Welcome to Your World: How the Built Environment Shapes Our Lives

I still have an interest in the subject matter after reading this book, however, it was more of a written tour of various buildings than I was hoping for. The author also used "we" to conduct these tours, making what felt like presumptuous assumptions about her readers. The work was decidedly one-sided, with the message that nearly all of society's ills could be cured with better design, and contained only one brief mention that cultural differences might influence a person's reaction to the environment around them.

Because I know almost nothing about architecture and design, I learned a lot of stuff from Sarah Williams Goldhagen's <i>Welcome to Your World: How the Built Environment Shapes Our Lives</i>.<br /><br />The "built environment" was a new concept for me. It includes three levels of design: urban, landscaping, and architectural. The built environment affects our thinking, which is a form of situated cognition. We are mostly bad judges of the built environment: <blockquote>"Not only are consumers disposed to prefer familiar, conventional designs, they will prefer conventional designs <i>even if those designs serve them very poorly</i> — which, as we have seen, they often do. This is owing to a common psychological dynamic, namely that the more times a person is exposed to a stimulus, even if it does not serve her well, the more she will habituate to it such that she eventually will not only prefer it when offered other options, but will eventually deem it to be <i>normative</i>.</blockquote> But maybe that bad judgement is understandable given that buildings aspire to: help individuals psychologically; allow groups to socialize; become part of the physical (often natural) environment; make statements. Because they must do so many things, buildings often fail or succeed inconsistently. I found one quote here that goes something like "a building is a struggle not a miracle." That seems right. To make a really great building is very difficult, and we should celebrate when architects succeed.<br /><br />There were things I didn't love about <i>Welcome to Your World</i>. First, in an early chapter, SWG explains that "'environmental revolution' will elicit in most people's minds thoughts about overpopulation and pollution, particularly from carbon emissions, which has so degraded the ozone layer that encircles our planet that we face potentially catastrophic climate change." This is wrong, and I was shocked that it made it through the editing process. Both the depletion of the ozone layer and climate change can be tied to pollution and to our disdain for the planet. But they're nevertheless two issues. Ozone depleting substances (CFCs and HCFCs) destroy the ozone layer, which protects us from ultraviolet radiation. When we emit greenhouse gases, such as CO2 and methane, we increase their concentration in the atmosphere, which decreases the amount of heat that would otherwise leave the planet. Sorry for the long-winded explanation, but once I read this sentence, I questioned her expertise elsewhere.<br /><br />The thing is, the built environment touches on a lot, so it leads SWG to make many claims that go beyond buildings. First, when she writes a lot about slums, for example, it's not obvious that she has studied them beyond thinking that they're bad. I can't say I love them either, but I'm at least familiar with arguments about why they exist beyond callous disregard from Saunders' <i>Arrival City</i> and Brand's <i>Whole Earth Discipline</i>. Second, SWG discusses how building design can help students to think (or at least to fill in standardized tests more correctly), but in these moments it was never obvious to me that she had considered the role of income. It makes sense that students who study next to an airport would struggle to concentrate, but I would also expect those students to come from low-income families. I would have preferred more detail in teasing out the causality, or least some acknowledgement that the data might be noisy. (Or isn't—discuss the studies in detail, please.) Third, situated cognition often seems to boil down to "high roofs" and public spaces are inspiring and allow for collaborative innovation. I like cathedrals as much as the next person, but when people need to study or get things done, why do they so often eschew these places and find a private corner instead? Finally, although designers sometimes get it right, I did not finish <i>Welcome to Your World</i> convinced that they often succeed.<br /><br />These final irritations are petty. Nevertheless. <i>Welcome to Your World</i> has many pictures, which is fine, but the entire book is printed on glossy paper that reflects light like laser beams into my eyes. Maddening. At another point, SWG criticizes the One World Trade Center, but she only shows the intended design rather than showing it alongside the eventual design. Poor design choices in a book criticizing bad design is doubly irritating. <br /><br />My favorite thing about <i>Welcome to Your World</i> is that I began to think about what I want from buildings. I began to think about two axes, which are warm/ cold and neat/ dull. Many homes aspire to be warm and are content if they're dull; many libraries aspire to be warm but are actually cold and dull. Many buildings whose design is neat are actually cold to the point that I dislike them. One thing I like about industrial aesthetics is that they sometimes succeed in creating warmth, even though that should be all but impossible for them. I realized that I mostly value my cave and my prospect, a sense of warmth, a high level of functionality for reading and for blocking out sunlight, a regulated temperature, trees and plants, and I'm mostly OK with a dull design. I often like symmetry and order. These were opinions I had before I read the book, but it never occurred to me to think about them very consciously.

This is one of those non-fiction books which has enough interesting information to make a really interesting long form article but not enough for a whole book. I found a couple passages really interesting but the vast majority of the book is just repeating the same ideas over and over again so the interesting information gets lost. Goldhagen focuses WAY too much on famous buildings designed by famous architects and she really doesn't get into the research and neuroscience or even everyday architecture, so the book really doesn't deliver on what it promises on the cover of the book.

This is a passionate and well written discussion of why design and architecture matter and how it would improve our society to assign good design a more important role in contemporary America as so much work here is poorly built (much by developers who only care about building cheaply and personal profit). Our society needs policies that support good design as it increases the well being of our society at all income levels. Other countries, such as Holland build better not because they are more capable of good design than us, but as a culture they have higher expectations for their built environment. <br /><br />The application of studies in environmental psychology to architecture is fascinating. I wish there had been more examples of these studies, such as the one that students taking a test in classrooms painted with a blue ceiling perform better. I think more of these examples would have strengthened this book as a study of the connection between environmental studies and good architecture. Some of the examples seem obvious such as more nature, light and ventilation in an environment improves peoples sense of well being, but it is interesting that there are studies that actually prove this point. Additional interesting examples cited include that jarring angles can be disturbing, that we are attracted to curved walls (and the Parthenon has them even though it appears to be straight), and that we are attracted to symmetry. The point that the scale of repetition and symmetry effects its perception was so interesting; I wish the focus was more on examples such as these. <br /><br />There were many examples of good architecture described, including the Pantheon, the Parthenon, the Salk Center. The reasons why the projects described were good architecture was interesting reading, but I was hoping that more examples directly illustrated the points from the environmental studies. Also, some of the buildings mentioned did not have accompanying photos, and if one was not familiar with the building, the point was partially lost. As an architect I should be familiar with all of the examples, but general readers may not be motivated to continue further research. The Scottish Houses of Parliament was a fascinating example. I wish the exterior photo was better- it was so dark that I could barely make it out. The assembly room photo well illustrated a gorgeous space, and the little carved out seats in the windows were fascinating. I need to get to know this project better. <br /><br />The point that architecture matters was well made, and the examples of the social sciences supported the point that architecture and our environment is important. I wished that there were more examples of the social studies discussed with examples illustrating their points, rather than so many classic buildings being cited as examples of good architecture. We do need to be building more of the quality of the Pantheon, Parthenon and Salk Centers today; it is unfortunate that the quality of these examples are so rare as to be almost an anomaly. Having a society that understands and supports why good design is important would increase the odds that we will build a better more healthy environment, as all odds are against us the way things currently stand. This book well illustrates why good design matters and it wet my appetite to read more about the connection of environmental studies and good design.

Had such a high expectation on this book, finished it just for the sake of it after putting it down several times. Content-wise, it was not bad but her narrative was boring. My mind kept wandering off while reading. Because urbanization is something I'm interested in, because she is a woman, I really wished I could have gotten something more substantial from this book. I gave 3 stars, hoping that the fault was with me, not with the book.

I absolutely devour books about community, infrastructure and the "built" world. This book was such a light-weight on all of those levels, I was unable to finish it.

The prose is somewhat dry and labored, but deserves ample credit for pioneering an argument for "why architecture matters" rooted in cognitive science and social psychology.

I really enjoyed the description of how good design help buildings drastically improve our experiences and our lives. The case studies were also excellent. The studies of buildings that I've visited before were especially vivid, but the images in the print edition allowed me some insight into those that I hadn't experienced myself. At times, the language became really pretentious and unnecessarily academic. But that didn't detract from the overall message.

Fascinating! This would be an interesting read for anyone curious about the effects that built environments have on the people who inhabit them. As an architect, this book gave me much to think about, and having just finished it, I feel like I should read it again to pick up more of the info I probably didn't absorb in the first read.

Interesting, but prolix and self-repeating.