THE BOXES NUMBER 1

When reading a context, we will definitely get certain concept from it but If we take a look at the words of the same text individually, we will understand the meaning apart from the meaning of the whole sentence. Buildings inside the city are like the arrangement of these words within the sentence. When in at the streets and alleys we look at the buildings one by one , is like a time we look at the words separately in a sentence and sometimes is impossible to understand whole concept of the sentence ( here means the city we live) and presumably we hardly feel connection between words . Look at above pictures , will see buildings(objects) are fixed in the city and indeed in all the pictures objects are the same objects in other pictures and just the position of the subjects have been changed. And the subject's perception of objects in picture (1) with perception of the same object in picture (3) is completely different , A man and a flying crow in the sky will understand the various mental images of the nature and relationship between objects. As a result, we will see that always changing the structure of objects does not change our understanding of that object, but only by changing the position of the subjects can the same difference in the formation of a different mental image. When dealing with the subject of interior design, humans are usually placed in the center of space and in a fixed position relative to the walls of the building, As in cities, people are among the alleys and streets between them, and they have less opportunity to understand the generalities of the city and the relations of the buildings in it as a whole like a crow We want to know if the opportunity created by changing the subject to the object in the above illustrations can be obtained in the interior design of the building as a small scale generalization?With the difference that once words within a sentence have been replaced by buildings within the city, and now the rooms will be replaced within a building.

Certainly, for me, the experience of different spatial qualities, through the automaticization of the object to discover unknown frontiers, even if at the expense of being accused of the formalist approach, is always attractive and defensible, but the problem we are now looking for is precisely the picture of confronting it with its object With each approach . We want to change the relationship between the subject and the object and instead of exploring the object's content, in the opposite of the constituent space, we place the building in its simplest and most basic way to see if we can only experiment with the design of the positon of subject get a new one.

In order for humans to have a different image of cities like crows, without boarding the airplane and climbing the mountains, they must fly like crows, or, like fantasy stories, reverse the earth and the sky, so that the city It will appear as a vision in front of the eye . In order to achieve a different understanding of the city, we can do this in an imaginary way and turn the city in, and now people can walk instead of narrow alleys and watch their walls, see the objects themselves, the street and the relationships between them. But in the interior design, we do not really do this so we can see how to create a level of recognition just by designing the subject with an initial layout of the home space (even in its simplest form)! How to change the position of man (subject) and put it in a new layer to a different mental image like a crow!

With a simple displacement, spaces like the scene of the show will be placed in front of the eyes of the viewer, and each space will be independent of each other, so the relationships between spaces and universality of space would be understandable and concrete to the prese

As the crows can find the relationship between buildings and elements within the city, in here, the subjects will easily understand the relationships between rooms and spaces within the building and the accesses and relationships between them too. The equipment and applications of each space are located in a central core within each space, and the outer walls of each space are free and the ability to communicate between spaces exists.

کلاغ ها چه می بینند ؟ وقتی متنی را مطالعه می کنیم قطعا برداشت مشخصی از آن متن خواهیم داشت ولی اگر به صورت جداگانه به کلمات همان متن نگاهی بیاندازیم , معنای جدا از هم و به دور از معنای کل جمله درک خواهیم کرد . ساختمان ها در درون شهر هم مانند چیدمان این کلمات در درون جمله اند , وقتی از کوچه ها و خیابان ها به تک تک بناها نگاه می اندازیم , شبیه آن است که به کلمات یک جمله به صورت جداگانه نگاه می کنیم وگاها امکان برداشت معنای کامل جمله ( در اینجا شهری که در آن زندگی می کنیم ) را نخواهیم داشت و احتمالا روابط میان کلمات را به سختی حس خواهیم کرد . به تصاویر بالا نگاه کنید , خواهیم دید که ساختمانها (ابژه ها ) در سطح شهر ثابت اند ودر واقع در تمام تصاویر ابژه ها همان اشیاع موجود در تصاویر دیگرند و فقط موقعیت سوژه ها هستند که تغییر کرده اند . و برداشت سوژه از اشیاء در تصویر (1) با برداشت از همان شی در تصویر (3) کاملا متفاوت است , یک انسان و یک کلاغ پرواز کنان در آسمان شهر تصاویر ذهنی مختلفی از ماهیت و روابط میان اشیاء درک خواهند کرد . در نتیجه خواهیم دید که همیشه تغییر در ساختار ابژه ها سبب تغییر شناخت ما از آن شی نخواهد شد بلکه تنها با تغییر موقعیت سوژه ها می توان همان میزان تفاوت را در شکل گیری تصویر ذهنی متفاوت داشته باشیم . در برخورد با موضوع طراحی داخلی , معمولا انسان ها در مرکز فضا و در موقعیتی ثابت نسبت به جدارهای بنا قرار می گیرند , همانطور که در شهر ها انسانها در میان کوچه ها و خیابانهای مابین آن حضور دارند و کمتر فرصت درک کلیات شهر و روابط بناهای موجود در آن را همچون یک کلا غ خواهند داشت . می خواهیم بدانیم , آیا فرصتی که با تغییر سوژه نسبت به ابژه در تصاویر بالا بوجود آمده است می تواند در طراحی داخلی ساختمان به عنوان یک کلیات کوچک مقیاس نیز به دست آید ؟ با این تفاوت که یکبار کلمات درون یک جمله جای خود را به ساختمان های درون شهر داده اند و اکنون اتاق ها درون یک ساختمان جایگزین این موضوع خواهند شد .