Reflections on Boundaries: Reclaiming Our Personal Space
It has been a year; a global pandemic has spread to more than 100 countries and change the way we live today. Schools are closed. Restaurants are shuttered. Streets are emptied. Flights are canceled. Any mundane situation has become a battlefield. Public space is nowhere near safe, and the house, our little pod, has turned to be the safest environment. As we stop going to public spaces, we begin to recognize every inch of our own home. We start claiming each corner in the house and questioning every little detail of things: thin walls, small desks, dimmed lighting. However, the agony of lockdown is considered as a manageable minor monstrosity, compared to witness the daily death toll rise. This health crisis has amplified a conundrum over the future of space. With millions of people around the world now are staying at home, whether through self-isolation or simply a precaution, we begin to wonder: are we seeing the end of the traditional concept of boundaries?
Boundaries have always been a fundamental notion of architectural thinking, from defining the form of space, organizing closures and openings, to connecting such spaces which allow interaction and continuous reference to space beyond. Boundaries delineate where we stop, and another begins. It is the void that demarcates where the dot stands within each other, the line that separates and connects the two. Architectural boundaries focus on function, how form facilitates human activity, as in the need to open/close or the need to connect/isolate. This reminds me of an excerpt from an essay from Lawrence Abrahamson, which talks about Ma, a concept of boundaries as space. Ma is a Japanese word for the gap. It is the void, an existence of negative space, space within which we exist, the space we originate and evolve from the meaning is to be created by us. In Japanese culture, this reminds us that what isn’t there provides the ability for everyone’s story to coexist. It is the boundaries of space that allow us, and all our ideas, to exist side by side.
This is not the first-time architecture and design will be reimagined in response to the health crisis. In the 18th century, outbreaks of malaria and typhus encouraged residents to move out and occupy the suburban area. The cholera epidemic pushed the government to establish a better sanitation and drainage system for the city. Then, in the 19th century, the Tuberculosis outbreak shaped the character of built environments and spatial zoning in hospitals. The hospital’s architectural expression has become more formal as their needs were increased: separation of circulation pathways, the addition of quarantine areas, and more specific medical needs. Space also comes into the picture. Buildings played a significant role in the spread of infection, and redesign efforts played a key role in stemming the tide of a pandemic. Distance regulations between buildings were also promoted as a spatial effort to improve the built environment.
In each of these previous epidemics, space mattered. The health crisis doesn’t directly and irreversibly destroy the concept of living and coexisting traditionally. Instead, the sudden shift to work-from-home forces us to feel comfortable in such a limited space. Now, you have to share your workspace with your cohabitant. You have to share your domestic space with your coworkers. You have to work individually, but also publicly. The public has become private and the private has become public. There’s no in-between. Just as we’re aware of our essential needs, we have also become alert to reclaiming our needs of boundaries. We start to develop certain feelings, even fear, to control what kind of space we want to be in.
Boundaries are shapeshifting in this health crisis, and there are many aspects of architecture that are going to be rewritten. Shapeshifting allows boundaries to be an intersection of flows, functions, or expectations. It provides space for us to connect and reclaim our personal space back at the same time. Boundaries emphasize the human activities and interactions facilitated through its existence, highlighting its mediating character. The attention given to the processes that take place on boundaries has influenced, in recent years, the development of boundaries and their function both theoretically and practically. The manifestations which occur at the intersection between public space and private space, which have a variety of characters, even tend to be hybrid and dynamic, continue to negotiate, expand in time and place, and leading to the space-shifting of boundaries.
There are many aspects of architecture that are going to be rewritten when boundaries shift in this health crisis. As the public venues start to reopen, we begin to see design adaptations for the pandemic. Visualization is key when it comes to defining spaces. Colored tapes and plexiglass suddenly become the essential tools to make sure that people feel safe. The guidelines are loud and clear, exclaiming the size and the distance we should stay from each other. This doesn’t just happen in public spaces; it happens in our personal spaces as well. We negotiate our boundaries. We redefine our minimum existence. Boundaries are thus, and we will keep reclaiming our personal space.
[1] Sfinteș, Anda-Ioana. Boundary-spaces in the architectural anthropology. PhD thesis abstract. 2014. 1 July 2020. <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283324741_Boundary-spaces_in_the_architectural_anthropology_phD_thesis_abstract>
[2] Boer, Inge E. Uncertain Territories: Boundaries in Cultural Analysis. Amsterdam & New York: ed. Mieke Bal. Bregje van Eekele, and Patricia Spyer. 2006.
[3] Abrahamson, Lawrence. “The Potential of Nothing.” MAS Context. 2013. 1 July 2020. <www.mascontext.com/issues/17-boundary-spring-13/the-potential-in-nothing/>
[4] Atika. Wabah Penyakit dalam Catatan Sejarah di Indonesia. 9 April 2020. 1 July 2020. <arkenas.kemendikbud.go.id>