THE EYES OF THE SKIN, 1996

December 23, 2016

 

Juhani Pallasmaa, The Eyes of The Skin, 1996

 

Juhani Pallasmaa’s text The Eyes of The Skin is part argument against ocularcentrism in western culture, part manual for haptic sense in art and architecture. Pallasmaa approaches the impact of technological developments to design the 21st century not through form, or function, but the ‘unanalysable architecture of the senses’.[1] The title expresses a short circuit between the dominant sense of vision and supressed modality of touch, and these two elements joust for dominance throughout the text. Pallasmaa breaks the work into two sections one focusing on the eye, its significance and interaction with the world, the other on the body and the role our senses play in experiencing architecture. I plan to offer a brief introduction to Pallasmaa, his intellectual context, and methodology, moving on to the pivotal ideas in The Eyes of the Skin, of ‘sight’ and ‘touch’. I will explore how Pallasmaa differentiates these themes from the concepts of his predecessors, and what the significance of the presentation is. Finally I intend to what extent the text has impacted the way we make and interact with art and architecture. On the most basic level it has practical applications in architecture, while in its broadest interpretation it is a guideline for how we encounter the world.

 

The Eyes of the Skin grew from a series of Pallasmaa’s earlier works. The ideas developed from Steven Holl’s Questions of Perception (1994) a collection of three essays written by Holl, Pérez-Gómez and Pallasmaa, focusing upon phenomenological experience and the inconsistencies between perception and logic in architecture.[2] The second part of the manuscript originated from Pallasmaa’s on An Architecture of the Seven Senses (1994). The publication of The Eyes of the Skin was the result of a request in 1996 from Academy Editions, a  London Architectural publisher, for 32 pages for a ‘Polemics’ series on whatever Pallasmaa found pertinent at the time. The commission offers us an insight: if only nominally the text is ‘polemical’, attacking ocularcentrism in favour of the contentious value of a weaker sense. In this Pallasmaa radically calls for a change to the ontology of architecture.[3] It also demonstrates his significance as a theoretician and architect.

 

Pallasmaa writes that the work is based upon his experiences, views and speculations as an architect and theorist. He explains a growing concern about the dominance of vision and disappearance of sensory and sensual elements in the manner in which architecture was taught, conceived, and critiqued. Although based upon Pallasmaa’s individual insight, we nevertheless encounter a vast compilation of relevant references, theorists, philosophers, poets and engineers; this creates a context for the work and canon for the subject. In many ways Pallasmaa’s work becomes a web, or network of theories shuffled into their various complex alignments. The Eyes of the Skin can in this light be read as a guided tour of the themes of ocularcentrism, hapticity and phenomenology, motivated and directed by the unique vision of Pallasmaa.

 

Pallasmaa explains that he considers writing to be a process of exploration comparable to sketching, ‘without a clear advance plan or often without any kind of idea at all of what I will be doing.’[4] The Eyes of the Skin was written by hand, and then re-written and edited over the course of eight drafts. It is a process of encoding: the action of writing forces the development of an idea and transforms it into an object for study in its own right, prompting reflection. Pallasmaa describes writing as a mode of clarification; the thinking is in the writing.[5]  The reverse process would be an essay which is planned and researched in advance, and assembled only a means of communication. To Pallasmaa this process is ‘too straight forward, rationalised and forcefully persuasive’.[6] In The Eyes of the Skin, the reader is given no ratios, proportions, or measurements; everything follows a ‘rule of thumb’.[7] Pallasmaa applauds unexpectedness and non-linearity, ‘I like my sentences to include ideas that I never intended or aimed at.’[8] This results in an inductive text, generating theories rather than deducing facts. Phrases are repeated, like his drawing there is a working and reworking of forms, calibrating organically by hand and pencil. 

 

Pallasmaa’s process of writing underlines the content, the concepts are developed by the actions of hands, embodying his argument for hapticity in craft; moulding, forming, pocking, and smoothing what is then handled by others. The published book is equally homological to its content. Peter Mackeith reminds us of Pallasmaa’s theory of a door handle as the handshake to a building our first physical interaction with the architecture. The printed book offers a similar first impression, it is small and thin (152x229x254mm, 45gr) in proportion to our hands as much as it is for our eyes; this attention to anthropometry is characteristic of Pallasmaa who designs his work in bespoke sketchbooks 225x225mm.

 

Ultimately the strengths of Pallasmaa’s methodology can be found in the texts openness, and multiplicity of application. On the other hand his lack of structure leads the argument to meander, and repeat itself. Pallasmaa offers the reader significant texts but not significant facts. Thoreau writes that ‘a sensuous man’ struggles to write about his senses because ‘to write is not what interests him’.[9] In choosing to write the book Pallasmaa follows the constructs of the ocularcentrism he is arguing against: Michel Serres sights ‘urban dwelling scholars who sit huddled over their desks, basing their notions of perceptions on the bit of world they glimpse thorough their windows,’ and consequently overemphasising the role of vision in their intercourse.[10] Equally significant is that the text is now available digitally: the very form the Pallasmaa is critical of. Pallasmaa’s discussion is about sensorial experience, expressing the significance of sound, smell and feeling perhaps a lecture or recording would convey this stance to a greater effect.

 

Addressing the content of The Eyes of the Skin, Pallasmaa approaches sight through its connotations of knowledge: ‘knowledge has become analogous with clear vision.’[11] The ocularcerntric paradigm has been inherited from classical philosophy following Plato’s statement that vision is humanities greatest gift.[12] ‘To see’ is synonymous with understanding whereas ‘I hear’ and ‘I smell’ convey no superior knowledge. Ian Hacking and Richard Rorty explore the further linguistic inheritance from vision.[13] Scope is from the Greek word Scopium ‘to look’, and Synopsis from Greek for ‘view’. Demonstrate originates in the Latin Monstare ‘to show’.  While Inspect, Prospect, Introspect, Aspect, Circumspect are all derived from the Latin Specere ‘to look or observe’. One could go on for pages, the question is whether these latent metaphors pose an obstacle or aid to knowledge? Pallasmaa would suggest not, sight is unreliable. Language subdivides our visual experience and the universality of vision cannot be assumed. For example, ‘image’, Jay explains that it might signify ‘graphic, optical, perceptual, mental, or verbal phenomena.’[14] This is not true of touch.[15]

 

Pallasmaa‘s second stage in the development of ocularcentrism is the invention of perspectival representation. This interprets Gibson’s ethnographic distinction of cultural perception between the ‘visual world’: the world in which all of our senses interact and we see depth to shape and know that a plate is round.[16] And the ‘visual field’: in which the eye is detached and perceives the plate as an ellipse, a ‘project shape’ of perspectival representation. In cultures without perspective there is only a ‘visual world’. Pallasmaa argues that perspective in singling out the eye, does so at the expense of our other senses. He writes that perspective ‘made the eye the centre point of the perceptual world as well as the concept of the self.’[17] In perspective the eye stands in for the body as we perceive an image that relies upon our looking from a set spot.  Architecture should ground the body in time and space though all senses not simply the eye, we need an oral or haptic architectural equivalent to perspective.

 

The final progression of ocularcentrism that Pallasmaa’s finds is technology, writing that it has developed so rapidly that only the eye is fast enough to keep up, again singularising the eye.[18] Hull shows how by standing on the back legs, human ability to see clearly became more valuable than the ability to smell or hear: the latter senses cease to develop when raised above ground level while the eyes continued to improve.[19] The eye has 18 times more nerve endings than its nearest competitor the cochlear nerve of the ear and can transfer 500 varying levels of lightness and darkness and one million colour combinations at a rate faster than any other sense. The eye provides such an overwhelming volume of information that is the only sense we are able to shut-off completely, closing our eyes to think clearly. The eye is an active, signalling emotions from casual glance to fixed glare, to overflowing with tears. Pallasmaa suggests that our society in appealing to our strongest sense strengthened it further, we read, look, watch, aided by ‘exosomatic organs’, camera, cinema, glasses.[20] Pallasmaa builds on Heidegger’s presentment that ‘the fundamental event of modern age is the conquest of the world as picture’.[21] However Pallasmaa’s verdict is darker, arguing that the eye has been led to create a ‘perceptual present’ destroying our inherited reality and creating ‘a crisis of representation.’[22]

 

The consequence of ocularcentrism is ocularphobia; a sense of isolation and detachment with ‘human rootedness in the world’,[23] a loss of nearness between people and their world.[24]  In drawing this conclusion The Eyes of the Skin is indicative of the ‘sensual revolution’ of the last fifty years.[25] Considering senses as cultural systems, this attempts to overturn the perceived hegemony of vision in contemporary thinking to reveal a richer, full-bodied understanding of culture and experience. Pallasmaa explores the hegemony of vision through Martin Jay’s Downcast Eyes, (1994), traces the denigration of vision in twentieth century French thought, and David Michael Levin’s Modernity and the Hegemony of Vision, (1993) a collection of essays focusing upon ocularcentrism, both published around the time of The Eyes of the Skin.[26] In Le cinq sense (1985) Michel Serres describes the body bound by vision and language as ‘a desensualised robot, moving stiffly, unable to taste or smell, preferring to eat the printed menu than the actual meal.’[27] Pallasmaa is original in applying ocularphobia directly to architecture, where the design process has recently moved from drawing by hand to digitalised drawings on AUTOCAD and 3D printing.  

 

Many of Pallasmaa’s theories of vision are developments of Merleau-Ponty’s discussion of the Visible and Invisible, (1968) Holl suggests that the final chapter The Chiasm is particularly significant. Merleau-Ponty writes that ‘every visible is cut out in the tangible’ and the touchable is ‘encrusted’ in the visible.[28] He illustrates this with the appearance of a candle to a child before it has been burnt: later the pain informs the visual experience and so the flame looks hot. [29] Berkely describes the same effect through the example of hearing an ‘orange bird singing and see its soft feathers’, we don’t see the things we touch, hear, taste and smell but these senses mutually inform our vision.[30] This is the solution Pallasmaa adopts for the ‘crisis of representation’. Pallasmaa suggests like Ponty that our eye naturally works in tandem with our other senses, but he goes on to add that it can be artificially isolated through language, perspective and technology.

 

Pallasmaa suggests that there is an unconscious element of touch unavoidably concealed in vision; as we look, the eye touches.  This has an interesting application to traditional visual art, not made to be touched but might nevertheless appeal to non-visual senses. In Caravaggio’s’ ‘Doubting Thomas’ it is Thomas’ finger that alludes to the physicality of the resurrection, Christ has been remade palpable. Pallasmaa writes that in appreciating a work of art such as this ‘I lend my emotions and associations to the space and the space lends me its atmosphere’. Here again Pallasmaa reinterprets Merleau-Ponty’s account of the interaction in looking at an object. Merleau-Ponty writes that as objexts are influenced by their context, they are not ‘identical with themselves’, nor are we empty of preconceived perceptions; vision is a negotiation. Pallasmaa characteristically has adapted this concept of vision for a fuller experience.

 

Another technique Pallasmaa identifies to engage the sense of touch in sight is impressionism technique of paining, undermining our ability to ‘see clearly’. Pallasmaa believes that where focused vision confronts use with the world, ‘peripheral vision envelops us in the flesh of the world.’ I might add that a similar phenomenological affect is explored by Yves Klein and Anish Kapoor in whose work the pigment is so rich we can’t concentrate on it, as we lose our ability to focus clearly we become aware of the space in which we stand. Pallasmaa suggests that this transforms the two dimensional to a lived experience. Pallasmaa later goes on to develop his concept of vision to address vision and language further in  The Embodied Image and Imaginary Architecture (2011) looking at how poeticised images infiltrate our lived experiences.

 

Although art can apply to the supressed element of touch in sight, Pallasmaa’s solution to the hegemony of vision is an architecture that engages touch, sounds, smells, (he goes as far as suggesting taste). Pallasmaa uses the example of the passage to Pharaoh’s chamber in the Cheops pyramid, rising at ‘a forty five-degree angle inside a huge mass of stone. It is so narrow that two persons can only pass by turning sideways. The feeling of the weight and mass of the stone is incredible…once can have a very strong spatial experience completely without light.’[31] When exploring without light we become more conscious of our bodies and our actions because we have lost our regular sense for understanding our environment. Carsten Holler explores comparative ideas in his exhibition at Hayward Gallery, London (summer, 2015). Pallasmaa also explains the role of gravity in architecture, invisible but crucial when walking across a sloped floor we become aware of the balance and mass of our body. Pallasmaa also explores the significance of context in this analogy; when we know there are tons of stone above us, our bodily awareness is different (our sensations at the top of a skyscraper differ from those at an underground station). Pallasmaa suggests that stimulation like this is ‘life-enhancing’ after Wittgenstein.[32]

 

Of these senses it is touch that best ‘integrates our experience of the world and self’. Touch is grounding and in the Renaissance was compared to earth, though less noble it is more reliable than vision. For this reason the haptic becomes significant to architecture: ‘places make sense, senses make place.’[33] As seen in his method for writing The Eyes of the Skin Pallasmaa considers hands to be important. Having worked in a furniture workshop, Pallasmaa addresses his experience of the way craftsman work with their bodies and existential experience.  In this he follows Bachelard’s distinction between ‘formal imagination’ and ‘material imagination’ which evokes a deeper and more profound experience.[34] Pallasmaa returns to the ideas of touch in the Thinking Hand (2009) that addresses how designed things feel to the touch of a hand either concretely or imaginatively,[35] Addressing the broader role of our hands, Pallasmaa describes a ‘centripetal’ force from mind to hand.[36] Explaining that ‘our amazing hands are not products of our spectacular brains, but we have our amazing brains due to our spectacular hands.’ [37] Here he develops in Heidegger, we learn and think though doing things and the body and hands participate in everything we do.[38] Michael Serres describes the soul residing in our finger tips; the soul is not in the body but in the meeting with that which it comes into contact with.[39]

 

Phenomenology is a relatively new idea in philosophy originating with Husserl, Heidegger, Satre and Merleau-Ponty in the first half of the twentieth century. [40] Phenomenology explores structures of consciousness experienced from a first-person perspective. The principle structure of experience is intentionality: being directed towards something, which arises from an object by virtue of its content or meaning. Phenomenology therefore concerns the relationship between people and objects and their unity.[41] This creates a system of structures: ‘like the spider with its web, so every subject weaves relationships between itself and particular properties of objects; the many strands are then woven together and finally form the basis of the subjects very existence.’[42] It is a paradigm of mind, body and environment, as opposed to the Cartesian approach that investigates mind and body.[43] Pallasmaa avoids the label of phenomenologists, but suggests that his views upon architecture and art are parallel with the views of phenomenology.[44] He references the Dutch phenomenologist J H van den Berg ‘painters and poets are born phenomenologists’[45] for expressing their encounter with the world.

 

Phenomenology finds a link to architecture through the senses. Pallasmaa suggests that ‘the visual image of a door is not an architectural image, for instance, whereas entering and exiting through a door are architectural experiences.’[46] Architectural phenomenology is distinct from the phenomenology of philosophy centring upon design that prioritises a human environment.[47] It emerged in the 1960s with the Danish professor Steen Eiler Rasmussen’s Experiencing Architecture 1959 examining the network of proportions we find harmonious.[48] The concepts are developed by Christian Norberg-Schulz’s discussions of ontology of place discussing how we have a ‘need to grasp vital relations in [our] environment, to bring meaning and order into a world of events and actions.’[49]

 

To a certain extent The Eyes of the Skin follows the heritage of Nordic architecture. In the 1930s Erik Gunnar Asplund, Erik Bryggman, Eiler Rasmussen and Alvar Aalto made remarkably parallel moves away from the functionalist aesthetics towards a multisensory architecture.[50] When Pallasmaa entered Helsinki University of Technology in autumn 1957 he started to work at the Museum of Finish Architecture, where these established architects met and conversed. His greatest influence was Alvar Aalto, who discusses the importance of ‘psychological’ character and tactile qualities; Exploring a chair design through focussing upon its warmth and approaches architecture from our daily routine arguing that a building must be conceived from the inside out.[51]

 

In Helsinki Pallasmaa’s architecture appears on a variety of scales from the restoration of the market hall to bridges, walk ways.[52] Steven Holl writes that Pallasmaa architecture is about the way spaces feel, ’the sound and smell of these places, has equal weight to the look’ we might have guessed this from the way he writes.[53] However we can trace ideas from The Eyes of the Skin in the Kourundi project in Rovaniemi completed in2011.[54] There is synaesthesia in designing the ‘visual acoustics’ of the concert hall. It is a conversion of the old post bus depot from 1933.[55] Pallasmaa discusses the role of collage and montage in converting the building. Collage combines often unrelated fragmented images to convey a meaning independent of original images, while montage is a cinematic technique to join shots to form a narrative whole. Kourundi blends the structures and atmospheres of a utilitarian building with a contemporary concert hall and art museum. I would suggest that we can relate the technique of creating narrative or meaning through juxtaposition back to The Eyes of the Skin: evolving  around the juncture of eye and skin. The titles of thes chapters in the book are also formed by a paring of two concepts: ‘Vision and Knowledge’ or ‘the Narcissistic and Nihilistic eye’, bringing two ideas together to shed light on both by their likeness and differences. Again, as with his writing, randomness plays an important role in Pallasmaa’s architecture, he suggests that ‘randomness and age enriches the experience of viewing art’. [56]

 

In reviewing the strengths and weaknesses of the text, it is possible to read Pallasmaa’s ocularphobia as a phobia of technology. He suggests that modern technology inhibits the interaction of our non-visual senses through constructing a dichotomy between sensory affirmative architecture and modern materials such as scale-less sheets of glass, metals, synthetic plastics and unyielding surfaces. There are two possible solutions addressing time or conceptual differences.

 

Written from 1995-6, our technology has developed considerably since the point at which Pallasmaa was writing, and as our perception of technology has changed so has our interpretation of the text. Today, twenty years later keyboard has evolved for the use of our fingertips; a smart phone is designed to fit in the hand and vibrates causing a sensation to the skin to communicate. Our solution to ocularphobia might be found in an enveloping sensual technology as much as haptic architecture.

 

On the other hand, this solution does not address the conceptual significance of material and process. Pallasmaa’s dispute with technology addresses the audience’s imaginative awareness as opposed to their concrete interaction with buildings and objects. Knowledge of context changes our interaction with an object; we walk more carefully on a hand knotted rug than the industrial carpet in an airport. With technological developments human actions to making things: art works, drawings for buildings, door knobs, are being transferred to machines: cameras, photocopiers, computers, factories. Although the two results may even be interchangeable, Pallasmaa argues that there is significance in knowing that an object is authentic. He is calling for a purer design process that enriches the users experience and interaction through knowledge of a human connection. It is an idea comparable to Walter Benjamin’s ‘Aura’ in The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproducibility, (1931).[57]

 

Finally, what has been the impact of The Eyes of the Skin in Art and Architecture? The text has been republished three times since its publication and has found its way onto an international range of university reading lists and design studios: however it is challenging to quantify this influence. The Eyes of the Skin offers a global message and its impact such, the text was recently translated into Mandarin and Farsi.[58] Pallasmaa lectures regularly and internationally. Although not perhaps a direct tribute to the text, its evident influence can be viewed in The Ghost project, an architectural conference on ‘ideas in things’ in Nova Scotia, Canada in the summer of 2011.[59] Pallasmaa was the key speaker addressing embodied thinking, as explored in The Eyes of the Skin, and then a panel discussed the subject. 

 

Steven Holl writes that not since Rasmussen’s Experiencing Architecture (1959) has a text gone ‘beyond the horizon and ‘beneath the skin’ so clearly and succinctly. [60] Pallasmaa writes that through interacting with the world we gain our existence, but in reminding us of this The Eyes of the Skin makes us aware of our existence. Pallasmaa’s inherits Asplund’s 1936 theory that ‘everything grasped by our other senses through our whole human consciousness and which has the capacity to communicate desire, pleasure, or emotions can be art.’[61] Although it is not a quintessentially art historical text it raises questions upon the media of art that could certainly be taken further.

 

 

Words: 4397

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

 

Aalto, Alvar. ‘Problemi di Architettura’, Quarderni ACI, Edizione Associazione Culture Italiana. Turin, 1956. Untitled manuscript for a lectures held in Turin, Milan, Genoa and Rome 1956.

 

Anzieu. Didier, The Skin Ego, trans. Chris Turner. Connecticut, 1989.

 

Asplund, Erik G. Kornstoch Teknik. Byggmastaren, 1936.

 

Bachelard, Gaston. The Poetics of Space. Massachusetts, 1969.

 

Benjamin, Walter. ‘A Little History of Photography’ in Selected Writings, Volume 2, 1927-1934, trans. Rodney Livingstone. Harvard, 1999.

 

Bognar, Botond, ‘A Phenomenological Approach to Architecture and its Teaching in the Design Studio’ in David Seamon and Robert Mugerauer, ed. Dwelling, Place and Environment, Towards a Phenomenology of Person and World. New York, 1993.

 

Cerbone, David R. Understanding Phenomenology. London, 2006.

 

Connor, Steven, The Book of Skin. New York, 2004.

 

Ehrenzweig, Anton. The Hidden Order of Art: a Study in the Psychology of Artistic Imagination. London, 1992.

 

Feld, Steven. Places Sensed, Sensed Places, ‘Towards a Sensuous Epistemology of Environment’, in David Michael Levin. ed. Modernity and the Hegemony of Vision. California, 1993.

 

Frampton, Kenneth. ed.  Modern Architecture and the Critical Present. New York, 1982

 

Garner, Steve. Writing on Drawing: Essays on Drawing Practice and Research. Chicago, 2008.

 

Hacking, Ian. Why does Language Matter to Philosophy?. Cambridge, 1975.

 

Hall, Edward T. The Hidden Dimension. New York, 1982.

 

Holl, Steven, Juhani Pallasmaa, Alberto Pérez-Gómez, Questions of Perception, Phenomenology of Architecture. San Francisco, 1994.

 

Howes, David. Empire of the Senses. Oxford, 2005.

 

Innis, Robert E. ‘Technics and the Bias of Perception,’ Philosophy and Social Criticism. Summer, 1984.

 

Jay, Martin. Downcast Eyes: a Denigration of Vision in Twentieth-Century French Thought. California, 1994.

 

Kearney, Richard. Modern Movements in European Philosophy: Phenomenology, Critical Theory, Structuralism. Manchester, 1994.

 

Levin, David M. ed. Modernity and the Hegemony of Vision. California, 1993.

 

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. The Visible and the Invisible. Illinois, 1968.

 

Mictchell, Martin W J T. ‘What is an Image?’ in Iconology: Image, Text, Ideology. Chicago, 1986.

 

Montague, Ashley. Touching: The Human Significance of the Skin. New York, 1986.

 

Norberg-Schulz, Chrsitian. Existence, Space and Architecture. Connecticut, 1971.

 

Otero-Pailos, Jorge. ‘Phenomenology and the Rise of the Architect-Historian’, Repenser les limites: l'architecture à travers l'espace, le temps et les disciplines. Paris, 2005.

 

Pallasmaa, Juhani. ‘Hapticity and Time’ lecture at the  RIBA, 1999. Published in Juhani Pallasmaa, Encounters: Architectural Essays,  ed. Peter Mackeith. Helsinki, 2005.

 

Pallasmaa, Juhani. The Eyes of the Skin, Architecture and the Senses, third edition. London, 2012.

 

Rasmussen, Steen E. Experiencing Architecture. Massachusetts, 1959.

 

Rorty, Richard. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton, 1979.

 

Serres, Michel. Les cinq sense. Paris, 1985.

 

van den Berg, Jan H. The Phenomenological approach in Psychiatry. Illinois, 1955.

 

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Culture and Value, trans. Peter Winch. Oxford, 1988.

 

 

 

Websites:

 

Interview with Juhani Pallasmaa, Spacing, Vancouver [accessed: 27/3/16] http://spacing.ca/vancouver/2009/11/18/juhani-pallasmaa-architect-of-the-senses-2/

 

Korundi House of Culture, Rovaniemi, Finland [27/3/16]

http://www.korundi.fi/en/Korundi-house-of-culture

 

University of Art and Design Helsinki, Biography of Juhani Pallasmaa [accessed:27/3/16]

http://www.uiah.fi/studies/history2/pallas.htm

 

Interview with Juhani Pallasmaa, National Building Museum, Washington D. C. [accessed:27/3/16]

http://www.nbm.org/about-us/national-building-museum-online/interview-with-an-icon.html

 

Review of the Ghost 13 conference, The Architectural Review [accessed:27/3/16]

http://www.architectural-review.com/rethink/reviews/ghost-13-shobac-nova-scotia-canada-15-17-june-2011/8617838.fullarticle

 

Phenomenology entry, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy [accessed:27/3/16]

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] Juhani Pallasmaa, The Eyes of the Skin, Architecture and the Senses, third edition, (London 2012), 7.

 

[2] Steven Holl, Juhani Pallasmaa, Alberto Pérez-Gómez, Questions of Perception, Phenomenology of Architecture, (San Francisco, 1994)

 

[3] Pallasmaa, Eyes of the Skin, 99

 

[4] ‘NBM, Interview with Pallasmaa’

 

[5] Interview with Juhani Pallasmaa, National Building Museum, Washington D. C. [accessed:27/3/16] http://www.nbm.org/about-us/national-building-museum-online/interview-with-an-icon.html

 

[6] ibid

 

[7]Juhani Pallasmaa, ‘Hapticity and Time’ lecture 1999 RIBA Discourse Lecture in in Encounters: Architectural Essays, ed. Peter Mackeith, (Helsinki, 2005), 238

 

[8] ‘NBM, interview with Pallasmaa’

 

[9] Howes, Empire of the Senses, 5-6

 

[10] Michel Serres, Les cinq sense, (Paris, 1985), in Howes, Empire of the Senses, 5-6

 

[11] Pallasmaa, Eyes of the Skin, 18

 

[12] Ibid, 19

 

[13] Ian Hacking, Why does Language Matter to Philosophy? (Cambridge, 1975) and Richard Rorty, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, (Princeton, 1979) referenced in Jay, Downcast Eyes, 2

 

[14] Martin W J T Mictchell, ‘What is an Image?’ in Iconology: Image, Text, Ideology, (Chicago, 1986), 8

 

[15] Mitchell, ‘What is Image?’,  8

 

[16] Ibid,  4

 

[17] Pallasmaa, Eyes of the Skin, 18

 

[18] Ibid, 18

 

[19] Edward T Hall, The Hidden Dimension, (New York, 1982), 39

 

[20] Robert E Innis, ‘Technics and the Bias of Perception,’ Philosophy and Social Criticism, (Summer 1984), 67 

 

[21] Pallasmaa, Eyes of the Skin, 24

 

[22] Ibid, 24

 

[23] Pallasmaa, Eyes of the Skin, 22

 

[24] Kenneth Frampton, ed.  Modern Architecture and the Critical Present, (New York, 1982), 45

 

[25] David Howes, Empire of The Senses, (Oxford, 2005), 1

 

[26] See, Martin Jay, Downcast Eyes: a Denigration of Vision in Twentieth-Century French Thought, (California, 1994) and, David Michael Levin, ed. Modernity and the Hegemony of Vision, (California, 1993)

 

[27] Serres, Les cinq sense, in Howes, Empire of the Senses, 5-6

 

[28] Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible, (Illinois, 1968), 134

 

[29] David R Cerbone, Understanding Phenomenology, (London, 2006), 115

 

[30] Ibid, 115

 

[31] ‘NBM, Interview with Pallasmaa’ 

 

[32] Ludwig Wittgenstein, Culture and Value, trans. Peter Winch, (Oxford, 1988), 16

 

[33] Steven Feld, Places Sensed, Sensed Places, ‘Towards a Sensuous Epistemology of Environment’, in David Howes, Empire of the Senses, (Oxford, 2005), 179

 

[34] Gaston Bachelard, The Poetics of Space, (Massachusetts, 1969), 2

 

[35] ‘Review of Ghost’

 

[36] Ashley Montague, Touching: The Human Significance of the Skin, (New York, 1986), 3

 

[37] ‘Review of Ghost’

 

[38] Steve Garner, Writing on Drawing: Essays on Drawing Practice and Research, (Chicago, 2008), 110

 

[39] Steven Connor, The Book of Skin, (New York, 2004), 30

 

[40] Botond Bognar, ‘A Phenomenological Approach to Architecture and its Teaching in the Design Studio’ in David Seamon and Robert Mugerauer, ed. Dwelling, Place and Environment, Towards a Phenomenology of Person and World, (New York, 1993),183-197

 

[41] Phenomenology entry, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy [accessed:27/3/16]

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/

 

[42] Jakob von Uexkull quoted in Chrsitian Norberg-Schulz, Existence, Space and Architecture, (Connecticut, 1971), 9

 

[43] Howes, Empire of the Senses, 7

 

[44] Pallasmaa, Eyes of the Skin, 106

 

[45] Jan Hendrik van den Berg, The Phenomenological approach in Psychiatry, (Illinois, 1955), 61

 

[46] Alvar Aalto, ‘Problemi di Architettura’, Quarderni ACI, Edizione Associazione Culture Italiana, (Turin, 1956), 3. Untitled manuscript for a lectures held in Turin, Milan, Genoa and Rome 1956., 4

 

[47] Jorge Otero-Pailos, ‘Phenomenology and the Rise of the Architect-Historian’, Repenser les limites: l'architecture à travers l'espace, le temps et les disciplines, (Paris, 2005)

 

[48] Steen Eiler Rasmussen, Experiencing Architecture, (Massachusetts, 1959), 106-7

 

[49] Norberg-Schulz, Existance, Space, Space and Architecture, 9-10

 

[50] ‘NBM, Interview with Pallasmaa’   

 

[51] Aalto, ‘Problemi di Architettura’, p3

 

[52] Ibid, 103

 

[53] Pallasmaa, Eyes of the Skin, 7

 

[54] Korundi House of Culture, Rovaniemi, Finland [27/3/16]

http://www.korundi.fi/en/Korundi-house-of-culture

 

[55]‘ ibid,

 

[56]‘ ibid,

 

[57] Walter Benjamin, “A Little History of Photography” in Selected Writings, Volume 2, 1927-1934, trans. Rodney Livingstone (Harvard, 1999), 518

 

[58] ‘Interview with Pallasmaa, Vancouver’

 

[59] Review of the Ghost 13 conference, The Architectural Review [accessed:27/3/16]

http://www.architectural-review.com/rethink/reviews/ghost-13-shobac-nova-scotia-canada-15-17-june-2011/8617838.fullarticle

 

[60] Ibid, 79

 

[61] Erik Gunnar Asplund, Kornstoch Teknik, (Byggmastaren, 1936), in Juhani Pallasmaa, ‘Hapticity and Time’, in Encounters: Architectural Essays, ed. Peter Mackeith, (Helsinki, 2005), 238

Please reload

Recent Posts

April 22, 2017

January 6, 2017

Please reload