BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (HONOURS) IN ARCHITECTURE THEORIES OF ARCHITECTURE AND URBANISM (ARC61303/ARC2224)
SYNOPSIS: REACTION PAPER (OCTOBER 2016) [10 MARKS] NAME: SHALINN TAN JIAWEN ID: 0318714 LECTURER: MR. NAZMI ANWAR TUTORIAL TIME: 4-6PM SYNOPSIS NO: 3 READER TITLE: THE GEOMETRY OF FEELING AUTHOR: JUHANI PALLASMAA
In the chapter The Geometry of Feeling by (Pallasmaa, 2012), Juhani was basically tinkering with basic architectural theories to open up readers’ minds to a new way of doing architecture, also known as Phenomenology. Phenomenology of architecture questions the quality of architecture by referring it to the user experience through sensory properties; by means of building materials. One of the most thought-provoking part of the entire chapter was when he questioned about the feelings that modern architecture evokes as compared to the feeling from any anonymous dwelling in any town. He condemns modern architecture to be of purely dwellings that are architectural manifestations of space and structure, unable to stir upon the more subtle and emotional aspects of a home. In modern architecture, a simple square building can intrigue the user through its façade design, seeming meaningful and insightful, but does not provide any sense of familiarity and comfort. It is without a doubt the experience that connects the users to the buildings over time. The mind is stimulated through these basic feelings which associates itself to the building creating experiences for them. A certain memory could be analogous to a specific material texture(stimuli). Too often, architects design purely form-based which does not fulfil the basic conditions that commemorates human existence, and the disadvantage is that it does not sensitize ones physical and mental receptivity, causing a lack of emotional connection to the building. According to Juhani, the most interesting form of architecture is one where it is unique, where architecture cannot merely be a play of form. Highly agreeable are Juhani’s concerns, and it brings us to the fact that in schools of architecture we are taught to design houses and dwellings, and not homes. This raises a worrying concern; have our designs truly provided domicile in the world that matters to our clients? Do our designs tolerate or encourage personalization, or worse, asphyxiate it? It is important skills as designers that we should always be pushing to unflatten our perspectives. It only makes sense that instead of aspiring for a perfectly articulated environment, perhaps it would be a more meaningful to design a more layered, multivocal and ambiguous environment. By tastefully combining building materials, form, and the identity and memories of our clients, we are creating a stimulating and personal experience for them.