How does the organization of the space or historical accents aim to provoke though to revoke the past?

1.How does the organization of the space or historical accents aim to provoke though to revoke the past?
2.How do the artifacts or elements of the project work to creata layered history?
What is the program/experience.Is it complementary or seperate from the host structures previous identity/memory.
What specific artifacts or remnants of the past are incorporated.
What is the quality of the space.
3.How do the chosen projects work to choreograph a connection to the collective memory of the cities/are as they occupy?
Is the quality of the space/experience a continuation or extension of the previous hosts truces identity,or the collective identity of the area.
How does this relate to the idea of a limp set.How might the original architecture define the approach to continuity or extension of a space or narrative.
.4.How do some of the projects engender space?
What are some of the examples of masculine and feminine spaces.
What are the physical attributes associated with each gender.
What might have been the original intent of gender specific spaces.
Has this idea evolved or changed over time.
5.Why are we attracted to old places or established experiences?
Why might we be attracted to a space not four own time period.
.Is there something to gain from the romanticization of the past.
Might there be an attractiveness to vicarious experiences devoid of their original context or social/cultural consequences.