"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li...
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, MichaelJP wrote:

"Garry Smith" wrote in message
...
"MichaelJP" wrote in message
...

BTW watching the last BBC programmes recently, to me the whole idea of
the statue being an icon for the station has failed on two counts; (1)
the tall glass screens and posts completely ruin any long distance view
of the sculpture and (2) it's not really at a focal point of the
station, as all domestic pax are routed through the undercroft retail
area.

Indeed. I've been through the place three times this week, and it was
only when someone mentioned it here today that I remembered it existed.

I haven't seen it at all - suppose I'll have to go upstairs and have a
look now!

I like the statue; it is quite impressive, and people seem to be
photographing it, but I suppose what sticks in your throat is all the PR
guff about the statue being a place for people to meet, like Eros in
Piccadilly Circus. Those sort of places arise naturally, they're not
designed in.

Well, hang on: they arise due to the operation of natural laws about how
people move, congregate and communicate, not at random or through divine
intervention. That means it is possible to design them in, by arranging
things according to those laws. In principle - we would have to understand
the laws that are operating, and we might not, although i think we have
some good stuff - a chap called Christopher Alexander's written about this
sort of thing quite a bit, will see if i can dig something out tomorrow.

What you can't do, of course, is just plonk a big naff statue down and
declare it a meeting place.

tom


Yes, I'd say it has to satisfy these rules:-

1) Be a well-known landmark (Eros, Nelson's Column etc.)
2) Not be too big an area as to miss the person you're meeting (prob
Nelson's Column ruled out)
3) Be visible from a distance and also be fairly open so you can see people
approaching
4) Be at the intersection of various routes
5) Be at a useful destination (e.g. Eros for the West End)

This one fails on (1), (3), (4) and (5) though (1) may improve with time.