This document summarizes a reaction paper written by Meera Nazreen about the book "Life Between Buildings" by Jan Gehl. Some key points made in the book are that even passive contact like observing people in a park can be a form of human contact. Gehl argues this type of interaction between people in public spaces gives cities life. However, the author argues that in today's technology-focused world, social media allows people to connect without needing to interact in person. But people still do meet up after making online connections. The author concludes that as future architects, they should design public spaces that incorporate modern technologies to meet the needs of current generations.

1. BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (HONOURS) IN ARCHITECTURE
THEORIES OF ARCHITECTURE ANDURBANISM (ARC61303/ARC2224)
SYNOPSIS: REACTION PAPER (MARCH 2016) [5 MARKS]
NAME: MEERA NAZREEN ID: 0309630
LECTURER: MS IDA TUTORIAL TIME: 2-4
SYNOPSIS NO: 1 READER TITLE: LIFE BETWEEN BUILDINGS USING PUBLIC SPACES
AUTHOR: JAN GEHL
The Life Between Buildings: Using Public Spaces by Jan Gehl is such an eye opener. Who would’ve
thought by just sitting in a park alone, whether you’re observing or just plain looking around at the
people could be a form ofcontact? Not me, that’s for sure. Gehl’s writing of the book, with the help of
his team, is as if looking at society from a baby’s innocence eyes.He mentioned in the book that the
lowestintensity of contact is the “Passive Contact”; see and hear contact. That form ofcontact can be
seen as the birth of life in between the buildings. Having no sense of sight and hearing, a void would
take its place and float in betweenbeing by yourself,allalone as if you’re sitting in yoursilentbedroom,
and being with someone who you actually have connections since the start. Basically, what I think
Gehl is saying is that, any interaction happening between two or more people, specifically outdoor
(literally life between buildings) will give a city life. All of that may be possible back then. However in
my opinion, in this everything-is-one-click-away-era, we do nothave to hold the responsibility of going
out and make connections in order to give the city a heartbeat. There is no need to go out to make
new friends.All ofthat is filled by the current technology.Sure we would meetstill meetpeople outside,
not to be too anti-social, but the point is we do nothave to actually go out, make small conversations
with strangers to make friends. I am not saying to overrule Gehl’s idea of giving life to the city, to the
public. I am just saying there are more innovative and alternative ways in doing so and that today’s
generation, mostofthem rely on social media as a form ofcontact. However, they do still after making
good connections on those platform, meet up and create their own life between buildings. This is
where our job, as the future architects for this generation, to create public spaces which could be
incorporated with all the technologies nowadays.In conclusion, based on Jan Gehl’s interpretation of
life between buildings, we could further develop it. Develop and incorporate the current generation’s
needs because they are the future users.
WORD COUNT: 385 DATE: 11th April 2016 MARK: GRADE:
ASSSESSED BY: