Further...

Austin Homfeld

2.20.10 / 10pm
Initially I tried to propose this concept at a “micro” level to various established architects and my professors however it seemed as though they had difficulty understanding its application to the tool of mapping not so much the origional concepts.
so i have found that the most success I have had in providing a clear proposal is when i break down the components beginning on the macro level then working my way down to the micro level.

For example, when attempting to describe this proposal to an individual not exposed to these certain readings and studies of affectual atmospheres and sensation i am confronted with the
task of providing concrete data in order to make these concepts more tangible.

First, I make the individual aware of how drastic of an effect certain media can have on individuals emotions. These effects are produced by sensation, psycoanalitical backgoround and affectual situations, then I lead them
into the more complex realm of experinecing a piece of architecture within thier own reality.



Second, i give them the example of something simple, like “logic” behind the creation of the path that a tour bus might take and why this tour bus takes this path. For example, “Well of course it’s beautiful, I mean look at it.” Is this statemnt derived from ones true understanding that this is “beauty” or is this a simple mindless act of speech meerly becuase of the fact
that the tour bus brought them there so it must be beautiful.
Yeah, yeah seems dumb but there is more to it than that. When you place certain destinations on a tour they in a sense become part of the same direct context(i.e. a city). So in a
sense the spike in sensation becomes less significant.(somewhat)
Which led me to my next break down.

“The diamond in the rough,” if every building were equally beautiful then no ’spikes’ would exist. But that is not the case
even in a wonderful location facades and forms become rather mundane until there she is, ‘the diamond in the rough.’ So by jumping from the context of the tour bus to the context of those in it’s direct vicinity the spike will increase.

For the final breakdown I have been using ‘Sagrada Familia’ as my prime example since I am in Barcelona studying right now.
Also, because of it’s scale and purpose it actually is the easiest piece I have found and everyone knows it. I have found three simple contexts that produce three separate sensations subjective in their spike but from my discussions I have found the consensus to be fairly similar overall.

The first context would be experiencing the overall form from ground level exterior. The natural, yet intense articulation that tells a story, and leaves you begging to FEEL more. The inside becomes the outside at certain moments diverting a portion of the sensations and once again leaves you wondering what is beyond those doors. The context it is in leaves a dominating spike from ground level.






The second would be the interior which for obvious reasons is within it’s own context. Smooth less articulated space but white to capture the natural beauty casted by the light through the stained glass, sends a chill up your spine. The space is less articulated than the exterior, inverting the traditional style of a cathedral, so that all attention is directed to one focal point. Several spikes in it’s own context could be derived at certain moments but overall fairly equal as a space.

The final context would be at the top where the true beauty of Gaudi’s interesting, colorful forms come to life. They become
the foreground of your sight with the entire city as the context. Amazing.



This is when I have been most successful. But peole need concrete data. So now I am trying to develop a method and vocabulary under consensus for particular sensations to graphically display these spikes as a map. With that map my hypothesis is that I will be able to justify my moves in a design. Using other mapping techniques as derivatives instead of the current method I am using atmosphere as a derivative
of intimacy.
Reply

simondroog

2.23.10 / 8pm
That’s quite a long story, Austin. But I see what you mean, I also have some difficulty convincing the status quo of the potential of architecture based on sensations, emotions and affect of its users.

Lately I’ve been thinking about the tangibility of designing atmospheres attuned to the concerns of the user as well. Do we really need concrete data or evidence? I’m just thinking out loud here. I’ve been reading this article about measuring place – using your mind and body to record experience by Chloe Sambell. She describes her experience of space using a phenomenological approach – she measures by gathering words; observing phenomena like sound, light and shadow; making sketches and observing people. She also uses her own body to “gauge relative proportion and scale of elements.” (1) Maybe it’s enough “to describe the complex relationship between person and environment without reduction or abstraction.” (1) – abstraction as in the concrete data you write about. I’ll try to find a link to the article for you to read.

The reason why I’m thinking about this tangibility is that the experience of architecture is a very intuitive and subjective affair. Everybody experiences architecture, but mostly on a subconscious level. It’s hard to find out about someone’s sensations and emotions without influencing the situation and/or the person. Making people conscious of their experiences could and probably will influence their experiences. We’re still trying to find ways of distilling experiences without influencing them.

For mapping your findings I mentioned Christian Noldt with his Biomapping method. We’ve tried his method ourselves during a workshop. We’ve gathered data by measuring people sweat and connect this data to a context. The hardest thing was to translate the data into experiences. We knew when someone had an emotional response to a context, but we still didn’t know how they experienced the context without asking them about it and thus influencing their experience. It’s a complicated issue, that’s for sure!

1. SAMBELL, C. Measuring place: Using Mind and Body to Record Experience. Welsh School of Architecture – Cardiff, Wales: MADE magazine