Happy Thanksgiving Day!

Professor Frank Pommershierm in his article, A Snapshot from the Field, (1996)(21 Vermont L. Rev. 7.) includes the following quote in a reference to the development of “tribal jurisprudence.” “As noted by the Irish Poet Seamus Heaney, recent recipient of the Noble Prize in Literature, ‘In any movement towards liberation, it will be necessary to deny the normative authority of the dominant language or literary tradition.” He further states, “Although literature is not law in periods of liberation, law too will confront dominant norms.”
Does the dominant language of the “Western” researcher gain normative authority? To what end? To redefine experience? To justify projects which may actually further US imperialism in the name of charitable good? In the name of international development?
During my last year of law school, many of my “radical” friends went to work for large corporate law firms. They didn’t want to, but the financial obligations were crushing. Many of them said that it would be okay. They could change the system from within. Or-- it was just for a few years. Twenty five years later, they are still in the firms. The firms are still the same.
Can we do one research project accepting the normative authority of the dominant language? Or will we find it just easier next time to rely on our now familiar method? And the next time…and the next? Does it really matter? Is this a period of liberation? For whom?

Art is No Luxury

In this morning’s New York Times, I am reminded of Paulette’s recent post about art and science. Of course, I think this question has everything to do with research and research methods. In our current project we are trying to respect the steps of a more scientific approach towards research but at the same time, recognize the limitations of that method. The article is by Jori Finkel about artist Enriques Martinez Celaya. Mr. Celaya is a painter and sculptor who is exhibiting at his Venice studio. The article caught my eye being titled ‘Layers of Devotion (and the Scars to Prove It) wondering if that title might also describe my quest for an understanding of justice. Mr. Martinez Celaya was trained as a physicist. While a graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley, he found himself spending more time painting. He described this fascination. “I found that the kinds of questions I wanted to tackle were not the questions of physics...Art is usually described as a luxury, but I felt the opposite. I just couldn’t go to the lab anymore and ignore everything going on emotionally with me.”
At EMU, we are, after all, earning a Master of Arts degree. I hope that with this project, we can explore the art of research as we seek answers to the difficult question of justice.

The Future of Science is Art

As we continue to define our methods for this project - I found an article by Jonah Lehrer in the December 2007 Seed magazine helpful in its exploration of the limitations of reductionism. Lehrer asserts that only by heeding the wisdom of the arts can science gain new insights and perspectives that are the seeds of scientific process...

Here are a few excerpts and some summary:

When we think about the scientific process, a specific vocabulary comes to mind: objectivity, experiments, facts. In the passive tense of the scientific paper, we imagine a perfect reflection of the real world.

But the trajectory of science has proven to be a little more complicated. The more we know about reality - about its quantum mechanics and neural origins - the more palpable its paradoxes become. As Vladimir Nabokov, the novelist and lepidopterist, once put it, "The greater one's science, the deeper the sense of mystery."

The fundamental point is that modern science has made little progress toward any unified understanding of everything. Our unknowns have not dramatically receded. In many instances, the opposite has happened, so that our most fundamental sciences are bracketed by utter mystery. It's not that we don't have all the answers. It's that we don't even know the questions.



Sometimes the whole is best understood in terms of the whole. William James, as usual, realized this first. The eight chapters that begin his epic 1890 textbook, The Principle of Psychology, describe the mind in the conventional third-person terms of the experimental psychologist. Everything changes, however, in with chapter nine. James starts this section, "The Stream of Thought," with a warning: "We now begin our study of the mind from within."

With that single sentence, as radical in sentiment as the modernist novel, James tried to shift the subject of psychology. He disavowed any scientific method that tried to dissect the mind into a set of elemental units, be it sensations or synapses. Such a reductionist view is the opposite of science, James argued, since it ignores our actual reality.



As the neuroscientist Semir Zeki notes, "Artists (painters) are in some sense neurologists, studying the brain with techniques that are unique to them." Monet's haystacks appeal to us, in part, because he had a practical understanding of color perception. The drip paintings of Jackson Pollock resonate precisely because they escite some peculiar circuit of cells in the visual cortex. These painters reverse-engineered the brain, discovering the laws of seeing in order to captivate the eye.

Of course the standard response of science is that such art is too incoherent and imprecise for the scientific process. But isn't such incoherence an essential aspect of the human mind? Isn't our inner experience full of gaps and non-sequiturs and inexplicable feelings? In this sense, the messiness of the novel and the abstraction of the painting is actually a mirror. As the poetry critic Randell Jarrell put it, "It is the contradictions in works of art which make them able to represent us - as logical and methodical generalizations cannot - our world and ourselves, which are so full of contradictions."



(The power of the poet is that she) compresses meaning into meter, vague feelings are translated into visceral images. It is not coincidence that many of the greatest physicists of the 20th century - eminent figures like Einstein, Feynman and Bohr - were known for their distinctly romantic method of thinking.



No scientific model of the mind will be wholly complete unless it includes what cannot be reduced. Until science sees the brain from a more holistic perspective - and such a perspective might require the artistic imagination - our scientific theories will be detached from the way we see ourselves.

Berryville District Court

The Winchester Star ran a story on the portraits in the courthouse on Tuesday, complete with photos.

http://www.winchesterstar.com/showarticle_new.php?sID=6&foldername=20081118&file=More%20portraits%20_article.html

Analyze This!

Since the beginning of this course, I’ve articulated concerns I have about power relationships between the researchers and researched. One of the ways that power is exercised is through redefining the experience through “analysis” and placement within categories, as deemed by the researcher. In seeking to research these concerns, I’ve been reading Mary Margaret Fonow and Judith A. Cook, Beyond Methodology (Indiana University Press, 1991). They’ve tackled the tough issues in research from a perspective that adopts feminist values. I’ve written about the subject/object issue and the nearly impossible problem of power within the researcher/research subject relationship. The Acker essay also address the question of analysis when they adopt a principle that research consistent with feminist values should continually develop a feminist critical perspective that questions dominant intellectual traditions and can reflect on its own development (Acker, 133.) They observe that their commitment to minimizing the power differentials of the relationship in research was further confounded when it came to analysis. They recognize the problems in attempting to produce an analysis which goes beyond the researched while granting them full subjectivity. They posed the question: “How do we explain the lives of others without violating their reality?” (Acker, 142.) In the course of trying to analyze their research, they became frustrated with the complexity of the material which did not lend itself to categorization. Acker says “Both the ways in which we were categorizing experience and the kinds of categories we then developed were still somewhat antithetical to or theoretical position” (Acker, 143.)
Ackers relies on her theoretical beginnings in Marxism, feminism and critical theory. She concludes by observing that “…in the process of analysis we refined and reshaped our initial questions, trying to make the act of objectification analogous to a moment of critical reflection. The concepts and questions that are central in our final report are different from those with which we started” (Acker, 144.)
We are just beginning the process of analysis, but like Ackers, I find my own commitment to dialectical analysis and commitment to allowing the subjects to speak their own truth to be contrary to the use of rigid categories. In following Ackers, I am struggling to make this act of objectification more a moment of critical reflection. I got this idea for this project when I was in family court in Jefferson County. I was arguing a minor point with great eloquence when the judge remarked that she couldn’t hear me. Here I was, in this spanking new expensive court and the judge can’t even hear me. What was this architect thinking?
But then, my first background interview with the architect reminded me that the architect responds to the client. So much for blaming the architects for injustice. As we’ve progressed through the interviews and I try to critically reflect, I also find that my initial inquiry was really based on a sense that the architects seem to be striving for beauty and we need function. However, in the stories that have emerged, I am hearing a lot more than function and beauty. There is an incredible, complex functioning of the space in courthouses which creates ease, intimacy, clumsiness, aloofness, or any of a thousand other spatial relationships between people. These spatial relationships in many ways reflect or create the dynamic relationships of the participants in the judicial proceedings.
Delving further into the broad notions of categories and seeking the critical reflection which is demanded by Marxism, feminism and critical theory, I also see how narrow my initial vision may have been. In the interviews that have been conducted thus far, and even in the old books in the back room, justice is not about lots of natural light, beautiful paintings or comfortable chairs. Justice is not even about poor acoustics or making the defendant sit behind a glass partition. Justice is about relationships. Those relationships are those between the judges and lawyers and litigants and jurors. But even more, the relationships that are created and sustained in the courthouse are about the community and the bonds of the citizens to one another. The creation of space for the community to facilitate relationships based in equality, fairness, and peace is the function of the courthouse.

QUESTIONS, SUBJECTS, AND WHAT'S HIDING IN THE BACK ROOM

Today, we went to film at the Clarke County District Court, where Paulette appeared as a litigant. As it goes, we ended up booked to be filming at the Circuit Court and the District Court was unavailable today—being used for mediation.
As a researcher, I can’t limit my vision to what I can see. Just because I had planned to look at the older building with the paintings which would confirm some of my ideas, it doesn’t mean that’s the way it does (or should) develop.
Since we did have an appointment with the Circuit Clerk of the County, we walked over to that building and met a wonderfully charming woman who was nicely dressed in a grey suit who’d been a clerk, or deputy clerk, for forty five years. She was so kind to take a few minutes to talk with us. Joan Acker, Kate Barry, and Johanna Esseveld in their essay, Objectivity and Truth, published in Fonow and Cook, Beyond Methodology (1991, Indiana University Press) attempt to identify problems in doing feminist perspective. They seek to find modes of thinking, data collection and analysis that are more appropriate than others for studying the situation of women from a feminist perspective. In doing so, they challenge us in the theoretical reconstruction of our research to account for the investigator as well as those investigated. To locate the rsearcher in the social structure. They suggest that we ask the questions, “What are the social relations that produce this researchsituation and the enterprise of research itself? What makes it possible to raise this research problem at this time, in this place, in this society? What are the processes that have rsulted in the researched and the researchers coming together in a particular kind of social relationship?” (Fonow, et al, 146).
Today, we had our first interview with the Clerk who was a person that neither of us had a social relation. I did tell her that I was a lawyer in a neighboring county and Paulette had filled her in on her work at Shenandoah and EMU. However, we didn’t have a relationship. However, we do share a common interest—courts. This kind woman has devoted her life to seeing that the paperwork of the court is orderly addressed. And while we have no history of trust or adversity or companionship, we still share this love of justice and a fascination with the structures which are to house its producers.
The Circuit Clerk seemed a little more reserved and less likely to launch into a story as did those others with whom we have dialoged. However, she was so kind and forthcoming. She did describe the structure of this unusual courtroom and brought up a theme which has emerged. When she moved to the new courthouse in 1978, she also missed the old courthouse, and the lack of formality and community that was shared. She indicated she has gotten used to it, but I couldn’t help but think of the others who have raised this issue.
In Objectivity and Truth the researchers adopted a format of discussion similar to the transformative inquiry. However, they noted, “One strategy was encouraging the interviewee to take the lead in deciding what to talk about. This did not always work, people have ideas about what it is like to be interview end they want to be asked questions so that they can give the ‘right response” (Acker, et al., 140.) Perhaps the Clerk was in that category.
Another delightful surprise by our winding up in the Circuit Court was the unusual space. It is set up as a circle. At first I found that delightful, exciting and quite beautiful. But when I started thinking about where everyone would sit (since I knew that there are assigned seats) I noticed that the defendant would be at the side of the circle, against the glass and wood paneled wall. The prosecutor would be sitting next to the judge. Mmmm. Maybe the circle isn’t the perfect structure for the courtroom. Further physical research took us to a small room off of the main courtroom filled with volumes of “law books.” On one wall was a group of the Virginia Code, that’d be useful “good law.” However the next wall was filled with old case books dating back to 1858. Another gem was a 1939 bound report of the West Virginia Bar meeting. I recognized many names, including Judge Sander’s father. This speaks to the history of the place I suppose. The back room has a bunch of old books that someone undoubtedly donated at one point which still form the backbone of this building.
Paulette’s interview went well. It was strange to be interviewing her, but I have decided that including our own experiences is important not only to be ethical in disclosing our own positions or biases, but also in showing our commitment to our interview subjects that we are not asking them to expose themselves and more than we have. Again, relying on Acker, in their interviews they offered something about themselves to their subject at the end of the interview but reported that it was usually required, the subject had already asked (Acker, at al,141.)

From Paulette:

What struck me most about today was our "deconstruction" of the design of the circuit courtroom. As Brenda says, at first glance the built environment seemed welcoming. A circle! What could be better?! But when I sat in the defendant's chair I realized I felt trapped - actually pinned against the corner made of bullet proof class. It was the farthest point from the judge and literally "framed" - I felt anyone sitting there had the appearance of guilt - it was obvious who was being protected by that bulletproof glass.

It was interesting to be interviewed about my experience in the court. Talk about serendipity... the Winchester Star published a story this morning talking about the portraits that hang in the Berryville Courthouse. I had noted those portraits when I was there for a traffic ticket a few years ago. I felt a little oppressed by the paintings at the time because they reached from floor to ceiling and because I assumed they were all of confederate soldiers. Come to find out from the article - they were all lawyers and judges involved in the courthouse - what a cool historic thing! And an example of what Judge Sanders described as an "architecture of the mind". My assumptions were holding me back.

The relational aspect of courthouses emerged unexpectedly from my interview as well. I remember being surprised when I stood before the judge after my speeding ticket.. that he was conversational and very human... interested and amused by the fact that I received the speeding ticket on my way to Clarke Co. dog shelter. The cop that pulled me over was pulling for me not to have too strict a sentence - I had expired stickers as well as a lead foot.

Brenda asked me whether I felt I had received justice - I did because I was acknowledged, joked with and because I felt that I was trusted with some leniency. It made me respect the system - I've certainly not sped on the way into BVille again.

I also realized that my experience in that courthouse would be much different today than it was the first time because I am more a part of the community. I do yoga with a circuit judge - I know a lot of the lawyers from the Daily Grind - I go to the post office across the street nearly every day. The speeding ticket experience drew me farther into the community... today I feel that courthouse is a much more welcoming place - I no longer feel like the label of just being a northern yankee feminist... I am a contributing community member with ties to cultural, educational, environmental parts of Clarke County and ties to those who are a part of the courthouse. The courthouse is my courthouse. Perhaps that ownership and inclusive part has to do with justice.

NOVEMBER 14: A GOOD DAY FOR TRANSFORMATIVE INQUIRY

NOVEMBER 14: A GOOD DAY FOR A TRANSFORMATIVE INQUIRY
Yesterday was a productive day. Paulette and I interviewed the judge, the regional chief public defender and an assistant prosecutor. But I have to wonder if it is a true interview. I would prefer to avoid that. What we are engaging in, really, is a dialog. For video. And in doing so, we are researching, but at the same time, we are learning and changing. The incredible dialogs that we had today remind me of a quote that has been attributed to :Tich Nhat Hahn, “In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change.” I enjoyed true dialog today—I left the interviews with a changed outlook. I think that Paulette did as well.
When Howard spoke in class, he discussed the transformative inquiry. Surprisingly and predictably, we have adopted most of the guidelines and values for that research in our work. (See Howard Zehr, “Us and Them: A Photographer Looks at Police Pictures: The Photograph as Evidence.” Contemporary Justice Review, 1998, Vol 1 pp. 377-385.) Our work is aiming not only at “pure” knowledge but also social action. I think we were working on this on two levels—one is we were engaged in a dialog where we were introspectively exploring definitions of justice. At one point Paulette and Deb and I were discussing the women’s witness room and Paulette commented on how I had hugged the witness and questioned whether or not the hug was justice. Deb smiled and didn’t seem to hesitate to agree that justice might be a hug. We also left off copies of Howard’s Little Book which could lead to some future exciting projects with our participants.
The transformative inquiry also acknowledges that much knowledge is subject, constructed and interrelational (Zehr.) Part of the inquiry recognizes our own stories that we bring to this research. Paulette and I are including interviews of one another and our own perceptions on justice and architecture. During the dialogs, we frequently revisit each of our roles within the judicial processes and our experiences, even to the extent that the Judge shared his memories of attending court as a child with his father at the Mercer County Courthouse.
The transformative inquiry also recognizes the complex and limited natures of our findings. (Zehr). It is my hope that as we edit and present our “findings” that they will not be “truths” at all—but the simple stories that have been told to us, in an honest, and forthcoming means by our storytellers.
Transformative inquiry also respects “the subjects” with values such as collaboration, accountability, transparency of goals, methods of motives, benefits to subjects and opportunities for the subject to present themselves in their own voice. We have agreed with the subject not to broadcast our dialogs until they’ve had the opportunity to review them and find that our representations fairly present their stories. We have presented ourselves as students of restorative justice who are intrigued to learn what the physical space of the courthouse has to do with justice.
Another aspect of transformative inquiry is that our role is that of facilitator, collaborator, and learner more than neutral expert (Zehr.) As I’ve written consistently since 1990, I don’t have a notion how to be either neutral or an expert. What is an expert anyway? A disinterested professional who is engaged only for the money? I have never practiced law with that vision and don’t intend to conduct research any differently. The possibility of even a judge being neutral was dispelled by legal realism in the 1920s. To deny our own histories, ideas, intentions and dreams as we approach any project is a dangerous lie.
After we had the dialog with the judge, I thought about how sad it was that we are not given more opportunities to engage in a discourse in theory more frequently. I have been appearing before this judge for about twelve years. However, I have never had the opportunity to hear the deep insightful wisdom that he offered on such a theoretical basis. (As a matter of fact, during some of his rulings I have to admit that I was skeptical that he had any wisdom left—at all!) The value that am able to attach this process, where we are taking the time to sit down and talk about these very real, but at the same time, theoretical questions is consistent with Howard’s proposition that transformative research values the process, as much as the product.
As far as the issue of being attuned to the potential harms and unintended consequences for the subjects, and others (Zehr)—we are taking every step we can to remain respectful and provide those with whom we are dialoging the opportunity for a review. I am also proposing that prior to publication, we circulate our video product to others who may have an interest in this topic to help us be aware of potential unintended consequences.
Transformative research also seeks a balance of subjectivity and objectivity—where we avoid co-optation. Since this is self-funded that is not an issue. Since our dialog is with my colleagues, I suppose that we should be aware of a potential based on that relationship. However, I would add that in this profession, we disagree more often than we agree. I have filed appeals and writs against this Judge at the Supreme Court. I have argued vehemently against the public defender. Thus, while I think that our relationship provides a risk for cooptation, I do not think that it is so great to outweigh the value in working with those with whom this dialog is possible, in part, because of that relationship.
Finally, the transformative inquiry employs verbal and non-linear, as well as linear, methods of elicitation and presentation. During our dialogs, I had some burning questions and area of questions that I knew should be included. What do you like and not like about different courtrooms and why? What role does aesthetics play? How did you feel in the dilapidated John street courthouse? Your clients? How did that affect the proceedings? Justice? What experience do you have with the women’s witness room? Do you think Justice might be lurking in there somewhere? However, I didn’t know the order of the questions or even whether or not they may have meaning in each interview. What I did know that in each case, I was talking with someone who has been working for a long time for justice. I wanted them to tell me, in their time, in their own voice, in their own, what the building had to do with it, if anything.

After this full day, Paulette and I left the courthouse excited. We’d learned so much more than we had imagined. We’d heard stories that we couldn’t have anticipated. And this simple little project developed its own story, one that we didn’t write, but certainly share.

Dadirri - Listening to One Another

Australian Aboriginal author and researcher Judy Atkins struggled to find an appropriate research method for her 2002 book "Trauma Trails, Recreating Songlines - the Transgenerational Effects of Trauma in Indigenous Australia".

Atkins talks of the indigenous based methodological approach called dadirri "the aboriginal gift"- which is a deep, contemplative process of listening to one another in reciprocal relationships. It is a narrative approach used to help understand the context of Aboriginal lives.

The principals and functions of dadirri are: a knowledge and consideration of community and the diversity and unique nature that each individual brings to community; ways of relating and acting within community; a non-intrusive observation, or quietly aware watching; a deep listening and hearing with more than the ears; a reflective non-judgemental consideration of what is being seen and heard; and, having learnt from the listening, a purposeful plan to act, with actions informed by learning, wisdom, and the informed responsibility that comes with knowledge.

A Film About a Bathroom - Rough Cut

This is the first pass of our Architecture Justice project for Qualitative Analysis. Themes begin to emerge, including the fact that this film, about how architecture effects justice, is really about a bathroom. Watch 7 minutes now on Metacafe:

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2028276/a_film_about_a_bathroom_rough_cut/

Objectifying your sister

I am unsure about the notion of including the researcher as a subject within the research. Our scout included footage and interviews of me. How is it research? However, perhaps it is the only way to avoid what Ann Oakley (the sociologist, not the sharpshooter) was describing when she "...characterizes interviewing women, at least from a feminist perspective, as a 'contradiction in terms' because it involves 'objectifying your sister.'" (See Taylor and Rupp in Researching the Women's Movement, in Beyond Methodology (Indiana University Press, 1991). Oakley suggest that traditional guidelines for interviewing is a one way hierarchical process.

I've wondered about that and am thinking that it is going to be important to avoid that type of objectification of any of our subjects in our project. I am proposing to Paulette that we are both forthcoming about our personal expereinces with courthouses to attempt to break down this barrier.

Review of Scouting

The scouting last Monday went very well. We started by walking through town and visiting the old family court space off of Spring Street in Martinsburg. Paulette was shocked. We continued to the old John Street space which was used for Magistrate Court in Berkeley County until the new courthouse was constructed. During our stroll, Paulette filmed me offering my commentary--I hadn't fully anticipated this.

The courthouse was filled with excitement. Judge Sanders, who has agreed to be interviewed, was on the bench with arraignments. We watched for a while and then he took a short break to meet with us. He's excited about the project and we are planning to film his interview in Charles Town. He tells us about a project he worked on years ago involving courthouses.

On the way out, we run into a probation officer. We talk for a while and she fills us in on what it was like when her offices were located in the old Johns Street Building.

We talk with a bailiff. A clear early theme is the issue of respect for the court and security-at least with those interviewed.

We stop then at the prosecutor's office and find a few young attorneys. One described the situation on John Street during a jury trial as being horrible.

With a little over an hour to go, we scout out the "old" court house. Here we run into a wonderful man who was a litigant in a jury trial in that courthouse. He works for the clerk, and election day is tomorrow, but he is willing to tell us his story about his very short jury trial. He liked the arrangement of the bench and the jury--and described it as making him feel like his matter was being addressed in a fashion that was important and respectful.

At last, we reached the famous women's witness room. Again, Paulette interviewed me about some cases that I had and how important this space became for justice. While we were talking, Maria, who has worked in the building for thirty years comes in. She describes this room as a "sanctuary" which has been important to her for years. Paulette and I joke that we've come to make a film about architecture and justice and we are making a film about a bathroom.

Before Paullette is fully acclimated, we have one more stop. Patterson's Drug Store for an ammonia coke. Yum.

Brenda Talks with an Architect at an Obama Rally

It was mid October. At the 10 day follow up appointment to the orthopedist, I see on CNN that Obama is going to be in Leesburg. I call Peggy and we go. The rally was very exciting, even if I do have to climb a fence with my broken arm to get in. On the way back to the car, we pass what appears to be a group of people waiting for the entourage. Peggy was disappointed that we hadn't gotten closer to Obama during the rally and wants to wait. I'm tired but game.

A man is sitting at the top of the hill a few feet from where the folks are lined up and I decide to go ahead and sit down beside him. He's very pleasant and within a few minutes he's telling me that he is the architect that designed this, Ida Lee park. I sincerely love the park and complement this nice man on how well designed the park is. I tell him that I did a 10K here last winter and especially appreciated the sufficient number of bathrooms in the building.

He describes what a wonderful experience designing the park was for him. He tells me a few more stories about other buildings, including the aquatic center at the University of Virginia. He especially enjoyed that job because the board that oversaw the design was composed of the deans of the various schools and he found them to be a brilliant group of people with wonderful cultural experiences which contributed to the design.

I asked him about whether or not he had any experience with courthouse design and discussed our project where we are examining the functions of justice and the physical requirements. He didn't have any specific experience with courthouses and we discussed the exteriors of the courthouses in Leesburg.

Then, he gave me very good advice. He reminded me not to be too hard on the architects as I embarked on this projectarchitects have to respond to the requests and desires of their clients. I reminded myself that most county courthouses are funded and constructed by the elected officials in the county-the county commissions. Wonderful insight. I spent the next thirty minutes with the architect sharing stories about our families, clients, and of course, the election.

Academy of Neuroscience for Architecture

http://www.anfarch.org/index.php/content/people/

Board of Directors:
Tom Albright, Ph.D.ProfessorVision Center LaboratorySalk Institute for Biological StudiesLa Jolla CA

Joyce BrombergDirectorWorkSpace Futures/Explorations ResearchSteelcaseGrand Rapids MI
Gordon Chong, FAIA PresidentPrincipal and ChairmanChong Partners Architecture San Francisco CA

Gilbert Cooke, AIA SecretaryDeanNewSchool of Architecture and DesignSan Diego CA

Betsey Dougherty, FAIAPartnerDougherty + Dougherty Architects, LLPCosta Mesa CA

John Eberhard, FAIA Founding PresidentLatrobe FellowAIA College of FellowsWashington DC

Fred Gage, Ph.D.ProfessorLaboratory of GeneticsSalk Institute for Biological StudiesLa Jolla CA

Steven Henriksen, Ph.D.Vice President for Research and BiotechnologyWestern University of Health SciencesPomona CA

Norman Koonce, FAIANational Co-Chairman of the Campaign for the American Center of ArchitectureThe American Institute of ArchitectsWashington DC

Eduardo Macagno, Ph.D.Richard C. Atkinson Professor of BiologyDivision of Biological SciencesUniversity of California San DiegoLa Jolla CA

Frederick Marks, AIA CFODirector of Science and TechnologyAC Martin Partners, Inc.Los Angeles CA

Randal L. Peterson, FAIA, LEED APPresident and CEOHMC ArchitectsSan Diego CA

Esther Sternberg, M.D.DirectorMolecular, Cellular, & Behavioral Integrative Neuroscience ProgramNational Institute of Mental HealthBethesda MD

Alison Whitelaw, FAIA CEOPrincipalPlatt/Whitelaw ArchitectsSan Diego CA
John Zeisel, Ph.D.President and Co-FounderHearthstone Alzheimer Care, Ltd.

Lexington MA

Academy of Neuroscience for Architectureoffice at anfarch.org
Address:1249 F Street Suite 222

San Diego CA 92101
Telephone Number: 619-235-0221
Fax Number:619-235-4651

Interview Request - Christina Noble

Dear Christina,

I just finished reading your article Understanding Cognitive Process inthe Courthouse and was thrilled with your work on this topic. I am writing to ask if you may be in the Washington, DC area sometime within the next month so my colleague, Brenda Waugh and I may meet with you to talk to you about this topic? If you are not traveling to this area, we would be very interested in speaking to you by phone or in speaking with a colleague of yours in Washington who has similar expertise.

I am an independent documentary filmmaker and graduate student in conflict transformation at Eastern Mennonite University in Harrisonburg, VA. BrendaWaugh is an attorney in West Virginia and also a grad student. We are developing a short documentary on architecture and justice in the Shenandoah Valley and feel your research into the cognitive process in the courthouse would add greatly to our piece.

The finished documentary will air on local television stations and on YouTube.We would request that we be allowed to videotape an interview with you if we are able to meet in person. The briefing will take about 1/2 hour and we will travel to you if you are by chance going to be in Washington.

Thank you for your attention to this request.

Kind Regards,
Paulette Moore
703-597-7766
www.paulettefilms.com

Understanding Cognitive Processes in the Courthouse

Neuroscience and Courthouse Design Workshop

http://www.aia.org/nac_n_wordsby_christina_noble

From the AIA website - American Justice Architecture

The Academy of Neuroscience of Architecture

The Academy of Neuroscience of Architecture was created with the mission to research links between neuroscience and “human responses to the built environment.” As Dr. Fred Gage stated in his Lecture on Neuroscience and Architecture, “the places we live, work and play are changing our brains and our behavior all the time.” Neuroscience research has determined that the brain controls behavior, genes control the brain’s “design and structure,” and the environment impacts gene’s function.

As a result, environmental changes impact behavior.Past ANFA workshops have initiated research of healthcare facilities, worship spaces and detention facilities. This weekend I participated in “Neuroscience and Courthouse Design Workshop: Understanding Cognitive Processes in the Courthouse,” the first ANFA workshop to discuss courthouse design. Our session included behavioral researchers, architects and court administrators in a multidisciplinary exploration of how we might apply neuroscientific concepts to better understand design's impact on court users.One of the key themes that emerged during the session was the importance of the jury as representatives and executors of democratic justice.

By considering the jury the arbiters of truth and final authorities within the court of law, the importance of their engaged focus and concentration throughout complex legal proceedings comes to the fore. Neuroscience has already proven that stress reduces complex reasoning capabilities. Through focused study of juries’ courthouse experiences, we can hopefully identify key stress points throughout their courthouse visit, increase their reasoning and lead to more accurate and just verdicts.

Neuroscientific studies have analyzed how we create cognitive maps to navigate spaces – the first and best method, and the least stressful, is to find visual clues within our environment. Kevin Lynch described paths, edges, nodes, landmarks and districts in The Image of the City as effective urban way-finding devices. Dr. Richard Werner has proven that the use of rectangularity, simplicity, expectation, visual access, asymmetry, terminology and orientation can create more navigable interior spaces.

Of special note is visual access – the ability to see from where you are located now to where you want to go. Visual connections between interior and exterior can help us better understand our position in space, orient ourselves within a building, and experience less stress as a result.

Additional behavioral research surveys by Dr. Debajyoti Pati have drawn correlations between transparency, illumination, ease of way-finding and courthouse occupants’ perceptions of “openness.” “Openness” was theorized to have many layers of meaning, including perceptions of equal physical access throughout the building, transparency for way-finding, and transparency to suggest democratic access to justice for all. Thus, visual connections with the outdoors and community not only allow for ease of stress, but also strongly symbolize equality and justice.Our workshop’s final suggestion for further study hopes to build upon transparency’s ability to create visual connections and its symbolic associations with “openness” by extending the discussion to natural light.

We found natural light especially intriguing because of the dual possibilities of strong symbolism and stress relief for juries. Studies of natural light throughout the jury’s experience of the courthouse - the deliberation rooms, courtroom, lobby and waiting areas – could be especially intriguing because of natural light’s combined functional and symbolic implications within the courtroom. Separate behavioral research surveys by Dr. Pati have indicated possible conflicts between functional and symbolic lighting needs during court proceedings.

Functionally, more balanced, horizontal lighting allows for better facial expression recognition. The jury can identify a scientific expert witness’s indecision and discomfort or a jilted lover’s seething irritation. However, the same study also revealed that more dramatic, vertical lighting leads to perceived greater solemnity, dignity and ceremony within a courtroom. Dramatic lighting conveys the importance of the proceedings and engenders greater connection between the jury and the human dramas of the court.

Architects and designers will need to weigh these competing priorities in the judicial environment – the functional importance of unimpeded vision or the symbolic importance of respect and dignity.We can find numerous successful, built examples of designing natural light into the judicial environment, especially in Europe. French courts employ natural light as an integral symbolic gesture – light illuminates truth and truth produces justice. Similar Italian designs can be found, as well.

For example, daylight is placed above and behind the jury in the Doge’s Palace in Venice – evidence is illuminated in a gesture that carries both functional purpose and symbolic meaning. Inspired designers have intuitively recognized the power of natural light in legal proceedings. Now, neuroscience can provide the tools to understand why.

Christina Noble, LEED AP & Associate AIA, has worked as an architectural professional for 6 years and is currently employed with Gould Evans in Phoenix, Arizona. She has worked on numerous high profile and large-scale projects in her career, including collegiate, mixed-use, government and private development high rise buildings. Christina graduated from Rice University in 2002 and has also attended courses at Princeton University. She is currently serving as the AssociateNews assistant editor and is looking forward to becoming the 2008 AssociateNews editor-in-chief.

Architectural Styles and References - West Virginia

From the West Virginia Culture - Courthouses

Architectural Styles

Federal (1790-c.1820) In the period just before and after the Revolutionary War, when many Americans still looked to England for cultural leadership, the Federal style of architecture was commonly used in domestic as well as public architecture. This style, also called Adamesque, was first popularized in England a few decades earlier by architect/decorator Robert Adam, and is often thought of as a refinement of the earlier Georgian Revival style of architecture. Buildings constructed in Federal style are characterized by double hung sash windows that are arranged vertically and horizontally in symmetrical rows, cornices that have been embellished with decorative moldings such as tooth-shaped dentils, Roman styled decorative motifs such as festoons, urns and garlands, and semi-circular fanlights above the main door. Often the fanlights are incorporated into a more elaborate door surround that may be enhanced with a decorative crown or a small entry porch. Hardy County’s first Courthouse (c.1792) is in this architectural style.

Greek Revival (1820-1850) Following the example of Thomas Jefferson, buildings were patterned after Greek temples. Although Jefferson intended for government and public buildings to emulate Greek temples, the style was so popular that it was used for many domestic buildings as well. Greek Revival became the dominant style of architecture from about 1830 to 1850. It especially flourished in those areas of the country that were being rapidly settled during this period, and occurs in all areas of the country that were settled by 1860. Its main elements consist of a wide band of trim beneath the cornice of the main roof and the porch roof, elaborate door surrounds, and columned porticos (porch with a roof supported by columns) with either a triangular pediment or flat entablature. The cornice was usually simple and was constructed with or without dentil moldings. The use of stone, brick and timber suggests weight and permanence, but also balance and order. The proportions of Greek Revival buildings are usually broad. Windows tend to be regularly placed, and details are sparse and simple. Upper story window openings may be headed by flat stone lintels. West Virginia has three Greek Revival courthouses. They are located in Brooke (1849), Greenbrier (1837) and Jefferson (c. 1836, restored after the Civil War and remodeled in 1916 using elements of Colonial Revival architecture).

Gothic Revival (1840-c.1870) In 18th century western Europe, people began designing buildings in the style of Gothic cathedrals dating from the Middle Ages. In 1799, the revival of Gothic architecture made its first appearance in America in the form of a country house outside of Philadelphia, and was soon after used in the design of ecclesiastical and university buildings. By about 1840, with the help of pattern books, the trend caught on and scores of houses and public buildings, especially in the northeast, began to appear. Gothic Revival architecture is characterized by roofs that are steeply pitched with steep cross gables. Gables are typically decorated with ornamental boards that suspend from the roof. Exterior wall surfaces generally extend into the gable without a break. Windows, which also can extend into the gable, usually have the pointed or “gothic” arch. Hardy County’s second courthouse (c.1850/1859) was originally constructed in Gothic Revival style.

Romanesque Revival (1845-1875, later in West Virginia) The revival and use of Romanesque architectural components enjoyed a fluorescence during the second half of the 19th century. Buildings constructed in this style exhibit elements taken from the Greek Revival style, but also incorporate round arches on windows and entrances, heavy masonry piers and richly decorated cornices. Elsewhere in the United States, the popularity of Romanesque Revival began to subside by the 1870s. In rural West Virginia, however, the style remained fashionable through the end of the 19th century. Courthouses built after circa 1885 may also exhibit details influenced by Henry H. Richardson whose own style of architecture was influential about this time. Fourteen surviving West Virginia courthouses were built in this style. They are located in Doddridge (1899-1903), Fayette (1894-95), Marshall (1876), McDowell (1893-94), Mineral (1868), Monongalia (1891), Monroe (1882), Pleasants (1894), Pocahontas (1895), Putnam (1899-1900), Summers (1875-76/1893-98), Taylor (1890), Tucker (1898-1900), and Webster (c.1890) Counties.

Italianate (1860-c.1895) Italianate architecture is well known for its lavish style and rich design details that were popular during the Gilded Age in American history. The style was first created in England by architects who were inspired by the architecture of Italian villas and reacted against the formal classicism that had dominated architecture for the past 200 years. In the United States, where it was popularized by pattern books, Italianate architecture became fashionable during the 1840s and 1850s, but was not commonly used in public or civic architecture until after 1855. It is characterized by flat or low-pitched roofs and widely overhanging eaves that are typically embellished with decorative brackets. Windows, which are generally tall and narrow, can have rectangular, curved or round arches. Square towers or cupolas are also commonly found on buildings of this style. Lewis County courthouse (1887-88) was built in this style.

Richardsonian Romanesque (1880-1895, later in West Virginia) Richardsonian Romanesque emulates to varying degrees the architecture of Henry Hobson Richardson. Born in Louisiana, he attended Harvard before studying architecture at the Ecole des Beaux Arts in Paris. During the 1870s he developed his style of design, which borrows elements from many different architectural sources. For example, using stone and brick to create polychrome walls can be traced to contemporary late Gothic Revival. The massive low arches typical of Richardson’s style derive from earlier phases of Romanesque architecture. He also made use of unusual sculpted shapes, which give his buildings a lot of individuality. Richardson’s use of rugged stone and brick masonry conveys a feeling of heaviness and solidity and gives his buildings an impressive and stately feeling. This style of architecture is also characterized by imaginative towers, turrets and dormers, as well as a new use of terra-cotta, especially in cast panels and in column capitals. Facades on Richardsonian Romanesque buildings are usually asymmetrical and window openings can be variously shaped and sized. This style was most popular in the west and in cities that achieved their first maturity when the style was fashionable. Five West Virginia courthouses were constructed in this style. They are located in Barbour (1903-05), Kanawha (1892; renovated 1917/1924), Randolph (1902-04), Wetzel (1902), and Wood (1899-1900) Counties.

Beaux Arts (1895-1920) This style of architecture emulates the kind of classicism that emerged out of the Ecole des Beaux Arts (located in Paris, France), and was very popular in both public and residential buildings. Because it is a classical style, Beaux Arts buildings exhibit many of the same details found in other styles of classical inspiration. Now, however, buildings are more extravagant. As a style, Beaux Arts is grand in scale, and makes use of monumental and symmetrical elements with luxurious details pulled from Classical architecture. Typically, walls are masonry and are usually light-colored stone. Roofs can be flat, low-pitched hipped or are mansard. Facades exhibit shifts in scale and form, but are symmetrical. Windows receive a variety of treatments, but are usually embellished with window crowns and surrounds. Cornice lines are accented by elaborate moldings, dentils and modillions. The use of roof-line balustrades and balustraded window balconies are common. Finally, classical decorative motifs are applied for theatrical effect, and include paired columns or pilasters, wreaths, garlands, festoons, cartouches and figure sculpture. Because it is a flamboyant style, Beaux Arts was popular with America’s industrial barons who were interested in displaying their wealth in increasingly ornate and expensive houses. Three West Virginia courthouses were built in this style. They are located in Cabell (1899-1901), Clay (1902) and Marion (1897-1900) Counties.

Neo-Classical Revival (1895-1920) Interest in classical form was revived at the1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago. In response to planners of the world fair, who had prescribed a classical theme, architects designed spectacular colonnaded buildings for the exposition. Soon after, buildings constructed in the Neo-Classical Revival style became fashionable. This style exhibits the return to balance and composure that marks much of the turn of the century architecture. Facades of neo-classical buildings generally are symmetrical with a center door and are dominated by a full-height porch with classical columns, which typically have either Ionic or Corinthian capitals. Courthouses located in Boone (1921), Gilmer (1923), Hampshire (1921-22), Hancock (1920), Hardy (1914), Jackson (1918), Morgan (1907-08), Nicholas (1898), Pleasants (1925), Ritchie (1922), Upshur (1899-1900), and Wirt (1911) Counties were constructed in this style. Although built much earlier, courthouses located in Berkeley (1855/1880/1908), Grant (1879/1909) and Tyler (1854/1922) Counties, were later remodeled using elements of this style.
Colonial Revival (1880-1940) Between 1880 and 1940, Colonial Revival was the one of the most popular styles of architecture for both public and residential buildings. While the name itself refers to the rebirth of interest in the early English and Dutch houses of the Atlantic seaboard, the style pulls in elements taken from Georgian and Federal buildings. Typically, front doors are accented and usually have a decorative crown or pediment that is supported by pilasters or is extended forward and supported by slender columns to form an entrance porch. Doors commonly have overhead fanlights or sidelights. Facades are usually symmetrical with a center door. Windows have double-hung sashes and are frequently in adjacent pairs. Courthouses located in Braxton (1881-82), Pendleton ((1924-25), and Wayne (1929) Counties were constructed in this style.

Art Deco (1925-1940) Art Deco is a decorative style that first appeared in furniture, room furnishings and interior architecture, and then was developed as a way to design buildings in Europe. It became incredibly popular in America after a showing at the 1925 French exhibition, the Exposition Internationale des Arts Decoratifs et Industriels Modernes. Vernacular versions of the style began appearing across the United States by 1926. This style has been used in the design of various kinds of public buildings, but rarely in domestic architecture. Art Deco is defined by its use of simple cubic forms and flat, smooth surfaces, which were intended to emphasize their modernity. Decorative details on buildings are typically very vertical or linear in quality. Popular motifs include faceted surfaces, chevrons, zigzags, octagon and other geometric shapes and occur as decoration on facades, towers or other vertical projections above the roof line. Courthouses located in Mercer (1930-31), Preston (1934) and Raleigh (1936-37) Counties were constructed in this style.

Art Moderne (1930-1940) This style evolved out of the same period and influences as Art Deco. As a result, it is similar in its use of heavy cubic forms and flat surfaces. However, because Art Moderne was developed a few years after Art Deco, it’s inspiration was also derived from streamlined industrial design of automobiles, rail cars and airplanes. It can be distinguished from Art Deco by its lack of ornamentation, its use of curved corners and an emphasis on horizontal lines. Windows typically are grouped in bands. Spandrels, which are the panels on a wall that fill the space between the top of one window and the sill of the window in the story above, are usually expressed as continuous horizontal bands. Courthouses located in Calhoun (1940) and Harrison (1931-32) Counties were constructed in this style.
Counties with Modern/Contemporary (1940-1980) Courthouses:Clay (c.1978), Grant (1976), Lincoln (1964), Logan (1965), Mason (1956), Mingo (1966), Ohio (1960) and Roane (1965) Counties

References and For more information:
Noble, Allen G.1984 Wood, Brick and Stone, The North American Settlement Landscape, Volume 1: Houses. University of Massachusetts Press: Amherst.
McAlester, Virginia and Lee McAlester1984 A Field Guide to American Houses. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.: New York.
Rifkind, Carole1980 A Field Guide to American Architecture. Penguin Books USA Inc.: New York
Roth, Leland2001 American Architecture, A History. Westview Press: Boulder.
Thrash, Mary1984 West Virginia’s Courthouses, A Pictorial History. Clarksburg, WV.

History of West Virginia Courthouses Website

A website of the historical courthouses of West Virginia.

http://www.wvculture.org/shpo/ch/history.html

Here is the write up for Jefferson County...

The Jefferson County Courthouse throughout its history has been in the thick of controversy. Following John Brown’s three-day occupation of the US Armory and Arsenal at Harpers Ferry in 1859, he was captured and charged for “conspiring with slaves to commit treason and murder.”

At the conclusion of his trial at the courthouse, Brown was found guilty of murder and treason and later hanged just several blocks away. The courthouse gained notoriety again during the southern coal mine strikes for unionization. The early 1920s saw the growing dissatisfaction of miners in the southern coal fields.

Following the murder of Sid Hatfield in August 1921 and protests at the State Capitol, many armed themselves and marched into the coalfields near Blair, Logan, Sharples and Jeffrey. Federal troops quieted the area, but many were arrested for their protests. Leaders of the United Mine Workers of America were brought to trial at the Jefferson County Courthouse.

Bill Blizzard and other demonstrators were held in the adjacent jail. Today, this building is threatened by demolition by the County Commission. The courthouse has been renovated at least twice–once following the Civil War and again in 1916. The main structure is designed in the Greek Revival style; the cupola represents a Georgian departure from the overall character of the building. -- SMP