No abstract

No abstract

Introduction: Urban Heritage and the 'Everyday' Community-driven involvement in heritage practice has been advocated through a number of key texts and case studies, chronicling not only its successes, but also the pitfalls and limitations of grassroots participation (Crooke, 2007;Logan, 2016;Selman, 2007; Waterton & Watson, 2013a). However, according to Beilin (2005), participatory approaches provide a way of recognising the banality of the 'everyday' through which most social worlds are created and sustained:Critical theory affirms ordinary action and recognizes the effort involved in being an active citizen in the daily grind of participation. It emphasizes the centrality of everyday interpretation. It affirms the value in listening and attending to a grassroots perspective. (p. 59) This 'everyday' is constituted through engagement with place. There is a long history of research into the cultural production of meaningful places in a variety of disciplines such as cultural geography, archaeology, architecture and history, as well as those from within the cultural heritage discipline and professional practice (e.g., see Davis, 2011;Jive'n & Larkham, 2010;Relph, 1976). Further, new questions are being asked about the relationship between technical knowledge and historical and heritage expertise, and how social and popular media forms can be harnessed to identify new ways of engaging communities around heritage places and issues. Such engagement is cognitive, emotional and behavioural (Ponzetti, 2003in Smith, 2017 and multisensory (Crang & Toila-Kelly, 2010), which raises issues related to the ability of traditional 'talk-only' methodologies to understand the complexities of these engagements (Middleton, 2010). This chapter critically examines the use of visual research methodologies (VRM) to investigate the relationship between heritage digital technologies and 'sense of place'. It argues that despite technological and methodological problems, VRM are useful in examining the cognitive, emotional and behavioural encounters with ordinary heritage landscapes. Providing a more

Most accounts of how new technology has transformed the domestic realm focus on the provision of comfort, sanitation and labour-saving devices. In parallel, but typically not visible in these histories, there has been a minor strand of development that we identify as trivial technologies of effect. These are gadgets and devices whose utility cannot be separated from wonder and delight. They bring a kind of non-essential utility for private enjoyment, and so occupy a distinct ground somewhere between function and entertainment. In this sense they can be thought of as aligned to the practice of architectural design, which similarly pursues both functionalism and art. The paper explores this category of trivial technology through two significant examples of mechanised houses. The first is the house of Jean Eugene Robert-Houdin, a nineteenth century magician and noted amateur inventor. From this case, the form of the magic trick provides a metaphor for our analysis of technologies of effect. The second example is the penthouse addition of the appartement de Beisetgui, designed by Le Corbusier. Here we trace the same lineage of devices in the modernist guise. Finally we briefly examine the present-day phenomenon of the 'smart house', and other attempts to rekindle wonder in domestic digital technologies through the designs of Bill Gaver. In conclusion, we use the inherent ambiguity and irony of trivial technologies to explore the modernist mantra of the machine a habité in a different light, that is less about satisfying functionalism, and more about producing automated and sensory effects.

Introduction: Digital Design for Mortals