there and it's dreary, and it's it's like what you see everywhere. It's it's been pointed out as one of the potential threats of of you know, the loss of you know, mom and pop stores for sure, but also just places

with individual identity. As street level at any rate, cities turn more and more into you know, chain chain restaurant here, and here's the big box store here. And there's the sameness to everything and the lack of variety. Uh, you know, it takes us out of the sort of variety that we would need in the natural world and would also

historically find in a more vibrant city environment. Certainly, Like that's what you think of when you think of of walking the streets of New York, right right, that's the cliche. Not seeing a block of of storefront for you know, whatever your big box store happens to be. No, you you're expecting to see weird thing here, weird thing here, strange little store here, Uh, something up and coming over here.

You know, it's we want that kind of experience. We want the same sort of height through the wilderness experience even in our urban environments. Of course, again we're living in a time though where you know, there's more and more consciousness about mental health though, and we have decades now of of studies about the impact of design and things we can do to to to help to have like a you know, an actual benefit on our mental well being. For instance, when it comes to social interaction

human interaction. UH. Sociologist William White was a key advocate in the nineteen seventies of design that pushed people closer together and encourage social interaction, and one of his colleague, Expond Rights, founded the Project for Public Spaces, which made key moves such as deploying benches to make certain public spaces more inviting to the public. Put some benches there, make it seem like people are supposed to be here, and then by being here, they will interact with one

another UH in various ways. And another important aspect of city design, brought up by Kate Jeffrey, a behavioral neuroscience scientists at the University College London, is that more. The more lost you feel in a city, the more out of sync, isolated and potentially afraid you feel. And this is also important inside of a building. So when you

walk into the building, do you feel lost? Do you feel like you're in a maze, Because that's not good, because the interior of space should be more like a labyrinth, the place that is maybe complex, that is interesting to behold and experience, but there is not a sense of anxiety about where you are going. When you enter a true labyrinth, you will always go to the sin for the labyrinth and back out again. You will always go

exactly where you need to go. A maze is the edifice in which you become lost and possibly consumed by a minotaur. I don't think I was aware of that distinction. I've just used them. So they're often used interchangeably, even by the the best of writers, So I don't. I try not to get a bit out of shape when I'm reading something and they say maze when they need labyrinth, etcetera. It's not as elegant to say pans maze, pants maze. It's not as good. Labyrinth feels more appropriate. All Right,

we're gonna take one more break. But when we come back, we're going to explore the world of hostile architecture. Than alright, we're back now, Joe, you're the one who turned me onto this idea of hostile architecture. I was, I was blissfully unaware of this. Well, it's not something I ever had a deep knowledge about. It's just something i'd I'd seen in a few places, and I, you know, I

was just reading a little bit about it online. The idea that sometimes architectural signs that you would use us, say, defending a fortress against an invading army, can be turned inward and can be used within a society itself, even within the city itself, in ways that are both interesting and sad. Right, yeah, using these features against residents of the city itself, especially the homeless. So one of the older examples of this sort of thing, uh is probably

the flint cone. A number of you've seen this. I'm going to describe it, and a lot of you will go, Okay, I know what you're talking about. This is just deployed in the nineteenth century in Norwich, England, along with other designs to curb public urination in the city because basically, men walking about through the city would need to urinate, and having few options, they would turn to you know, a handy, dimly lit corner in the exterior of a

stone building, and that's where they would peet. But such urination course creates an odor and it even damages materials. So building oders employed a few different strategies. Again it's public urination, such as gates around such little corners and nooks and crannies, or even more drastically filling those corners in with brick and mortar, sometimes in the shape of

a cone. Right, So where you would have a recess that would normally just be a little corner where you could face into the corner and no one would see what you were doing with the front of your body. Instead, there's a you know, human height shaped cone of bricks and stuff. Right, that's gonna guess cause your urine to flow back towards your feet, right, But also just doesn't give you any privacy, Whereas normally this corner would have

allowed privacy. Now there is no way to be private there. Right. Of course, you might not have much of an issue with this, right, you're probably not a huge fan of public urination. But here's the thing. It does not address the route problem. There are people in the city with nowhere to pee. Public toilets were not readily available. Transforming

these corners didn't actually solve the problem. It just redirected it to other places, like other other corners that didn't have cones implanted in them, and and it, you know, ultimately made life even more miserable for the Norwich wanderers who had full bladders. Now, the city eventually made public restrooms more available, but many of these structures still remain, especially the cones, because they are rather permanent in their construction.

Sure now, lack of a place to leave oneself can still be a problem for the urban homeless today, though this is a problem that is addressed to a large extent by public restrooms, which are deployed with varying degrees of success depending on which city you're looking at and

where you are in that city. But like just yesterday, I was outside our own city zoo and in an individual walked up and asked me where the nearest bathroom was, And naturally there's one inside the zoo, but that requires a membership or a ticket to get into, And I said there was one at the instrants to an adjacent park, but I wasn't sure if renovations were affecting it. And then he said that he tried that one and he

couldn't get into it. And then my only suggestion was said to tell him, well, there's a coffee shop across the street. And of course a coffee shop is the sort of place where one usually encounters a customers only policy for restrooms, and in some areas you even have to have a key or the receipt code off of receipt to get in there. So the problem still remains. The homeless also need a place to sit and to sleep, a situation addressed to some extent by shelters and other initiatives.

But what about these public spaces, these green spaces we've been discussing that have such a benefit for all of us, Like these these places have an important impact on our mental wellness and UH and certainly access is even more vital for individuals on the margins who may also very well be struggling with depression, anxiety, and or mental illness.

But unfortunately there's often an effort then to prevent the homeless from using such areas, and to be fair of a public spaces is overrun by homeless individuals that you know, I guess it can certainly become less desirable for some members of society. Uh And but the result is we see other examples of what critics have dubbed host aisle architecture also known as defensive design in our modern cities.

And here are just a few examples. First of all, park benches with arm rests down the middle right, so they the goal there is to make a bench that you can sit on, but you can't really lay down on. Another one, spikes or bolts installed on stairs or on areas of the pavement itself. This is something I've only

seen photos of. I don't think I've seen this in in real life, but yeah, just the idea of like, well, here's a place where one could lay here's some stairs someone could potentially lay on, but we're gonna put spikes there instead, which which is a drastic solution. Another one gates around various fountains, specifically around the the the edge of the lift of the fountain where one might normally

set uh. The placement of boulders or other objects such as bike racks or other structures in place of benches or in spots there were previously popular gathering places for the homeless. Or here's another one, sprinklers that at least allegedly been placed to deter squatters, like in parks. Yeah so some of them. And then as far as benches go, we mentioned the bench with an arm or us down

the middle. But some of the designs that have been utilized are really quite elaborate and you might not even recognize their true purpose at first glance, as with the South Philadelphia Transit authorities, modern chrome ribbed like benches that that look cool. They look they look like I said, like this weird space curvy rib thing. But as I read in What's behind the Uptick and Hostile Architecture by Elizabeth Wallace published an architectural digest, the intention here is

to create benches that are difficult to sleep on. Ye they're not flat, They've got these ridges in them that will sort of cut into you if you try to lay down. Yeah. So it's probably a worthwhile exercise, especially for anyone out there who uses like public transportation and visits urban public spaces. Like the next time you see a weird bench or even abut a full bench, ask yourself, could Could I sleep on this? Could I lay down and sleep on this? Could I even set up and

sleep on this? And then what does that say? Um? Another example, London's concrete Camden benches have often been criticized for this. Uh and you can there just again this kind of like weird bench design that is like you look at it and you ask yourself, could I lay on that? And the answer is not not comfortably at all. And you also see variations of this sort of design when it comes to anti skateboarding uh features as well that have been retro fritti fitted on things I've noticed

the others I've never noticed anti skateboarding stuff. Yeah, I wonder what that's like. Um. Basically, it's like like little like metal ridges, metal bars, things that are added to and I don't have any skateboarding um lingo in my brain. I'm sorry, but the thing just call everything ali the okay, the thing where they ali along the side of the like the yeah or the bench or the concrete by the fountain. Put a metal are somewhere there to disrupt

such activity, you can't ali. Yeah. Uh. So obviously, hostile architecture has angered quite a lot of people, inspiring social media campaigns and even sticker and graffiti efforts against the features because these effects are by their very nature, uh, not only anti homeless, but just anti human. As critics point out, you know what about older members of society, homeless or not, who simply might need to sit down

more often? What if they, they or anyone else you know, has a health episode you need to lay down, But oh, you can't lay there because there's spikes coming out of the concrete for no reason. Like you're like you live in a Mortal Kombat game. Yeah, there's a really depressing lack of compassion evident in those though at the same time, I mean, to be fair to I guess the people

who would install things like that. I mean, like, the problem is that there, you know, there are people without a place of their own to to lie down or to sleep or something like that. And like the one owner of a building or something can't individually all of the problem, right, give every one a place to live, uh, And so like they're just forced to individually deal with their own problem, which is that people keep laying across

the doorstep of my building. But it's sad to see that problem dealt with by just like trying to make things even harder for the people who end up sleeping there. Yeah, yeah, yeah, certainly to your point that the individual store owner is not going to solve the wicked problem of homelessness. We call it a wicked problem because it's something with a number of different factors involved, and it's very difficult to address and to solve. It's the kind of effort that

people devote their lives to trying to deal with. Oh, but I mean, I think there there are clearly things you can do to reduce homelessness. I think I think the evidence is there, certainly. But but in terms of the individual store owner, they can't. They can't do it themselves. But you know, ultimately that the issue is, you know, benches that you can actually sleep on are not going

to fix anything. But but neither does the presence of hostile architecture, even though it may allow some people to better ignore the underlying problems in society. And and that's the thing, like it's about making Ultimately, it makes the problem less visible two segments of the population and without actually solving the actual problem. Yeah, it wouldn't make any sense to to blame the the homelessness problem to begin with on the individual store owner or homeowner or whatever

that's putting these measures in place. But I mean it does seem like, I don't know, this is the kind of thing where you really need collective action, the action through large nonprofits or through the government to try to intervene to solve homelessness more systemically and like actually connect people with places to live, rather than than trying to come up with ways to make the problem less visible. Right. Yeah, Ultimately I would I would say that metal spikes are

never the perfect answer to any given problem. So we we bring all this up not to not to end this two part or on a really negative note, but ultimately again to think about the power of architectural design

and the power of architectural objects in our environments. Well, yeah, and to emphasize again one of the many ways I mean, this is what we've been exploring throughout these episodes is that um is that the designs of cities, and the designs of buildings, and the designs of public spaces are not necessarily neutral neutral, not necessarily in a moral sense, and not necessarily in uh in a public health sense.

They're not just a matter of aesthetic preferences. The design of buildings in public spaces in many ways have public health outcomes, they have cultural outcomes, and they have moral implications. Yeah. Absolutely,

And we live in these environments. So if it is an environment where there are spikes on the stairs, I mean imagine like growing up seeing that every day and that being is part of your world and you have to like and asking like why are there spikes on the stairs, mom, And they're like, oh, that's so people don't set on the stairs. That is a weird message

to drive home. So hopefully these episodes we've explored, you know, the various ways that that's certainly design can make an environment and artificial environment uh more imposing and more negative, but also the ways that they can make make it more positive and ultimately more in line with the natural world that we evolve to thrive in. Totally. My my take is less spikes, more trees. Yes, less spikes, more trees. Big atriums are great, um as long as they don't

have spikes all over. I don't know, it's some atrium type type spikes can be cool, like like, especially if they're like spikes within the vegetation. I want to go back to Mortal Kombat and there was that one stage in the second game where they had the spikes on the ceiling and you would punch someone up into the spikes. But that's a much better design because if someone can still lay on the floor, it's fine, You're not. No one's gonna trip over something and fall on the spikes.

Much better design. Let's let's do a finishing move on this episode. Yes, we're gonna have to call it here obviously. You know, there's so much we could have talked about additionally, concerning architecture and the different style us of architecture, the way different things impact our mind from you know, you know, sharp angles to spirals, uh and so forth, but we only have so much time. In the meantime, we'd love

to hear though from it. Certainly any architects out there that happened to be listening to the show, or people who have experience with any of the architectural styles, features, or specific sites that we've mentioned on these episodes. We we invite listener feedback all the time right in. We'd love to hear from you. In the meantime. If you want more stuff to blow your mind, head on over to Stuff to Blow your mind Dot com that's the

mother ship. That's where you'll find the episodes. You'll also find us anywhere you get your podcasts and wherever that happens to be. Leave us some starts, leave us a nice review that really helps us out. Huge thanks as always to our excellent audio producer Seth Nicholas Johnson. If you'd like to get in touch with us for any of the reasons we talked about in this past couple of episodes, just to say hi, or to suggest a topic for the future, you can email us at contact

that's Stuff to Blow your Mind dot com. Stuff to Blow Your Mind is a production of iHeart Radio's How Stuff Works. For more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.