Imagination is not, as its etymology would suggest, the faculty of forming images of reality; it is rather the faculty of forming images which go beyond reality, which sing reality. It is superhuman quality.

- Gaston Bachelard

A disembodiment of today’s image-based architectural practice

1

Content

04 1. Introduction

07 2. A phenomenological approach

09 3. Case study: two museums

15 4. Concluding thoughts

17 References

0504

1. Introduction

Since the dawn of time, the world we live in needs to be conceived as a place of continu-ous perception, in which the eye has always been one of the most important tools for the gathering of information. However, due to an exponentially increasing digiti-zation of our environment in recent years, in which images are (re)produced inces-santly, the visual perception of images and how they are interpreted by observers have come to supersede our other senses with which we perceive the ‘real’ world. When referring to the field of architecture, today’s iconic mode of architectural representa-tion has resulted in an ongoing stream of published projects, built or to be built. As a consequence, the published image of a building becomes a representative factor to decide whether or not the building is a success. The way this actually contributes to the usage and experience of the built object, the real architecture, remains questionable, as architecture ultimately should relate to the way built objects are lived. In fact, instead of guiding a physical architectural experience, today’s building designs seem to exclusively create impos-ing retinal images, which in general lead to buildings that lack a true connection with the users body and his experience. Such a

disconnection is mainly caused by edited pictures of situations which we have never encountered, and therefore in no way can be referred to in our memories; they leave out an added understanding to our world.

A question which immediately rises, is how a two-dimensional and framed image should represent the notion of architecture that is perceived in three dimensions. In contemporary design, visual produc-tions, rather than personal experiences, have become the medium through which architecture is produced, promoted, and evaluated. This neglect of all senses but the visual does not seem to be applicable in architecture, since architecture is inex-tricably related to the bodily perception of spaces. Consequently, as Juhani Pallasmaa argues: “contemporary design has housed the intellect and the eye, but it has left the body and the other senses, as well as our memories and dreams, homeless.”1 It is therefore important to value architecture that responds to context over architecture that strives for concept and strong images. Due to changing design presentations and the present-day wizardry of computer graphics, architects have learned to make manifest how a building will appear before it is built. Indeed, Bryan Appleyard ob-serves that architects are notoriously fas-

1 Pallasmaa (1996), p.10

Fig. 1 Kolumba Museum

Human beings - threshold -

unity of existing and added

building mass

tidious about how their finished buildings will appear in visual media: “architecture exists alongside other consumer goods. We see clothes on one page, recipes on another and buildings on a third. They are not real, but we act as if they were. Architecture, the queen of the arts, is reduced to the level of a frock or a sauce.”2

One needs to question whether exclusive visual perception sufficiently succeeds in understanding the surroundings we encounter, from a phenomenological point of view that emphasizes the body’s central position in the world. I would like to use ‘phenomenology’ as the study of appear-ances. The phenomenological philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty extensively elabo-rated on the phenomenology of perception in his eponymous magnum opus. In ac-cordance with his theory on this subject, I argue that the human body is our medium for the world and consequently enables us to perceive relations in the space we engage with. Opposed to this notion, images actu-ally turn into an artificial reality for those who perceive them and cause a disem-bodiment from their surrounding physical reality. In a phenomenological way of thinking, this could be best defined as a disconnection from reality. In fact, most visual productions are, as a result of new

possibilities in the current age of digital developments, edited in a way to make the viewer experience them differently. Pictures like these unconsciously become a crucial part of the decisions we make and how we live our lives. However, as pointed out already, pictures lack crucial aspects of a sufficient representation of reality and might even apply suspension of disbelief - an audience’s perception suspending judge-ment concerning the implausibility of, in this case, certain aspects of the represented design. The question that rises is in what way pictures can be called pretentious, leaving out other perceptual aspects.

To explore and question the ever increas-ing role of images as a ‘limited’ reality’, the phenomenological approach that considers the whole body central to our perception of reality will be discussed in section 2. Then, in section 3, the confrontation with a manmade space and the human body’s relation to this space will be described, exemplified by analyzing and collating two built museums designed in opposite ways. Finally, by way of conclusion, the research question Do we need bodily experience to ‘encounter reality’, or are images which we visually perceive sufficient to understand the reality of the spaces we (are about to) live in? will be answered in section 4.

2 Appleyard, B. (1998)

0706

2

2. A phenomenological approach

Before starting our search for an answer on this question, a sufficient understanding needs to be gained of how we perceive and more specifically how images are interpreted. Although an explanation of the meaning of ‘to perceive’ might seem superfluous, as it is an act that is inextri-cably related to human nature, I would like to refer to the way Merleau-Ponty added understanding to this act of relating ourselves to the world that surrounds us. He claims that our body enables us to ap-proach the world; through our body we act in the world we are living.3 This approach of the world lacks completeness of that which is perceived; we always perceive things in a certain perspective and under cetain aspects, leaving other aspects out of our perception. This incompleteness tends to strongly increas when images are per-ceived. A description of an image would most probably provide a two-dimensional artifact as example, which represents a three-dimensional event that took place, or could eventually take place, at a certain time and location. Philosopher Gaston Bachelard raises an important question concerning the interrelationship between images and reality by questioning “how can a singular, short-lived event consti-tuted by the appearance of an image, react

on other minds and in other hearts, despite all the barriers of common sense, all the disciplined schools of thought, content in their immobility?”4

In order to provide a concise answer to this question, a detailed look at phenomenology and embodiment seems to be inevasible. The phenomenologist view of Merleau-Ponty suggested that the value of people’s experience of the world, gained through their immediate bodily engagement with it, remains greater than the value of understanding gleaned through abstract mathematical, scientific or technological systems.5 The intentionality of the think-ing body arranges the physical space and interprets the architectural qualities that surround it. One could say that the phenomenological way of encountering reality offers an account of space, time and the world as we live them by attempting to provide a direct description of the phenomena we experience. A phenom-enon would be best described as a directly observable occurrence that is perceived by an individual, though present to all human beings. As Merleau-Ponty puts it, it is something above and beyond the creative powers of the mind.6 Basically, phenom-ena form the true connection between a sensing creature and things within its sur-rounding space; they enable us to perceive

3 Bakker (1965), p.73

4 Bachelard (1969), p.14

5 Merleau-Ponty (1962),

p.11

6 Merleau-Ponty (1962),

p.57

Fig. 2 Kolumba Museum

Transition between remnant

structure of Kolumba

church, translucent stone

wall structure and concrete

ceiling

0908

3

the world we are living in. This perception starts on a subconscious level and, as a result, it mainly remains inaccessible to our consciousness. This actually means that perception precedes our reflecting consciousness.7 Merleau-Ponty provides an interesting view on this by saying that ‘to perceive’ is actually ‘to believe’ in a world. This belief - ‘Urglaube’ - can be seen as our awareness of being anchored in the world, in the spatial situation within which an individual is mentally and physically positioned. In this sense, the body is our general medium for an interrelation with such a world.8

The act of entering a building exemplifies the way we require our bodily interrelation with the world and buildings that are part of it, to allow the ability of experience and interpretation. When standing in front of the door we generally need to grasp for the doorknob as an obligatory act which enables us to enter the building and perceive its interior spatial arrangement, materiality, atmosphere and so on; we now find ourselves in a spatial situation with which our bodies engage physically and to a great extent intuitively. It shows that every touching experience of architecture is multi-sensory and therefore cannot be reduced to the eye only.

3. Case study: two museums

Now, an interesting question would be how to explain the apparent disparity between the image of architecture and the place to which it refers. In order to make this distinction between the perception of images that represent space and the bodily experience of space, two built museums will be discussed that will show the differ-ence between designing based on bodily experiences and memories, and designing based on a more visual or conceptual ap-proach of the design and its process. The former approach of the design process will be discussed on the basis of the analysis of Peter Zumthor’s Kolumba Museum in Cologne, after which the analysis of Rem Koolhaas’ Kunsthal in Rotterdam will show the latter approach.

Highly inspired by the phenomenological way of thinking about the world and our existence in it, Peter Zumthor carefully designs his buildings to stimulate experi-ences and evoke memories. Memories are so important to him, understanding himself as a thinking body, that he uses his own imagined past experiences of spaces and places to interpret the various spatial configurations of his designs, which are surrounded by architectural qualities.

7 Bakker (1965), p.61

8 Merleau-Ponty (1962),

p.146

Fig. 3 Kolumba Museum

Interior exhibition space,

naturally illuminated and

connected with historical

location

1110

4

Gradually he decides how future places should be experienced and what they need to feel like. In his book Architektur Denken [Thinking Architecture], Zumthor recalls lasting memories of places and things he once experienced through their sensual qualities. One of these memories is ex-plained at the very beginning of this book: “I used to take hold of it when I went into my aunt’s garden. That door handle still seems to me like a special sign of entry into a world of different moods and smells. I remember the sound of the gravel under my feet, the soft gleam of the waxed oak staircase, I can hear the heavy front door closing behind me as I walk along the dark corridor and enter the kitchen, the only really brightly lit room in the house… Memories like these contain the deepest architectural experience that I know. They are the reservoirs of the architectural atmospheres that I explore in my work as an architect.“9 What needs to be regarded as most important is Zumthor’s view that these different sensory aspects should be a fundamental aspect of (his) designing. Here he echoes architectural practitioner and writer Juhani Pallasmaa’s thoughts, that in a world where technologies operate so fast that sight is the only human sense which can keep pace, architecture should emphasize other senses which remain

more immediately resonant.10

To show Zumthor’s views on approaching and conducting his designs, or rather to question them, my experience of encoun-tering and strolling through his built design for the Kolumba Museum in Cologne will be discussed now. Built on top of the remains of the Kolumba church that was bombed during the Second World War, this museum completely adapts to its specific location. In this way, Zumthor remembers and respects the intense history of the site. The building imposes itself both through a monolithic presence and through differ-ent propositions of interacting with the surrounding area. The building merges the remembrances of the religious past of the site, the tangible paintings and sculptures that are exhibited inside the monolithic presence, and windows which frame the surroundings as if they were paintings - a variety of images.

When I approached the introvert build-ing and entered the tomb at the ground floor, it was immediately clear to me that the project design had started from the inside; from the site and the collection of the church’s preserved remains. The building seems to adapt to its function of ‘showing’ by remaining in the background

9 Zumthor (2006), p.7

10 Pallasmaa (1996)

Fig. 4 Kolumba Museum

Reading space, surrounded

by mahogany cladded

walls, related to the exterior

world and its changing

conditions

1312

5

6 7 8

and providing both physical and mental space to encounter the exhibited works. A quiet, clever and dignified building, built in a complex context. In contrast to the white spaces that have become the standard envi-ronment for installations of contemporary art, Zumthor created a strong spatial presence that guides and supports the visi-tors during their journey through the art collection. At some intervals, the building ‘opens’ towards the outside neighborhood, basically turning the surroundings into paintings, and relating the interior and its art collection to the important his-torical location. On my journey through the museum I encountered numerous well-chosen materials - concrete, stone, chromed steel, glass, mahogany, leather - which were composed in a powerful cho-reography. The materials Zumthor used express their age and history as well as the passing of time and human use. This can be connected to the way Merleau Ponty describes the things we observe. He states that every perception captures a formerly percieved dimension of the past and a di-mension of the future that eventually will be perceived.11 In that sense every moment is sufficiently connected to the past and focussed on the future. Equal to Merleau-Ponty’s aforementioned suggestion that the value of people’s bodily experience of

the world remains greater than that of un-derstanding gleaned through mathemati-cal, scientific or technological data, Peter Zumthor treated these materials in such a way that my bodily engagement with the different spaces and even the exhibited collection was amplified.

The design for the second museum that will be discussed, the ‘Kunsthal’ in Rot-terdam, is strongly based on a conceptual way of thinking. In this specific building not the viewer, nor the artworks get a central position; the concept of tempo-rality and neutrality are considered to be most important. In contrast to the first example, which clearly showed that Zumthor consciously avoided the white spaces that are commonly used for instal-lations of contemporary art, the exhibi-tions that I encountered at the Kunsthal did make use of today’s dominant display system. Whereas Zumthor privileged the individual contemplation of art in specific spaces, Koolhaas attempted to provoke interaction between viewers by providing a neutral stage that allows the exhibiting of ‘art on the move’. Even though this concept would fit best to a Kunsthal, a museum presenting exhibitions without owning a collection of art, this undue neutrality remains questionable. As Andrew MacNair

Fig. 5 Kunsthal

Exterior approach,

assembly of different

materials.

Fig. 6 Level 0

Fig. 7 Level 1

Fig. 8 Level 2

White exhibition spaces,

11 Bakker (1965), p.67

1514

9

puts it, “the Kunsthal acts as a train station without trains, an airport without planes, a terminus which is a place of intersection between ordinary people and ordinary art. Nothing stays very long.”12 Unfortunately, that is exactly what I felt like when visit-ing the building and strolling through its exhibition spaces. Sensual aspects were to the utmost extent left out of the building; its spaces and applied materials were not able to move me in such a way as those in the Kolumba Museum. Most materials that Koolhaas used in this design - sheets of glass, enameled metal and synthetic ma-terials - present their unyielding surfaces to the eye without conveying anything of their material essence or change over time. What remained, as a result of the lack of sensual and embodied essence, was an emptiness between the building and my bodily experience.

4. Concluding thoughts

The initial task of architecture is to create an embodied reality that structures and re-enforces man’s being in the world, though currently, there seems to be an over-emphasis on the visual and conceptual dimensions of architecture. The secondly discussed museum, which clearly fits the

conceptual type of architecture that more or less exclusively focuses on imagery, showed a lack of sensual and embodied essence. Consequently, many ways of perceiving the world are getting lost and people that are confronted with buildings from this type are likely to become dissoci-ated from it.

With this loss of tactility and the scale and details crafted for the human body and hand, our structures become immaterial and unreal. The detachment of construc-tion from the realities of matter and craft turns architecture into stage sets for the eye, devoid of the authenticity of material and tectonic logic.

An answer to the research question that was formulated in the introduction, will mainly focus on the limits of two-dimen-sional representation that only partially engage the myriad sensations evoked by architecture. Only architecture can simul-taneously awaken all the senses. Not the built object or image should be regarded as architecture; it is the bodily movement through a sequence of spaces, a series of partial experiences, that actually creates architecture. As a result, when aiming for true architecture, designing based on bodily experiences and memories would be

Fig. 9 Kunsthal

Interior concept, spiral

ciculation ramps

12 MacNair (1994), p. 120

1716

recommendable over designing based on a more visual or conceptual approach of the design and its process. Conceptual archi-tecture reflects and externalizes ideas and images of life; architecture that captures phenomenological qualities materializes our images of ideal life.

Literature

Appleyard, B. (1998). A most

constructive guide. London: Times.

Bachelard, G. (1969). The poetics of space.

Boston: Beacon Press.

Bakker, R. (1965). Merleau-Ponty. Baarn: het

Wereldvenster.

MacNair, A. (1994). Kunsthal Rotterdam. A

& U: architecture & urbanism, Aug. 1994,

pp.108-133.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962).

Phenomenology of perception. London:

Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.

Pallasmaa, J. (1996). The eyes of the skin.

Academy Editions.

Zumthor, P. (2006). Thinking Architecture.

Basel: Birkhäuser Verlag.

Figures

1-4 Kolumba Museum, Cologne.

Personal photographs made on

July 24, 2011.

5-9 Kunsthal, Rotterdam.

Personal photographs made on

May 26, 2012.