FERN HOCKLEY-TELLES
N0483444 - Interior Architecture + Design
FINAL THOUGHTS
CONCLUSION
From the research I have carried out, I have realised the complexity of a phenomenological experience in architecture, in terms of what it is that creates atmosphere, feeling and emotion within a space, as well as the difficultly in explaining these components, as they ‘become articulate and specific, though wordless’ (Holl, 2007, p.41)
Though a difficult subject to explore, due to the fact that it is completely subjective, the intent of this investigation was to establish whether or not it is possible for a material to evoke human emotion, and if so whether certain materials evoke certain emotions.
Through both my own personal, primary research and secondary readings, it seems that there is a definite recognition, amongst architects and users of architecture, of each material having its own properties and associations. For example, timber is generally considered a natural material that provides warmth in its tone and texture, and can remind users of a homely, comforting environment that puts them at ease. However, in terms of whether the environment that a material creates can produce a specific emotion from a human, especially from every human that experiences that material within a space, is still unclear. As explored within this research, there are so many factors, both human and architectural, that influence the nature of a material and the overall atmosphere of the space, that even if it were possible to capture one material evoking a specific human emotion, this could completely change from one moment to the next.
Firstly, in terms of human factors, though we have the same senses, we do not necessarily utilise them in the same way as one another when experiencing a space. Adopting either a focused vision or peripheral vision can produce different perceptions, and where one person may address a space with a heightened sense of hearing, others may pick up on scent or touch. There is then the crucial factor of all being moulded to view things in very different ways, developed throughout our lives and influenced by our earliest memories and experiences, therefore it is impossible for everyone to have the same feeling within an architectural space.
Secondly, even in its simplest form and physicality, architecture itself and the materials used to create it are constantly changing. Not only will the visual aesthetic of a surface develop as it ages or becomes weathered over long periods of time, but within one day it will also take on multiple looks and atmospheres as the light, shadows, sounds and human activity progress around it. Furthermore, even if we fully understood the many impacts of a material’s physical attributes, it could be concluded from my research that more important than this, is for a material to possess ambiguity, softness and simplicity that works in perfect balance with its setting.
Taking all of this into consideration, I conclude that it is possible for an architectural environment to evoke a particular emotion, and that this is often largely influenced by the materials used, however, in terms of what creates a specific atmosphere and feeling, which is perceptible to human beings, and what makes a phenomenological experience, I would have to agree with Palasmaa’s notion of ‘Enmeshed Experience’; it is a combination and the coming together of a vast number of factors, from the scale of the architecture, its form, the materials and their tone and texture, the light and shadow in the space, and the human activity filling it, that can ultimately emotionally move a user. Even then, these factors are so changeable, and human beings so individual, that what one user may feel at one particular moment could be completely different to what they feel ten minutes later, and this is also likely to be different from the experience of the person next to them.
This notion of ‘Enmeshed Experience’, and the role of architectural elements within this, can be summarised rather poetically by Peter Zumthor’s reminiscence of Maundy Thursday, 2003:
‘Here I am. Sitting in the sun. A grand arcade – long, tall, beautiful in the sunlight. The square offers me a panorama…Just the right number of people. A flower market. Sunlight. Eleven O’clock. The opposite side of the square in the shade, pleasantly blue. Wonderful range of noises…So what moved me? Everything.… ‘What else moved me? My mood, my feelings…<Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.> But then I take away the square – and my feelings are not the same…I could never have had those feelings without the atmosphere of the square.’ (Zumthor, 2006, p.15-17)