Art Education and Urban Aesthetics

Leonardo

Art Education and Urban AestheticsAuthor(s): Rachel de Sousa ViannaSource: Leonardo, Vol. 35, No. 3 (2002), pp. 255-261Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1577114 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 15:13

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The MIT Press and Leonardo are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toLeonardo.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.54 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 15:13:00 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpress

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1577114?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


GENERAL ARTICLE

Art Education and Urban Aesthetics

Rachel de Sousa Vianna

T7 he inclusion of urban issues in the art- education agenda can be traced to three developments that

emerged during the 1960s: the mingling of art with political, social and ecological issues; the spread of environmental awareness and activism; and the development of new information about the human-environment relationship. Studies in the social and behavioral sciences disclosed the importance of the environment for human well-being and indicated that culture, age, gender, socio-economic status and the environment itself, among other factors, affect the way people experience their surroundings and their criteria for judging environmental quality [1]. These findings led to the charac- terization of conventional methods of design as authoritarian and lacking interest in the users' values and ways of life. In re-

sponse to these developments, art educators joined profes- sionals from other fields to propose an urban environment education that would foster informed, responsible public participation in environmental decisions.

With its origins linked to postmodern theories and activism, urban environmental education has a strong commitment to issues of citizenship, equity, sustainability, pluralism and community. Its advocates recommend that teachers discuss environmental issues that are directly relevant to their students' everyday lives, encouraging them to analyze local problems and possible solutions [2]. In accord with this conception, art educators involved with the urban environment place great emphasis on helping students to reflect upon the connections between urban aesthetics, ethics and cultural and socio- economic factors [3].

A number of art educators, architects and urban planners consider the widespread problem of visual illiteracy one of the main obstacles for effective public participation in environmental decisions. McFee and Degge [4] and Nelson [5] state that most people are "visual illiterates," meaning that they cat-

egorize objects by their concepts and functions while over- looking their visual properties. According to these authors, the Western education system concentrates on the mastery of numbers and written language, almost at the expense of learn-

ing to see. This bias, coupled with a general belief that there is no learning process involved in the ability to see, has produced a society of visual illiterates.

Lynch, in his pioneer book about the city's image, proposes visual education as a means of improving the quality of the urban environment. He states that

in the development of the image, education in seeing will be quite as important as the reshaping of what is seen. Indeed, they to-

gether form a circular, or hopefully a spiral process: visual education im- pelling the citizen to act upon his visual world, and this action causing

ABSTRACT

The widespread problem of visual illiteracy prevents people from perceiving the aesthetic quality of their surroundings. This inability repre- sents a barrier to full participation by the public in debates over the kinds of cities they want to live in, and yet the physical qualities of the environment strongly affect the social and psychological well-being of its inhabitants. This article

him to see even more acutely [6]. argues that art educators h an important role in fosterin

Sanoff affirms that "if we are con- the awareness, understand the awareness, understandi cerned with the quality of the phys- and appreciation of urban ical world around us, it is evident aesthetics. It then recounts that there needs to be an increased author's field study, which

investigated the effectivene awareness of the impact of the vi- three instruments for deve sual environment on people's understanding of urban aes everyday lives" [7]. ics. The article concludes w

Since experiencing the environ- some suggestions for art educators interested in dev ment involves not only visual and educators rested in dev ing programs for studying t

spatial perception but also input urban environment. from the other senses, references to the urban environment as visual are sure to bring controversy. More- over, neither the terms visual literacy nor visual education address the multiple aspects involved in urban aesthetics. Yet, as

Riley puts it, the "discussion of vision and landscape must begin with the recognition that vision dominates our immediate sen-

sory and cognitive transactions with the landscape." This is not to dismiss the complexity of the problem, as Riley himself ob- serves a few lines later: "But it is the very dominance of vision that makes its relationship with landscape an enormous, un-

wieldy subject for inquiry, and one that might include very different categories of human experience" [8].

In fact, the urban environment presents specific characteristics that make the appreciation of urban aesthetics a

challenge surpassing the difficulties in appreciating two- dimensional compositions or even architectural spaces. On the one hand, the large size and the undefined forms of urban

ave ig ng

the

ss of oping thet- Nith

elop- he

Fig. 1. Belo Horizonte, with the Curral Sierra in the background. (Photo ? Rachel de Sousa Vianna)

Rachel de Sousa Vianna (architect, art educator), Rua Muzambinho 42/801, Belo Hori- zonte, MG-30.310-280, Brazil. E-mail: <[email protected]>.

LEONARDO, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 255-261, 2002 255 ? 2002 ISAST



6m

Fig. 2. Apartment buildings in front of the Curral Sierra on Bandeirantes Avenue. With one exception, all were constructed after 1990, when the Juscelino Kubitcheck Square was built. (Photo ? Rachel de Sousa Vianna)

spaces defy a clear understanding of their structure. Because the experience of the environment occurs in a sequential man- ner, one has to consider the cumulative effect of a series of views in capturing the character of a place. Likewise, perception of a space varies according to the spaces experienced before and after it [9].

The environment itself is also con-

stantly changing. Shifts in the quality and direction of light, which varies with the time of day, the weather and the seasons, can completely transform the way a place looks and feels. Moreover, the activities that occur in a setting greatly influence its character.

Yet another factor that makes it hard to judge urban aesthetics is the sublimi- nal way in which we process a variety of environmental input. This mode of perception generates subconscious notions that affect our understanding and evaluation of a place [10]. Moreover, because we are participants in rather than mere observers of the environment, we usually take it for granted and rarely spend time to analyze and question its quality. This

tendency to reduce the environment to background increases as we become more familiar with our surroundings.

The current state of urban aesthetic

theory further complicates the study of

the subject. Recent theoretical developments and empirical research have

pointed out some insights into the nature of aesthetic environmental appreciation, but scholars have yet to produce a well- ordered body of formal principles specific to the urban environment [11]. Designers also must confront the problem of disappearing canons. Madanipour [12] suggests that in the last two decades architects and urban planners have

adopted solutions that follow the exist-

ing context as a means of humanizing and democratizing their interventions- and also as a safe way out of determining aesthetic merit.

In view of such a state of affairs, one

might ask: if neither theorists nor de-

signers have arrived at a set of parame- ters to define urban aesthetic quality, how are art educators supposed to help the public to make aesthetic judgments? There is no simple answer to the question, except that they must. In order to

participate in environmental decisions, people need to be able to critically ana-

lyze the physical qualities of their sur-

roundings and the effect they exert

upon them. "Reading" a landscape involves addressing the two basic components of urban aesthetics: form and

meaning.

Assessment of formal quality requires awareness and understanding of the visual

relationships between the diverse elements that compose the environment. One has to consider how buildings, open spaces, urban public fixtures, vegetation and the natural setting relate to each other and to the whole. The character of a place de-

pends on how these elements are organized in terms of scale and proportion, unity and variety, rhythm, balance, conti-

nuity and level of complexity, as well as on the adjustment of the physical setting to the activities performed within it.

Interpretation of the landscape involves analyzing the interrelated factors of culture, socioeconomic patterns and

political and economic interests that have

shaped the environment. The design of a place (be it the result of professional work or informal arrangement) results from a series of choices from a set of al- ternatives. Worldview, values, lifestyles and activities influence the choices people make. On the other hand, the variety of groups living in a city often generates conflicting interests. Accordingly, decisions regarding urban developments gen- erally reflect the view of those who retain some kind of power. Yet the city is a dy- namic structure. People move in and out, neighborhoods pass through periods of

256 de Sousa Vianna, Art Education and Urban Aesthetics

ft- #e~

;- a

ib ?-- ...... r : :;? :: J1?-*?- : r?'mCh fl ? I '?. 'c? ????

r.r'..stLCF..i"a%t;iii:?:* 3 32p.*?;*I, ?*LL

---.?,.. .- ?..UF.-?- ?c- '-" - :irCc" "' '

-: ....X... . .; w,

.. .



"': S::::*;HI*:ii:*iElii!::""x:fi' IPLeY;pHe4"4;b:: *''??':'":

?*:?: ??::,?::??::?r:: riC ::i::iias?inr.:i;:s*? ?r: ??.:?.:?.???:::::.: ;' ';r:::.+?..?* I;:ii??-? ?:.?

Fig. 3. Houses built perpendicular to the gradient on Curral Sierra, a landmark elected symbol of Belo Horizonte. (Photo ? Rachel de Sousa Vianna)

prosperity and decay, economic activity changes and cultural trends change the

way people perceive their surroundings and their ideal image of place and city. Hence, one place can arouse different

meanings for different groups of people, and meanings can change over time.

As with other artistic disciplines, the two components of urban aesthetics have not always received the same amount of attention. Currently, concern with cor-

recting a long-standing approach that saw aesthetics as an autonomous realm has led some art educators to emphasize meaning to the detriment of formal

analysis. Yet to reduce the discussion of aesthetics to its socio-cultural component means to cut out the very essence of the

subject. In this regard, it is important to

distinguish between imposing aesthetic canons and teaching about visual elements and formal principles.

A number of scholars do agree that awareness of visual elements and knowl-

edge of formal principles are crucial for aesthetic appreciation. Rapoport affirms that "it is clear that before we can evaluate we must know, i.e., the elements eval- uated must be part of our awareness and must fit into some schema. Cognition is

then a search for order and a process of

imposing an order" [13]. Goodey asserts that "our ability to organize our percep- tions probably gives us a satisfaction which is at the root of our aesthetic judgments. Our appreciation of an environment or structure may be a measure of the degree to which we can organize the various stimuli that we sense" [14].

Scholars also acknowledge that aesthetic understanding and evaluation of the environment tend to change with

learning and experience. Thus, while

laypeople tend to focus on isolated elements of the environment, architects and

designers are able to grasp the relation-

ships between these elements [15]. This is not to say that individuals cannot gain mastery in aesthetic matters through observation or/and exposure to other people's criticism. Nor does it mean that

knowledge of design principles ensures "visual competence." Yet it is reasonable to expect that, in the same way that pro- fessionals working with images have ben- efited from learning about design principles in school, so would the public.

The low prestige that aesthetic matters command suggests that interest in the

subject is not intuitive but needs to be

cultivated. This is an urgent task, since the shaping of a city results from a col- lective process in which we all take part, even if with different degrees of impact. Environmental educators have devel-

oped a variety of instruments for im-

proving people's ability to perceive, understand and evaluate the urban environment. Below, I present a study in which I examined three instruments de-

signed to help individuals to "read" their

surroundings in a critical way. My ob-

jective in this study was to contribute to the effort of art educators working with the urban environment by providing methodological and empirical information that can be used to enhance interest in urban aesthetics.

THREE INSTRUMENTS FOR UNDERSTANDING URBAN AESTHETICS

I adapted the three instruments-a town-

scape survey, a visual preference survey and a visual appraisal tour-to assess the aesthetic qualities of Bandeirantes Av- enue in Belo Horizonte, a city with 1.5 million inhabitants in southeastern

de Sousa Vianna, Art Education and Urban Aesthetics 257

f .

. :.

:!

.

::, 't.<

: . r-

'XF

:

....



Fig. 4. Billboards on Bandeirantes Avenue. (Photo ? Rachel de Sousa Vianna)

Brazil. The fieldwork testing the instruments took place in August 1998. Ban- deirantes's history illustrates the

dynamics that have shaped Belo Hori- zonte in the past few decades, as pressure from real estate companies and poor planning by authorities have compro- mised the city's landscape. In less than 15

years, Bandeirantes Avenue lost its

panoramic view of the city. The avenue also lost the potential to create a square surrounded by the green slopes of the Curral Sierra, a landmark so important that the population elected it the symbol of Belo Horizonte (see Figs 1 and 2).

The three instruments call attention to the following aspects of Bandeirantes Avenue: (1) the importance of the Cur- ral Sierra in the landscape; (2) the ob- struction of the city view by high-rise apartment buildings; (3) the differing textures of the two sides of the avenue, with one side containing almost only houses and the opposite with a predom- inance of high-rise buildings; (4) the lack of any visual unity throughout the avenue, as buildings, sidewalks and vegetation fail to present any kind of pattern or visual linkage; (5) the aggressive occu-

pation of the sierra's slopes by enormous houses built perpendicular to the gradient (see Fig. 3); and (6) the role of urban structures, billboards in particular, in

making the avenue a chaotic visual land-

scape (see Fig. 4).

The Visual Preference Survey, Visual Appraisal Tour and Townscape Survey The visual preference survey uses slides for helping participants develop aes-

thetic criteria for judging built environments [ 16]. During a group presentation of slides, the participants individually rate each slide, assigning a score from 0 to 10. At the end of the section, all scores are

averaged, and the group discusses the reasons for their preferences and dis- likes.

A visual appraisal tour consists of a

map of the area studied, in which points of observation are marked, accompanied by an appraisal form for each point [ 17]. The appraisal form has an area for the observer to describe the view, a series of checklist questions, and a space for con- clusions. During a visit to the area, the observer assigns a score for each question ranging from 1 (meaning contrast-

ing, inadequate or discordant) to 5

(meaning harmonic or appropriate). The questions are divided into three cat-

egories, which involve increasing diffi-

culty, going from analysis of urban elements to relationships between build-

ings, to an evaluation of how the built environment interferes with the natural

landscape. The townscape survey provides a

method for recording visual experiences (see Fig. 5). The urban elements include

vegetation and ground surface because of their importance as potential means to create continuity and visual unity, while billboards are part of the system as

aspects of visual pollution. The system for

representing buildings comes from town-

scape notation, a system developed by Henry Sanoff [18]. The survey asks the observer to classify groups of buildings as orderly or disorderly and to evaluate their visual quality. There are also sym-

bols to indicate respondents' views of the mountain and the city. Because of Ban- deirantes Avenue's topography, the notation is organized in three sections. The first one refers to the sidewalk; the second to the buildings on the avenue's level; and the third to the second group of buildings seen behind or above the first plane. Participants walk on one side of the avenue and record their impres- sions of the opposite side.

Methodology Sixty students in the seventh and eighth grades of a private school located near Bandeirantes Avenue participated in this

study. All students were familiar with the avenue. The participants took a pretest that asked them to: (1) draw a map of Bandeirantes Avenue between the Ban- deira and Juscelino Kubitcheck squares; (2) describe the area in writing, focusing on its visual characteristics; (3) evaluate the area according to a series of opposing adjectives; and (4) justify their evaluation with examples of places and situations. The technique of combining maps and written descriptions to investigate people's perception and knowledge about their surroundings has been used in a number of environmental studies [19].

After the pretest, three groups of participants used one of the instruments-visual preference survey, visual appraisal tour, or townscape survey-to study the same area. Considering that the pretest, by itself, could lead to a closer observation of the environment, a control group was established. Participants in this group took

only the pretest and the posttest. After the activities, all participants repeated the test. The criteria for assessing effectiveness involved the inclusion in the second exer- cise (independently whether in drawn or written form) of the aforementioned six

aspects stressed by the instruments.

Results The data corroborates the theory de- fended by Lynch [20], Rapoport [21] and Prak [22], which states that people tend to pay more attention and to value human activities more than the physical setting. In the pretest, the references to the opportunities for leisure that the avenue of- fers, to its bustling character, and to the

region's status far exceeded the remarks about the physical setting for determining the avenue's appeal. The participants' maps confirm the importance of social activities in the construction of mental im-

ages of the urban environment. Fewer

participants depicted the difference be-




L . . W, ..

iU' -

. . imiras v ?c-0/

'p I%13

Legend

-)-_ View to the city Discontinuous sidewalke ~uou sidwalk - ~View to the mountain I I Continuous sidewalk

(s,Uluh +23 -) 1 ,(I (m.bod som) O*O Groupofsimilar ftrees +2"21 n-lb"

t t Group of harmonious buildings 000 Group of different trees (color, nlteris, rooft walls, bcallU)

NNewsstand/ Kosk ni- +21-2 n(i d rsm)

, F,,,, a BilEx:xrd , G j AL~_ Group of conhasting buildings Bl board rT(corskt, Aoedols, roofs, wak, localion)

pdO r //// ^ Street sope

Fig. 5. The townscape survey applied to Bandeirantes Avenue. Subjects were to use the symbols in the legend to describe the site. Each group of three lines corresponds to one side of the avenue. (? Rachel de Sousa Vianna)

tween the two sides of the avenue, or the Curral Sierra, than, for instance, the lo- cation of bus stops.

Regarding the aesthetic quality of Bandeirantes Avenue, the results indicate that the three instruments did have a pos- itive effect on the participants' perception. Yet each instrument produced different outcomes. Table 1 shows the

proportion of participants that noticed the visual characteristics of Bandeirantes Avenue in the pre- and posttests and the difference in the results between the two tests. The lower level of awareness of the

participants in the control group in the

pretest most probably comes from their

disappointment in not taking part in any activity besides the tests-this information being revealed before the pretest.

The control group's responses indicate that the pretest did not influence the perception of the area under study. More

subjects in this group mentioned the Curral Sierra in the posttest, but all other

aspects received less or the same number of references. An important point to consider is that no subject in the control

group presented a more critical reason-

ing about the area's aesthetic quality in the second analysis.

The townscape survey was the most ef- ficient instrument in leading participants to observe the lack of harmony among the Bandeirantes buildings. Initially, 15% of the group's participants had observed that the avenue's business contributed to disorganization. One affirmed: "This is a

place where there are many schools, malls, and commerce, which makes the

place chaotic." In the posttest, 38% of the

participants commented about the build-

ings' visual characteristics leading to con- fusion. One stated: "The avenue has

many large houses and also many large buildings, which often results in a dishar- monious landscape." A second one noted: 'The buildings vary a lot: size, col- ors, and volumes." Another subject as- serted: "This is not a very harmonic

region, where houses and buildings mix without concern." The activity produced also the most definite results concerning the different uses of the two sides of Ban- deirantes Avenue and the view of the city.

The outstanding result of the visual

appraisal tour on the participants' perception of the aesthetic quality of Ban- deirantes Avenue involved the presence of billboards. The activity also called attention to the houses built on the Curral

Sierra. Although the percentage of sub-

jects who referred to the sierra increased

only 8% in the posttest, the activity had

interesting effects that escape the scope of statistics shown in Table 1. All participants representing the sierra in their second maps of the area (41% of the total) drew houses on the sierra's slopes. Some of these maps make such compelling pic- tures of the visual disruption caused by the houses that they could be used as

protest posters. Yet only 18% of all sub-

jects criticized the interference of the

buildings in the landscape in their texts. Moreover, 29% of the participants con- tinued to express favorable views about the buildings, with comments such as: "the houses fit with the avenue," and "its houses and buildings are very elegant and fancy."

Although the visual appraisal tour did not succeed in changing preconceived notions equating beauty with wealth and status, it did help the only subject who had initially criticized the avenue's build-

ings to formulate his viewpoint. In the

pretest, he had affirmed: "In aesthetic vision it falls short, because despite its ap- parent diversity, the houses and schools follow a pattern that serves only to clash


i: i . . i,

F



Table 1. Percentage of Participants Mentioning the Avenue's Visual Aspects

Aspects Control Group Pre Post Diff.

Curral Sierra 15 31 16 View of the City - - Different Sides 38 15 -23 Billboards 23 15 -8 Bldgs x Landscape - -

Group of Buildings 8 8

(Pre = pretest; Post = posttest; Diff. = difference)

Townscape Survey Pre 31 15 23 23 15 15

Post 38 54 38 62 23 38

Diff. 8 39 15 39 8 23

Visual Appraisal Pre 47 12 12 18

6

Post 53 18 24 71 18 6

Visual Pref. Survey Diff. 8 6 12 53 18

Pre 35 6

35 24 6 6

Post 47 24 29 35 41 6

Diff. 12 18 -6 11 35

with the avenue." In the posttest this par- ticipant wrote: "This avenue is well served

by its landscape, but the big buildings in- terfere with the view both of the Curral Sierra and of the city. The residents, own- ers of the lots, construct huge buildings that assault the mountain."

The visual preference survey was the instrument that most strongly affected the participants' perception of the build-

ings' impact on the landscape. The iso- lation of visual information from other stimuli presented in the environment, provided by the slides, may have facili- tated this reading. The group discussion

might be another factor, as participants noticing the interference of the build-

ings might have convinced others of their improper characteristics. In the

posttest, 41% of those who completed the visual preference survey condemned the interference of the built environment with the landscape. One affirmed: "The Sierra, for instance, is very beauti- ful, but the billboards, the houses, and the buildings block the view and distract attention." Another stated: "At Ban- deirantes Avenue there are many moun- tains, but they are being damaged by buildings and houses." Another partici- pant wrote: "The agglomeration of

buildings and houses that spoil the view do not show harmony. I don't like the avenue because I don't see anything in-

teresting in its buildings." Overall, the results suggest that the

townscape survey, visual appraisal tour and visual preference survey hold strong potential as didactic instruments for art educators interested in the urban environment. The three instruments helped a number of participants to become more aware of the visual characteristics of the area being studied and more critical of its aesthetic quality.

SUGGESTIONS FOR AN URBAN AESTHETICS STUDY PROGRAM

When designing a program to study the aesthetics of the urban environment, art

educators have to consider those characteristics of the landscape that they want to address, the resources available and the participants' interests. In the case of Bandeirantes Avenue, which presents the visual disorganization typical of the larger Brazilian cities, the instruments invite

participants to reflect upon contrast ver- sus harmony. The visual appraisal form

clearly equates "contrasting" with "inad-

equate" and "discordant," and the town-

scape notation implies that contrast is a

negative characteristic. Yet, this is not true for all environments, as too much order or likeness can produce monotony and boredom.

The characteristics of the group that will undertake the activities are an im-

portant point to consider in planning the activities. While adolescents seem thrilled about taking field trips, adults

might find it more comfortable to watch slides. For people without easy access to

photography, seeing slides of their houses or neighborhood might be an ex-

citing novelty. The ideal is to use more than one in-

strument, including visits to the area and slide sections if possible. Working with

maps that put the area of study in context can clarify spatial relationships and

help participants to improve their mental maps of the area. Group discussions

open opportunities for participants to reflect upon the diversity of readings that one environment can inspire. Interdisci-

plinary works can enhance the scope of the study and give a larger frame for the discussion of urban aesthetics. Consid-

ering varying types of urban arrange- ments can help participants to understand the role of culture, climate and socio- economic and historical conditions in the development of the built environment. Any activity for studying urban aesthetics should consider two fundamental goals: to increase visual awareness and to develop understanding about the connections between aesthetic choices and ethical, cultural and socio-economic issues.

Acknowledgment I would like to thank Rebecca Brooks for her advice on and encouragement of my study and this article.

References and Notes

1. A. Rapoport, Human Aspects of Urban Form: Towards A Man-Environment Approach to Urban Form and Design (Oxford, U.K.: Pergamon Press, 1977); B. Goodey, Perception of the Environment: An Introduction to the Lit- erature (Birmingham, U.K.: Univ. of Birmingham, 1971); K. Lynch, Growing Up in Cities: Studies in the Spatial Environment of Adolescence in Cracow, Mexico City, Salta, Toluca, and Warszwa (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1977); I. Altman and M. Chemers, Cul- ture and Environment (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1984); Y. Tuan, Topophilia: A Study on En- vironmental Perception, Attitudes, and Values (Engle- wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974).

2. C. Ward and A. Fyson, Streetwork: TheExplodingSchool (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1973); H. Symonds, ed., Urban Studies Project: The Teacher and the City (Toronto: Methuen Publications, 1971); R. Wis- niewski, ed., Teaching about Life in the City (Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies, 1972).

3. J.K. McFee and R.M. Degge, Art, Culture, and En- vironment: A Catalyst for Teaching (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1977); L.E. Hicks and RJ.H. King, "Map- ping a Sense of Place: A Contextualized Approach to Designed Environments," inJ.K. Guilfoil and A.R. Sandler, eds., Built Environment Education in Art Edu- cation (Reston, VA: National Art Education Associa- tion, 1999) pp. 10-17; R. Neperud, "Texture of Community: An Environmental Design Education," in R. Neperud, ed., Context, Content, and Community in Art Education: Beyond Post Modernism (New York: Teachers College Press, 1995) pp. 222-247.

4. McFee and Degge [3] p. 17.

5. G. Nelson, How to See: Visual Adventures in a World God Never Made (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, 1977) p. 2.

6. K. Lynch, The Image of the City (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1960) p. 120.

7. H. Sanoff, Visual Research Methods in Design (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1991) p. xiii.

8. R.B. Riley, "The Visible, the Visual, and the Vicar- ious: Questions about Vision, Landscape, and Ex- perience," in P. Groth and T.W. Bressi, eds., Understanding Ordinary Landscapes (New Haven, CT, and London: Yale Univ. Press, 1997) p. 201.

9. K. Lynch, Site Planning (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1971) p. 190.

10. Rapoport [1] p. 179.

11. A. Alcock, "Aesthetics and Urban Design," in R. Hayward and S. McGlynn, eds., Making Better Places: Urban Design Now (Boston, MA: Joint Centre for Urban Design, 1993) pp. 42-49; J. Lang, "Formal Aesthetics and Visual Perception: Questions Archi- tects Ask," Visual Arts Research 10, No. 1, 66-73 (Spring 1984).




12. A. Madanipour, Design of Urban Space: An In-

quiry into a Socio-Spatial Process (New York: Wiley, 1996) p. 168.

13. Rapoport [1] p. 109.

14. Goodey [1] p. 3.

15. Rapoport [1] p. 212; Lang [11] p. 71; Mada-

nipour [12] p. 167; N.L. Prak, The Visual Perception of the Built Environment (Delft, The Netherlands: Delft Univ. Press, 1977) p. 64.

16. The idea of using a visual preference survey came from a study called the Community Vision Project, developed in 1996 at the School of Architecture at the University of Texas at Austin. This project used slides to discuss with members of the community issues of visual quality and preference in architecture and urban environment. The project is documented in two brochures and a video, available at the School of Architecture at the University of Texas at Austin.

17. In developing the visual appraisal tour, I drew on the environmental appraisal sheet created by Keith Wheller and Brian Waites, originally published in the Bulletin of Environmental Education, Nos. 16-17

(August-September 1972) and cited by Ward and

Fyson [2] p. 45. I also looked at the CRIG analysis developed byJeff Bishop, originally published in the Bulletin ofEnvironmental Education 73 (1977) pp. 3-8, cited by Sanoff [7] pp. 57-61.

18. The system developed by Sanoff [7] (p. 119) has a variety of symbols, and the observer is supposed to analyze the scene from a standing viewpoint. The version I created has fewer elements and assumes that the observer analyzes a block as she or he walks.

19. Lynch [1,6]; see the work of Jonge and Klein cited by Goodey [1] p. 26; F.C. Ladd, "Black Youths View Their Environment: Neighborhood Maps," En- vironment and Behavior 2, No. 1, 74-99 (June 1970); J.R.M. Velazquez, An Empirical and Interdisciplinary Test of a Theory of Urban Perception (unpublished doc- toral dissertation, University of California, Irvine, 1978).

20. Lynch [9] p. 200.

21. Rapoport [1] p. 116.

22. Prak [15] p. 71.

Manuscript received 3 May 2000.

Rachel de Sousa Vianna has designed a number of buildings in Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Be- tween 1993 and 1995, she worked in a collaborative project supervising the construction ofhouses for low-income inhabitants of Belo Horizonte. She received her Master in Art Education at the University of Texas at Austin in 1999. Currently, she is a professor at the State University of Minas Gerais (UEMG) and at the Catholic University of Minas Gerais (PUC-MG).

Elu APM AI

Call for Bibliographies to be posted on Leonardo On-Line

We are seeking bibliographies related to art, science and technology for posting on-line. Types of bibliographies might include (but are not limited to) reading lists for classes and courses that might be of interest to other educators; detailed bibliographies on a specialized topic (e.g. Art and the Internet); bibliographies of the works of single authors of interest to our readership (e.g. Rudolf Arnheim).

If you are interested in publishing a bibliography on Leonardo On-Line, contact us via E-mail: <[email protected]> with a one- to two-paragraph description of the bibliography. This description should

provide the title of the bibliography, definitions of any specific terms (e.g. "Telecommunications art"), and brief details of what the bibliography encompasses (e.g. "a listing of books, journals and theses published from 1921 to 1945"). It is also helpful to indicate where the interested persons can find more information. We will publish this descriptive paragraph along with the bibliography if it is accepted for publication on-

line; we will also publish the paragraph in the print journal Leonardo, pointing to the web site for the full

bibliography.

If your bibliography is accepted for publication, we will ask you to send it along with the descriptive paragraph(s) to us on computer disk (PC or Macintosh), along with a hardcopy version for use in referring to

formatting and accents.

If you have a bibliography already available on-line, send us a description and we will point to the bibliography, if appropriate.




Documents

Art Education and Urban Aesthetics