Pallasmaa

How can we understand and determine a person’s experience of architecture?

I don’t believe we have full determination, as designers, over a person’s experience in what we create.  We can guess – at the individual user’s nostalgia, at what the space will emulate for them, at how they feel imposed upon or in refuge.  Especially in a global society, where cultural biases lose their fervor (ie: people move around & their point of view is less predictable) we cannot anticipate such intricacies in human memory that took decades to manifest.

 

Interpretations…

All art eminates from the body…..  I agree.  It must link subconsciously in the eye of the viewer to what they are most familiar with – the human form. This is why cars have “faces” in the front, why symmetry gives a perception of order, etc.  It is why we know intrinsically that something has a “pedestrian scale” – because it appears to answer to the dimensions of a human, not something bigger.

Personally, I believe art eminates from the body because our recognition of what is beautiful is connected in our DNA.  Just as we recognize the design of our favorite architect, clothing line, or film producer; we recognize the artwork of a common Creator – of nature & people.

Early childhood memories inform us and form us as we grow up….  Absolutely.  Whether we admit it to it or not, our early childhood memories create a platform for how we understand the world. They recall certain things to mind as enjoyable or to be avoided. (ie – I like the outdoors, because I built tree forts with my brothers as a child / I don’t eat seafood because I was forced to “try it” as a child…)  But again, in architecture, how do we possibly predict what our building user’s childhood experiences were?

One example that comes to mind, was Jackie’s case study in South side Chicago – a center for foster / abuse victims.  The design was fashioned around creating an experience that would counter the negative recollections of an abusive space.

Other arts create the importance of place and experience…..  Yes – we can design an architecturally beautiful space, but if it is not activated by culinary arts, street performances, musicians, displays, merchants…it will be less interesting.  A user will remember a performance, product they bought, or a good meal more than the walls, ceiling, & floor of a space.

Loneliness and silence of buildings…….  “A strong architectural experience always produces a sense of loneliness and silence irrespective of the actual number of people there or the noise.  Experiencing art is a private dialogue between the work and the person experiencing it….” This quote raised my eyebrow.  Is he saying that urban / active pedestrian spaces that make you feel engaged are not good architecture?  In that case, I disagree.  While the art & the viewer must have a private dialogue, I believe that dialogue is greatly influenced by the hustle & bustle of the social environment surrounding it – the noises, smells, light.  It is unrealistic to think that people are going to stop and have a private “moment” with our buildings.  (a bit arrogant too…)  Only architecture students have such “moments” with buildings…

– D. Hoet