We all refer to it in our daily lives; we talk about a concert as having a good vibe, we talk about a social situation as being ‘gezellig’, we talk about the impression of a part of town as being gloomy and we even talk about the mood of a day as having a sense of anticipation. Atmosphere is a familiar conversational subject, but at the same time it is remarkably undefinable. We return to the use of the term constantly despite its ambiguous quality, or maybe even because of it. And this atmospheric description that seems to be applicable to every situation always concern a spatial sense of ambience.
Remarkably, the notion of atmosphere remains largely unaddressed in architectural education and practice. The appreciation for the art of building is still largely dependent upon the supremacy of it’s functional, aesthetic and conceptual value. The essential task of architecture to support human life by engaging with human experiential reality has been frequently overshadowed by these formal inclinations. Atmosphere could be defined as the very initial and immediate experience of space, and thus can be understood as a notion that addresses architectural quality. Fortunately, there has been a development in which architectural practices are showing a renewed interest in atmospheric quality in the built environment. Leading advocates of the value of the atmospheric dimension in architectural design include architect Peter Zumthor, architectural theorist Juhani Pallasmaa, philosopher Gernot Böhme and environmental sociologist Jean-Paul Thibaud.
Despite the fast-growing research field, the discussion on architectural atmosphere does entail a certain ambiguity. After all, the atmospheric experience is something personal, ephemeral and vague, but above all it is hard to conceptualise. We seem to be able to immediately sense the atmosphere of a place, but it seems to be very difficult to capture in text or design. We are able to intuitively recognise atmosphere, like when we recognise the essence of the weather in a glance, but we are not able to define, analyse or understand its phenomenological origin. The Argentinian poet Jorge Luis Borges captures this difference between intuitive and analytical identification as follows: ‘We might say that we know something only when we are unable to define it…This is what we know what poetry is. We know it so well that we cannot define it.’.
Despite the elusive character of atmospheres, is it suggested by the intuitive recognition and appreciation of the atmospheric dimension that we are able to share this intuitive sense with a larger community. The atmospheric experience seems to have a collective quality about it. Therewith the atmospheric experience has the inherent quality to be as much the realm of the layman and daily use, as it is the realm of the expert and professional discourse. I believe that non-architects primarily sense the atmosphere of a place or building, opposed to appreciating distinct visible and formal concepts. Therewith non-architects have the advantage of approaching places and atmosphere more intuitively, whereas architects to often assume an intellectual and theoretical approach. Layman may not have the vocabulary to verbalise their sensitivities for the atmospheric dimension that is acquired through an architectural or artistic education, but the notion that the sensitivity for the atmospheric dimension is largely intuitive indicates that the actual sensitivity does not necessarily differ between layman and expert. And this exceptional transcending quality is why atmosphere may be the ultimate intermediary between architectural quality as perceived by the architects who design the architectural plan and architectural quality as perceived by the inhabitants of the architectural environment.
I believe that architectural atmospheres are more effective than the architectural discourse has been willing to rationally admit. I would even argue that the atmospheric dimension of a constructed environment is the key to architectural quality. Therefore in this research I would like to explore how the atmospheric dimension may attain its proper place in architectural design. The main question of the research considers:
How can an architect integrate atmospheric quality in the design of architecture and the built environment?
Dissecting this question into four parts, we will consecutively explore the phenomenon, the perception, the process and the plan. The research thesis will start with an introductory chapter in which we will look into what the perception of atmosphere entails. In chapter one we will look into the conditions under which atmosphere may be perceived. Subsequently we will look into the atmospheric dimension in relation to the design process, and finally we will explore its relation to the architectural realm.
Atmosphere by definition, seems to lack definition. This inherent paradox will echo throughout this research on how to construct atmosphere. The very act of analysing and defining the atmospheric phenomenon may result in the dissolution of its very quality. Therefore the research approach is built around the duality between an analytic and an intuitive approach. Even though the main body of this research considers a theoretical exploration of the atmospheric dimension in architectural design, I have sincerely attempted to protect the ambiguous quality and integrity of the atmospheric phenomenon. However in order to counteract this theoretical and analytical approach and to appreciate the personal, ephemeral and ambiguous qualities of an atmospheric experience I simultaneously kept a so-called atmospheric journal. This highly personal document, called Encountering Atmosphere - a personal account of the atmospheric dimension, contains memories, observations and encounters of atmospheric experiences. A multiplicity of sketches, images and words illustrate the way matter, light, rhythm, age, imperfection, fragility and life move me to evoke a rich emotive response to space and matter that seems to be the essence of atmosphere.
Furthermore, I aim to integrate the acquired knowledge on the integration of atmospheric quality in the design of the built environment in the subsequent design project of my graduation. I aim to have absorbed the acquired theoretical knowledge on this topic in a way that makes it part of the subconscious dimension of the design process, ultimately allowing me to intuitively integrate atmospheric quality in my own architectural design. My search for the integration of atmospheric quality in the design of architecture and the built environment will not end at the closing of this document, but will continue as I explore its application during my own design process. I aspire both the research project and the design project to accumulate the knowledge and experience to provide me, and hopefully others, to find the essence of the atmospheric dimension in architectural design.