Friday, November 6, 2009

Whyte v. Gibbs

1) Whyte and Gibbs both have different approaches to designing the city. Gibbs believes the city should be more designed, much like a mall; whereas Whyte believes the less design put into a city the better it will turn out. Whyte makes a more convincing argument because he is less extreme, he realizes that the city is not a shopping machine like the mall and believes the city should stay true to this. Gibbs however makes the argument that cities should be designed, his stance gives me the feeling that he is trying to over-design the city, and this takes away from his argument in my opinion.

2) The elements of urban design that appeal to me most are the design of buildings; how these buildings look, their style and even their height and width. Other things that appeal to me are the design of the roads and sidewalks. An aspect of urban design that repels me is over-design. When I feel coerced into buying something, I am bothered and annoyed. Other than this, I like the design of most urban areas.

No comments:

Post a Comment