010 Spatial Syntax Part 01 - Architecture and Freedom?

Spatial Syntax was mainly developed by Hillier and Hanson. Its a system that architects use, i.e. OMA that attempts to reveal deep social structuring of architectural space. From this analysis, buildings operate to constitute social organizations as spatial dispositions. 

Architecture mediates social reproduction through spatial genotypes. 

Spatial "genotypes" are clusters of spatial segments structured in certain formations with syntactic rules of sequence and adjacency. These seen as institutionally embedded. The forms of schools, offices and houses are reproduced from a number of genotypes. Each of these forms link into specific social institutions, i.e. school - knowledge, office - production and house - reproduction. 

The spatial syntax theory itself is perceived as positivism and reductionism. Koolhaas's programmatic innovations demand analysis and the link between spatial structuring. This complies to the syntactic analysis where the outcome would reveal its complexity and the links in social structure.

This here is a loose adaptation of the syntactic analysis that translates the building plan into a diagram of how life and social encounters are formed within it.
The diagram illustrates three primary cluster relations: the string structure (linear) with no choice of pathway, the fan structure with access controlled from a single segment, and the network structure with multiple choice of pathways. Architecture inevitably involves the combination of these three.

The linear syntax illustrates an enfilade of spaces with controlled movement. This is common mainly in traditional centers of power, such as Versailles, and in modern retail buildings where the entry is at one end and the exit is at the other. 
The fanned syntax emphasizes on the characteristic of bureaucratic organizations with large numbers of cells controlled by a hallway. 
The network syntax is defined by a choice of pathways which is often called permeability. 

When a linear syntax is combined with a fanned syntax, the result is a tree i.e. a linear series of fans. This creates a continue of many linear syntax duplicating itself within the fan syntax. 

The idea of syntactic analysis is the degree of network connectivity "ringness" vs tree-like heirachy of spatial control. The network syntax structure is defined by its multiple and lateral connections, many possible pathways through it, and dispersed control. The tree-like structure controls the circulation and social interaction in certain key access spaces. A hallway is the only access to cluster of rooms and has a high level of control over flow of everyday life. The permeable network syntax offers many possible pathways and diverse encounters however the flow of life through space is only loosely controlled. 

Another characteristic that can be derived from the syntactic analysis is the depth or shallowness of spatial structuring. A deep structure requires many segments with many boundaries and points of control. 

The syntactic method shows the spatial segments of the building layered into levels  of depth so that the level of space indicates the shortest route from the exterior (first node). The issue of depth is an important mediator of social relations both inhabitants and visitors. Domestic spaces and gender divisions are often structured in deeper segments while mediating a contact of visitors in the shallower end of the analysis. Examples such as prisons, hospitals, asylums, schools locates it subjects under surveillance deep within its spatial structure.  This verifies that the deeper the structure, the more secure and exclusive the spaces will become i.e. less integrated within the structure.

This diagrammatic method is not made up of plans; they are designed to reveal the nodes of access and control through the spatial structure. A breakdown analogy of spatial encounters and flow of everyday life within a building. >