MODULES

The primary focus for designing this bubble was to integrate the often problematic divide between administrative environments and public, interactive spaces within an educational institution. Often heard throughout the halls of our school are proclamations that the administration is a monolithic group that does not have the students’ interests at heart – with regard to issues ranging from the economic portfolio of the school, to the stance of our leaders on federal politics. The proposed space makes an effort to incorporate modern principles of social dynamics into a space meant for equitable discussion that isn’t housed behind closed doors as is done traditionally. While the social-interactive component of this space is the most visually prominent, the ecological considerations are embedded in the materials used throughout the space, and the way in which the mechanical portion of the leadership zone (green pods with blue chairs/desks) is constructed.

 

1. The welcome desk marked in purple serves the simple purpose of an information booth during times in which a non-formal event is occurring in the “Admin-itorium”®. This would be a position available to friendly, environmentally-savvy students with excellent communications skills. Those who man the desk would be responsible with aiding visitors and potential discursive participants with orienting themselves with this bubble. This would largely entail working closely with those manning the Democracy Stations.

 

2. This portion of the space would be manned by full-time administrators who would serve as liaisons between the non-administrative members of the community (students, faculty, visitors to the public portions of other bubbles, etc.) and the people who have administrative responsibilities. The intent of this portion of the room is to provide human interaction between an institution that might be perceived as intimidating to approach, and the people it intends to serve. The principles of this workstation will be focused around eliminating bureaucracy, maintaining transparency, and generally re-orienting the school’s culture of evasive administrative problem-solving

 

3. The stairs are pretty self-explanatory, but there is one catch. While they do constitute the aisle between the sides of the seating rows and the repulsory viewing pods, as displayed in Figure 2, they also slope back up once they reach the presentation area. This is what creates the saddle-like geometry of the room, and thus the social elements of the interactive space.

 

4. The General Admission seating space is dedicated to not only the free viewing of the paid administrative leaders, but interaction with those leaders as well. This degree to which non-officials will be able to participate will be regulated, and certain rules and protocols need to be followed to prevent a constant town-hall style shouting match. The idea of this portion of the room is to allow community members to see how they’re being governed, complain, give feedback, and build a stronger, more trusting community. Out of respect for the concentration and ability of the official admins to deliberate effectively, there would need to be measures in place to ensure that audience members remained respectful. This would be done through a mandatory check-in at the democracy center. While freedom to speak one’s mind and contribute productive input is of the utmost importance, a system of tracking or logins based on an ID card would serve the purpose of the space very well. This way, repercussions could be enforced if rules were not followed.

As for the the physical composition of this space, minimizing the use of traditional materials is ideal. While this bubble’s greatest attributes may have to do with the social dynamics of the space, integration of ecologically-friendly materials (specifically ones that minimize carbon footprint) are also crucial for this space to represent its goals, and serve as a reminder for those in the space. These chairs will be built in the fashion of Terreform One’s mycelium benches, which will serve the functional uses of the space, but also provide a distinct spectacle and environmental theme.

 

 

5. This dotted red line designates the highest section of the room. This lines up with the transparent blue triangles on the right of the image, which indicate the relative topography of the the room, which is imperceptible from above. It is also worth noting that despite what figure 2 suggests, the foyer (comprised of the Welcome Desk and Democracy center) is level with the ground.

 

6. The Interactive senate is the selling point of this space. More than half of the room is dedicated to the dual-purpose Interactive Senate. This space divided by the stairway just like the general admission space, but when it reaches the center of the space (the presentation pod), the stairs go back upward toward the projector screen. The best attributes of this space include its ability to serve many different social and discussive situations through versatile reconfiguration.

 

7. The Suspended “Repulsor” Viewing Pods are most important attribute of the senate, and pièce de résistance of the the bubble itself. The customizable nature of the position of both the pods and their components allow for different physical arrangements that are conducive to different scenarios. The inspiration for these pods was drawn from the generally mediocre Star Wars prequels. Although the plot and acting chops were awful, I found application of modern animation capabilities to the Star Wars universe to be quite exciting. One of the results of this marriage was the representation of the “Galactic Senate”. This space was a vast chamber containing an array of hovering capsules, occupied by representatives from various inhabited moons, planets, and star systems throughout the galaxy. The capsules – also called “Repulsorpods” because of the imagined futuristic repulsor technology that allows them to levitate – can change position and orientation so that if a representative wishes to speak, their pod can move to the proper position in the center of the room, allowing for the best visual access and acoustic quality. While technology of the sort does not likely exist to the level shown in the Star Wars movies (and if it does it is probably extremely expensive and consumptive of energy) the concept of having independent cells that house people in communal manner is something that directly inspires the space I have designed. Additionally, the ability to customize the orientation and position is crucial to maximizing the capabilities of the space. Each of Gallatin’s “Admin-itorium” pods will have either two or four seats with ample personal desk room, which will be accessible to the administration/senate members regardless of which room orientation is being implemented. The most notable motion capabilities of the pods are:
   1. Vertical – using a human-powered pulley system akin to the one pictured in the Legoland amusement park ride in Figure 3 below (but in a much more compact manner as pictured in Figure 4), occupants of the pods would be able to adjust the height of their pod with minimal effort due to the mechanical transference of power through the pulleys. The cables used to suspend these pods would be both high-strength, and transparent (so as not to impede anyone’s vision)
   2. Rotational – The desks/chairs would be able to rotate and lock into place in any position.

The space can also be augmented to reflect subdivisions and groups under the administration as a whole. For example, each of the four quarters of the senate can be raised or lowered to different uniform heights. Alternatively, the two-seater pods could be lowered so that their visibility would be restricted to only the pods immediately adjacent. These are only a few of the possible configurations made possible by such a space.

 

8. As shown in the preceding diagrams, and mentioned in the text, this is the lowest point of the room.

 

9. The Presentation Pod, while possessing the same positioning capabilities as the other pods, would be dedicated to individuals whose presentations demanded long-term central focus. Such situations include TED Talks and town-hall meetings. This is the place to which any non-official administrative participants would go to make their voices heard (the people in the General Admission seating in yellow.)
10. Numbers 10 through 12 are possible seat/desk configurations for the senate members

 

13. As shown in the preceding diagrams, and mentioned in the text, this is the relative high point of the room. It is adjacent to the projector screen.

 

14. The projector screen is self-explanatory, but is a staple of any auditorium space. The senate pods would shift accordingly to make sure that maximum visibility is ensured for all members.