FERN HOCKLEY-TELLES
N0483444 - Interior Architecture + Design
PHENOMENOLOGICAL ARCHITECTURE:
How does architecture create an emotional experience for users?
Firstly, by examining the works of philosophers of Phenomenology, it is necessary to investigate the notion of ‘experiencing’, as there are so many possible ways to ‘experience’.
The fact that there is currently an ‘ocular bias’, widely criticised by many architects, makes it harder to ensure a true experience for users, particularly one which will connect with emotion. As Pallasmaa has noted, we have become a society of images, where so often we visit a place and view it solely through a camera lens. This has lessened the depth to which humans can experience a space, as they are processing the environment in a 2D format; ‘Computer imaging tends to flatten our magnificent, multi-sensory, simultaneous and synchronic capacities of imagination by turning the design process into a passive visual manipulation, a retinal journey.’ (Pallasmaa, 2012, p.14)
In his writing, Heidegger considers phenomenology less as a philosophy and more as a method with which one can really experience being. His analysis of language suggests that an element of being is to remain, from ‘the Gothic word ‘wunian’ (Heidegger, 1993, p.351), and an element of this ‘remaining’, is to be at peace, to be free. ‘Wunian means to be at peace, to be brought to peace, to remain in peace. The word for peace, Friede, means the free.’ (Heidegger, 1993, p.351)
Taking on this idea of being ‘free’ and ‘at peace’, whilst excluding our current attachment to, and our obsession with, a digital memory that we can share with the world, it could be suggested that one of the key parts of truly experiencing architecture is for users to completely free themselves within the space; by making themselves available for a whole experience, visitors are much more likely to be influenced and even emotionally moved.
Similarly, Zumthor reflects on the importance of human participation and freedom, being ‘free’, to interact with a space when discussing Therme Vals: ‘It was incredibly important for us to induce a sense of freedom of movement…a mood that has less to do with directing people, than seducing them’…’Getting people to let go…freedom’ (Zumthor, 2006, p.41-2)
Assuming then that users are open to having a complete experience, it is necessary to look at the different elements which make up an architectural environment, and that have the potential for evoking emotion. This includes the types of surfaces, the use of light and shadow, the acoustic qualities, the temperature, the colours, the smells. All of these are not only qualities of a whole piece of architecture, but also properties of the individual materials used to create it, and each element affects another.
Often, form is thought of as the determining factor when it comes to the character of a space, as is evident in the symbolic, Deconstructivist work of Libeskind (see fig.7). However, architecture focused on form is becoming more widely criticised, particularly by Phenomenologists, who emphasise the role of more intangible, atmospheric elements that are highly influenced by material:
‘materials, colour, rhythm, and illumination are strongly atmospheric, probably because of their embodied, haptic and enveloping nature…form and formal cohesion seem to have a closing and externalising impact’
(Pallasmaa, 2014, p.240)
Context, historically dense settings and nature, all of which are contained within materiality, can also affect the feel of a space. There is a suggestion that humans respond to materials that are ‘capable of absorbing the traces of human life’, (Zumthor, 2010, p.24). For example, in an old chapel where a stone step has been indented as a result of years of visitors passing through, we find a visible affirmation of our existence in the world.
As described in his book, ‘In Praise of Shadows’, Tanizaki writes of how his culture appreciates jade due to the history it possesses:
‘It quite lacks the brightness of a ruby or an emerald or the glitter of a diamond. ..when we see that shadowy surface…we seem to find in its cloudiness the accumulation of the long Chinese past.’ (Tanizaki, 1977)
Similarly, the Biophilia Hypothesis theory suggests that a connection with nature, with earth, is more emotive. Often, practicing architects of Phenomenology will choose a materiality that reflects this, one that alludes to a natural element such as air, water or even fire, and within this is an appreciation also for natural light; it is the use of light and dark, sunlight and shadow, that creates an experience. Such manipulators of natural light include Louis Kahn who, ‘used light not merely as a surface effect, but as primary means of shaping space’ (Russ, 2014), and of course, Peter Zumthor. When discussing his own work in the book, ‘Atmospheres’, Zumthor talks about creating a building as ‘a pure mass of shadows then… hollowing out the darkness as if light were a new mass seeping in’ (Zumthor, 2006, p.59), and goes on to discuss choosing ‘materials in the knowledge of the way they reflect.’ (Zumthor, 2006, p.59) When an architect controls this relationship between material and light correctly, it is felt ‘almost as a spiritual quality’ (Zumthor, 2006, p.61)
This both poetically demonstrates the importance of light manipulation, and highlights the fact that light itself is a material in architecture that can control and be controlled when combined with tangible materials; where one material may hold the light for a shadowy interior, another can reflect and diffuse beams in such a way that the space is enlightened with a spiritual quality.
It would seem then that, in order to create an entire phenomenological experience, users will need to feel the impact of these many elements coming together as a whole, an ‘enmeshed experience’; one in which an emotion is evoked by a greater impact than is produced by one small feature, or material.
