O paradoxo da galeria progressiva
PDF

Como Citar

ROLIM, A. L.; AMORIM, L. . O paradoxo da galeria progressiva: neurociência e morfologia aplicadas na análise do comportamento espacial em uma tipologia de galeria de arte. Revista de Morfologia Urbana, [S. l.], v. 10, n. 2, 2022. DOI: 10.47235/rmu.v10i2.264. Disponível em: https://revistademorfologiaurbana.pnum.org/index.php/rmu/article/view/264. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2024.

Resumo

Focando no comportamento espacial de visitantes, investiga-se uma tipologia de espaço expositivo com arranjo sequencial de ambientes, denominada “galeria progressiva” (GP). Resultado de uma tese de doutoramento, propõe-se a interface entre neurociência e sintaxe espacial. Avalia-se o impacto de GPs na função atencional pela aferição da resposta de foco em visitantes em galerias virtuais. As hipóteses iniciais sobre GPs foram: campos visuais são altamente inteligíveis; leiautes deterministas levam à visitação com maior foco e o espaço impacta decisivamente na visita, sobretudo quando rotas são limitadas. São analisados leiautes hipotéticos simples, exemplares históricos e duas GPs modernas, o Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum e o Museu do Crescimento Ilimitado. Posteriormente, procede a análise de variações complexas e, finalmente, a avaliação de percursos de visitantes e captura de foco durante navegação virtual em galerias, cerne deste artigo. O “Grau de Progressividade” e o “Índice de Variação de Picos de Foco” são introduzidos, levando à relação de proximidade entre geometria espacial e respostas neurais, que pode fornecer valiosos dados para projetos curatoriais e arquitetônicos. Resultados revelaram que a coexistência de inteligibilidade, boa intervisibilidade e geometria definidora de rotas, diferente da hipótese, não levou a respostas com maior foco, apontando para o paradoxo em questão.

https://doi.org/10.47235/rmu.v10i2.264
PDF

Referências

Albright, T. D. (2015) “Neuroscience for architecture”, em ROBINSON, S. e PALLASMAA, J. (eds.) Mind in Architecture: neuroscience, embodiment, and the future of design. (The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts) 197-217.

Ashwal, S. (2018) “Disorders of Consciousness in Children”, em SWAIMAN, K. et al. (eds.) Pediatric Neurology (Elsevier, Amsterdam) 767-780.

AUTODESK, Inc. (NASDAQ: ADSK) (2017) “Revit: software built for Building Information Modeling (BIM)”. Versão educacional 2017. [S. l.] [2017?]. Disponível em: https://www.autodesk.com/education/free-software/revit. (Acesso em: 10 Fevereiro 2020).

Amorim, L. (1999) The Sector’s Paradigm: a study of the spatial and functional nature of modernist housing in Northeast Brazil. Ph.D. Thesis. University College London. Disponível em: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1318054 (Acesso: 21 Outubro 2022).

Benedikt, M. L. (1979) “To take hold of space: isovist and isovist fields”, Environment Planning B: Planning and Design 6, 47-65.

Bennett, T. (1995) The birth of the museum: history, theory, politics (Routledge, New York).

Choi, Y. K. (1997) “The morphology of exploration and encounter in museum layouts”, Proceedings of the Space Syntax First International Symposium (UCL, London) 1, 16.1 -16.10.

Conroy, R. (2001) Spatial Navigation in immersive virtual environments. Ph.D Thesis. University College London. Disponível em: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1111 (Acesso: 21 Outubro 2022).

Conroy-Dalton, R. et al. (2015) “Navigating complex buildings: cognition, neuroscience and architectural design”, em GERO, John S. (ed.) Studying Visual and Spatial Reasoning for Design Creativity. (Springer, Netherlands) 7-12.

EMOTIV (2015) “Emotiv BCI: software for brain computer interface.” Versão 2019 [S. l.] [2015?]. Disponível em: https://www.emotiv.com/product/emotiv-bci/. (Acesso em: 10 Fevereiro 2020).

EPIC GAMES, Inc. (2019) “Unreal Engine: real-time 3D creation platform”. Versão 2019 [S. l.] [2019?]. Disponível em: https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/get-now. (Acesso em: 10 Fevereiro 2020).

Gazzaniga, M., Ivry, R. e Mangun, G. (2014) Cognitive NeuroScience: the biology of the mind (Norton & Company: New York).

Hillier, B. (2003) “The architectures of seeing and going: or, are cities shaped by bodies or minds? and is there a syntax of spatial cognition?”, Proceedings of the Fourth International Space Syntax Symposium (UCL, London) 06.1-06.34.

Hillier, B. et al. (1976) “Space syntax”, Environment Planning B: Planning and Design 3, 147-18.

Hillier, B. e Hanson, J. The social logic of space (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge)

Hillier, B. e Tzortzi, K. (2011) “Space Syntax: The Language of Museum Space”, em MACDONALD, S. (ed.) A Companion to Museum Studies (Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford) 282-301.

Li, W., Mai, X. e Liu, C. (2014) “The default mode network and social understanding of others: what do brain connectivity studies tell us”. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8(74), 1-15.

Mallgrave, H. (2013) Architecture and Embodiment: The Implications of the New Sciences and Humanities for Design (Routledge, New York).

Melton, A. (1935) Problems of installation in museums of art (Publications of the American Association of Museums: Washington D.C).

Menon, V. et al. (2015) “Salience Network”, em TOGA, A. (ed.) Brain Mapping: an Encyclopedic Reference (Elsevier) 2, 97-611. Disponível em: https://med.stanford.edu/content/dam/sm/scsnl/documents/Menon_Salience_Network_15.pdf. (Acesso 14 Setembro 2019)

Peponis, J. e Hedin, J. (1982) “The layout of theories in the Natural History Museum”, 9H 3, 21-25.

Peponis, J. (1993) “Evaluation and Formulation in Design – the implications of morphological theories of function”, Nordisk Arkitekturforskinning - Nordic Journal of Architectural Research 2, 53-62.

Peponis, J. et al. (2003) “Path, theme and narrative in open plan exhibition settings”, Proceedings of the Fourth International Space Syntax Symposium (UCL, London) 29.1-29.20.

Psarra, S. e Grajewski, T. (2000) “Architecture, narrative and promenade in Benson and Forsyth’s Museum of Scotland”, Architecture Research Quaterly, 4(2), 122-36.

Psarra, S. (2005) “Spatial culture, wayfinding and the educational message: the impact of layout on the spatial, social and educational experiences of visitors to museums and galleries” em MACLEOD, S. (ed.) Reshaping Museum Space: Architecture, Design, Exhibitions (Routledge: London) 78-94.

Psarra, S. (2016) The Venice variations: Tracing the architectural imagination. (UCL Press, London).

Radek, P. (2011) “The Frontoparietal Attention Network of the Human Brain”, The Neuroscientist 18(5), 502-515.

Rolim, A. L., Amorim, L. e Queiroz, M.C. (2017) “From Wright to Gwathmey Siegel: The case of movement in the Guggenheim Museum”, Proceedings of the 11th International Space Syntax Symposium (Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisboa) 19.1 -19.15.

Rolim, A. L., Amorim, L. e Flavigna, L. (2019) “From Progressive to Labyrinthine: Testing formal variations of an exhibition space typology”, Proceedings of the 12th International Space Syntax Symposium (Jiaotong University: Beijing) 291.1 -291.14.

Rolim, A. L., Amorim, L. e Jaborandy, M. L. (2022) “The galleria progressiva in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum and the Museum of Unlimited Growth”, em RUIVO, C. et.al (ed.) Formal Methods in Architecture and Urbanism (Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Newcastle upon Tyne) 2, 201-222.

Spreng. R. Nathan et al (2013) “Intrinsic architecture underlying the relations among the default, dorsal attention, and frontoparietal control networks of the human brain”, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 25(1), 74-86.

Stavroulaki, G. e Peponis. J. (2003) “The spatial construction of seeing at Castelvecchio”, Proceedings of the Fourth International Space Syntax Symposium (UCL, London) 66.1-66.14.

Sutton, T. (2000) The classification of visual art (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge).

Tröndle, M. (2014) “Space, movement and attention: affordances of the museum environment”, International Journal of Arts Management 17(1), 4-17.

Turner, A. (2003) “Analysing visual morphology of spatial morphology”. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 30(5), 657-676.

Turner, A e Penn, A. (2002) “Encoding natural movement as an agent-based system: an investigation into human pedestrian behaviour in the built environment”, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 29 (4), 473-490.

Turner, A. (ed.) (2007a) New Developments in Space Syntax Software (ITU Faculty of Architecture: Istanbul).

Turner, A. (2007b), “To move through space: lines of vision and movement” Proceedings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium (ITU Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul) 37.01-37.12.

Tzortzi, K. (2015) Museum space: where architecture meets museology (Routledge: London).

Vail, K. (Ed) (2009) The Museum of Non-Objective Painting: Hilla Rebay and the Origins of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum (Guggenheim Museum Publications: New York).

Creative Commons License
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2022 Ana Luisa Rolim, Luiz Amorim

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.