Semiology / Semiotics (signs and how we define them)

The subject of signs and iconography is something that appears in our everyday lives to point where it gets an automatic response from us.  Whether its road-signs as we drive along dictating the speed to go; public transport and its colour co-ordinated route system; or an office building and its designation of floor space, each has its own set of parameters defined for its users.  The subject of Semiology (the study of signs) is something that has a depth beyond anything I could comprehend in this brief discussion, but I hope to give an insight in relation to my previous experience. 

To begin with, this is a subject that has been on my peripheral since the later parts of my second year at university.  I remember Extra Credits doing a Halloween episode on the subject in correlation to horror (quite appropriate in relation to the current time of the year) which perked my interest.  As I have developed my own thoughts over the years through such viewpoints as Heidegger, Lyotard, Baudrillard, etc I’ve only briefly noticed how close semiology comes into the fray.  Defining ‘place’ and ‘space’ is somewhat similar to defining items like ‘chair’, ‘door’ and ‘wall’ which brings us to the architectural context of this piece.

For this piece, I’ve looked at Roland Barthes ‘Semiology and the Urban’ and Umberto Eco’s ‘Function and Sign: The Semiotics of Architecture’ which in turn present some nice examples in game design.  Barthes is the essay I would align closer to my personal architectural theory with the discussion of how towns and cities develop over time and define their areas; such as neighbourhoods, commercial and industrial districts of varying importance.  As you may be aware, the traditional progression of a settlement is a progressive growth into villages-towns-cities depending on a number of factors like geography, economics and social growth.  As a settlement crosses one of these thresholds, there is a certain difficulty in creating new space while appeasing the issues of change.  For example, a village being developed into a small market town may feature new dwellings and more widely recognised retail outlets.  However, the current population may desire a small settlement and dislikes the look of the new developments out of this desire to stay a village.  It is at this point the architect / town planner has to be careful to consider the thoughts of each party as they create this new settlement. 
Personally, I feel a strong connection between this and the idea of particular IP’s (intellectual property) and the interpretation from different studios.  Take the Warhammer 40k IP and see the range of game genres handled by its developers (RTS, FPS, 3^rd person action, etc).  The mechanics are different but they each follow a particular aesthetic (to a lesser or greater degree) of this ‘grim dark’ future where there is a fight for survival in a somewhat brutal manner.  Another example would be the recent Devil May Cry (DMC: Devil May Cry) where a reboot change the story’s main character (Dante) from a ‘jokey’ fun-loving character into a more ‘brooding’ kinda nihilistic person, much to the disapproval of the series fans. 

Eco’s essay is more concerned with the semiology of objects and the correlation we find to create patterns in space.  One of the examples given by Eco is that of a cave and early man; as they use a hole in a mountain as shelter, over time it will be defined by the person as a place of settlement in which they dwell.  Rock formations along the edges can also be defined as walls and the opening itself is effectively a transition from dwelling to not dwelling (aka door).  As the person goes forth and explores, they may see similar rock formations with a transitional ‘hole’ which one could imagine they define as another ‘cave’.  More modern examples can be things like viewports (windows, glazing, platforms, etc) or a chair (pile of rocks, a fallen tree, a chair, a sofa, a throne, etc) but they come under the idea of how we define what something is and the connotations with it.  The range of items that can come under a single definition is somewhat infinite from a broad spectrum, but there’s an example from a game I enjoy greatly which I feel takes on this idea greatly.
Ratchet and Clank on the PS2 was a platformer which featured an anthropomorphic main character (Ratchet) and his robot sidekick (Clank).  Initially, Clank is a means to bring the call of ‘a hero’s journey’ to Ratchet, but over time Clank develops some motor actions to help the player progress the game.  These features include a helicopter / jetpack / waterjet transformation from Clank which gives us the ability to jump higher, glide, swim faster and other tertiary functions.  Clank is defined as a robot; but he features AI of a robot, customisation of a mechanical object, and the companionship of a sidekick character.  I haven’t played it, but those of you from the Nintendo console side will probably see a similar light with Banjo Kazooie and the range of involvement Kazooie has in the game. 

To summarise, the subject of signs and semiology is a vast subject which bleeds into our everyday lives on both a conscious and sub-conscious manner.  Taking time to consider these factors gives us the potential to view games in a new depth when we corroborate it with exterior schools of thought.  I would highly recommend reading further into the subject with people like Young (psychology) or the examples I’ve presented in this post. 

I hope you’ve found this piece interesting. 

References

*Barthes, R. Semiology and the Urban
*Eco, U. Function and Sign: The Semiotics of Architecture
*Ratchet and Clank.(2002). Insomniac Games
*Banjo Kazooie. (1998). Rare

Self-Reflection: Finding Space Within Place

Over the past week, I have had my house to myself much to my own happiness.  After leaving university and going through the process of getting employment beyond small-scale commissions, I haven’t been able to fund my own flat which has moved me back into the parental home.  For those of you who have experience such circumstances, you will probably understand the shortcomings with such a situation, especially if you were rather happy in the previous living setup.  It’s a factor of the little things like sleep schedules, privacy, points of discussions, etc. which can build up into a recognised negative. 

The most recognisable thing for me correlates to my hobbies and interests, particularly gaming and a desire to learn more from the medium.  To be immersed in a world where your eyes envelope the monitor and ears hear nothing but the ambience is a truly wonderful experience; until people either disrupt with juxtaposed prose or a contrasting piece of radio / TV.  I don’t hold such a desire to be sociable against them naturally, but this event can make one less interested in either side of the spectrum and possibly come across as dismissive.  In the end, both parties get a fragment of what they wanted. 

So back to this past week, I had a couple events to attend to, but the majority of my time was set to creating an environment of immersive gameplay to rekindle some of that time I had in my previous university residence.  The stage was set and the first day went well, with a mixture of RPGs, shooters, a couple Indies to try out and some Dota.  I enjoyed my time greatly because it was disrupted by factors outside of the immersion.  However, as a couple days went on, I was unsure about how to fulfil my time which I had been looking forward to.  All my thoughts on this desire for personal space were (in a roundabout way) possibly unwarranted beyond small chunks of time.  As the week went on, I found a happy medium of social interactions and immersive gameplay (most likely due to my work commitments) which pushed me to consider a self-reflective experiment; with the return to the status quo how long would it be until I desired personal space and to what extent. 

Sunday came around and by 3 in the afternoon the parameters were in place to analyse my little personal experiment.  The return to normality was met with the conventional catching up and discussing how the past week went alongside a brief agreement on what to eat for dinner.  The day continued on with me replaying some tower defence games I had got back into over the weekend (Defense Grid and Sol Survivor).  I had particularly enjoyed replaying Sol because of the new modes and discovering the soundtrack again (Oil and Sweat my particular favourite track atm) which combined with the hectic decisions within higher difficulties held my enjoyment and interest.  It was in this timeframe that my experiment came into place; with myself being asked about an advert for hair care products while easy-watching TV droned on in the background around the 7-8pm mark.  The flow of conflict on screen was out of sync with my disinterest in the product of the advert it was most likely clear that I felt that way (although I accept I could have acted in a more amicable manner). 

Many hours later, I took a moment to understand this experiment referring back to my previous living situation trying to find any similarities.  What I considered that although I enjoyed my time in immersive gameplay and academic theory, I purposely took time to talk and discuss things with my housemates.  As I mentioned in one of my introduction posts, having hour long conversions at 3am about architectural theory, games or anything in-between was something I enjoyed a great deal.  So, on the surface I could deduce that I desired social interactions but only of particular subject matter with people of similar interest.  This made sense, but I felt that the range of my housemates and their interests ranged greatly of both the academic and general converse of life.  My second point was one brought from an architectural point of view being that I looked for both personal space and communal space within my environment; something that would seem rather obvious to everyone who is ever lived as we all have pigments of introverted and extroverted characteristics.  Beyond this although, it got me consider Heidegger’s ‘poetically man dwells’ alongside a few minor points. 

We live within places (houses, flats, etc.) but create space within them.  This space is an expression of self and as such becomes architecture.  This architecture can be created by a number of items of both physical and mental application; colour schemes and furniture to whether one converses within said space or not.  We also do this outside of the home, for example in public green space; we outline our space with jumpers for goalposts or towels for picnic; even though you don’t hold ownership of the area.  On the other side of the spectrum, it may me think of my previous mmo experiences where a person may lay claim to an area for farming (as in particular monsters or resource nodes) regardless of free ownership or the camping of spawn points for particular rare monsters.  One of the examples that Heidegger presents is a long distance lorry driver who may have a sleeper cab; this is their space with place but their journey still features interactions with exterior factors e.g. other people. 

With this reflection underway, it got me to think about the desire to return to the previous standard of living in a new way, because that kind of wouldn’t exist in my future.  To move is more of a case of self and defining self in his residence alongside their interactions.  To charge on with the possibly superficial ‘find my own place and get away’ would do a disservice to myself and those I interact with and I need to make sure I do it properly.

So yeah, this was a bit of an odd reflection for me because of what came about from this past week, but I hope you found it interesting or possibly similar to your own experience.  On the subject of employment mentioned above, I’ve built up a larger set of contacts so I hope to become a bit more established in the heritage / gallery space and I can look to make this a bit more than just words on a page.  In the mean-time, I’ve had some really enjoyable commissions recently and it’s keeping me going slowly but steadily.  If you can make a job out of something you enjoy, try it but be ready to accept some frustration; but in the end you can make it worth it.

= )

Ryan

Gaming Through Architecture

(post #2 of the uploaded website)

This may seem like an odd paring at first glance but hopefully i’ll explain some method behind the madness in the coming sentences. Like many people, I enjoy playing video games and experiencing the wide range of entertainment in this medium. Over the last 4-5 years however, this has grown further into a interest to promote video games in a better light; opening the medium up to such topics as education, social considerations, drama, etc. This has been heavily influenced by the web series “Extra Credits” by Daniel Floyd and James Portnow, which has grown from a small weekly discussion on games into a large group of invested individuals with their tagline of “because games matter”. What made this series special in my view was that the presenters weren’t only discussing views from a designer point of view; giving precedence to the arts, humanities and scientific considerations. Quite appropriately I was starting to open the world of architecture into a new light soon after watching these early episodes.

My second year at university featured a small book called “What is Architecture?” which opened my mind to countless possibilities beyond bricks and mortar. With such theorists as Heidegger, Leach, Lyotard and Certeau asking the question of said book title, I viewed my environment (both real and virtual) through different ideas and possibilities. That being said, these years didn’t really make the strong connection that I’m investigating now due to my gaming habits at the time. I played a significant amount of WoW (World of Warcraft) and HoN (Heroes of Newerth) from a quasi-competitive point-of-view and as such wasn’t thinking about my actions beyond performance of play. However, I hope to talk about both genre’s in a future post….

Getting back to the crux of today’s point, it started to come along only recently some two years ago. I had changed from architecture to history due to a number of personal reasons and found myself alot more time to pursue personal interests. Initially, this was more gaming, but didn’t take long to slow down and get me thinking. My starting point was ‘combient’ architecture (or at least what I’ve thought it to be defined as) being the discussion of architecture through the use of technology. A rough example discussed in a past lecture was ‘Second Life’ but at this point I was more interested in the literal interpretation that something like ‘Minecraft’ gave, with its digital Lego feel. That being said, a great deal of people have built wondrous pieces in Minecraft with the care and attention on both a individual and group level which in this context constitute architecture; it just wasn’t really letting me feel like when I read “What is Architecture?”. I needed a way to discuss these views and so then I turned to the real world and started talking.

In my last year of university, I found myself with a new set of housemates. One of new guy’s was a first year architect who enjoyed designing buildings and playing games. We got on well and chat quite a bit about games we were playing. One evening when discussing the medium, we came onto the topic of architectural theory and how to interpret it. After umming and erring through a couple ideas, I started to use video games as ways to discuss Certeau (the definition of space and place within architecture) and we got to understanding of the subject. I enjoyed this alot, possibly owing to the hour or so conversation it entailed, but it got me talking about it. Over the period of that year, we spent time ever so often having similar talks which became the inspiration for producing a web series on the connection.

As discussed in the introduction however, its been a long time coming and I hope to get talking more about this odd combination in an ever growing medium. (That being said, i’m gonna do a little review on a game I’ve been playing next so it’ll be a slow but steady pace).




Extra Credits – http://www.youtube.com/user/ExtraCredits or http://www.extra-credits.net
“What is Architecture?” Ballantyne, A .(2002). Routledge, London.