Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
1 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
Home
Back to "articles"
[Originally published as in Building and Dwelling [Bauen und Wohnen],
edited by Eduard Fhr. Munich, Germany: Waxmann Verlag GmbH; New
York: Waxmann, 2000, pp. 189-202; to see other articles in this collection,
which originally appeared on the Web, go to: http://www.theo.tu-cottbus.de
/Wolke/eng/Subjects/982/Seamon/seamon_t.html
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
2 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
3 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
4 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
It is this need for lettingbe in designing and understanding that marks the
value of Thiis-Evensen and Alexander's work for a deeper, more grounded,
understanding of dwelling. Both architects seek concrete means for
identifying and describing built qualities that sustain and strengthen the
quality of dwelling. Through evoking one style of sparing and preserving,
Thiis-Evensen and Alexander provide ways to see and think more clearly,
which, in turn, might lead to better designing and building.
A PHENOMENOLOGY OF ARCHITECTURAL FORM
Norwegian architect Thomas Thiis-Evensen's Archetypes in Architecture
goes far in developing a language of architectural elements as they have
relation to dwelling (Thiis-Evensen 1987).1 Thiis-Evensen's aim is to
understand "the universality of architectural expression" (ibid., 8). His
vehicle is what he calls architectural archetypesthe most basic elements
of architecture," which for Thiis-Evensen can be identified as the floor,
wall, and roof (ibid.). Thiis-Evensen argues that these three architectural
elements are not arbitrary but, rather, are common to all historical and
cultural traditions. The essential existential ground of floor, wall, and roof,
he argues, is the relationship between inside and outside. Just by being
what they are, the floor, wall, and roof automatically create an inside in the
midst of an outside, though in different ways: the floor, through above and
beneath; the wall, through within and around; and the roof, through over
and below.
Using examples from architectural history as evidence, Thiis-Evensen
argues that any building can be interpreted experientially in terms of these
three archetypes. His main purpose is to describe the kinds of
environmental and architectural experience that different variations of
floor, wall, and roof sustain and presuppose. The result, he claims, is "a
common language of [architectural] form which we can immediately
understand, regardless of individual or culture" (ibid., 17).
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
5 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
6 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
can dwell. In addition, varying physical qualities of floors, walls, and roofs
lead to different experiences of motion, weight, and substance. The result is
an intricate set of tensions between architectural elements and architectural
experience:
What is it that the roof, the floor and the wall do? As a motion, the
roof rises or falls. The walls stand up or sink, the floor spreads out,
climbs or descends. In this way, weight is also implied. That which
rises is light, that which falls is heavy. And if the roof is bright and
soft as a sail, it is open. If it is dark and of stone, it is closed. If the
openings in a wall are tall and narrow, they ascend, if they are short
and wide, they sink. A soft and fine floor is warm and open, but if it
is hard and coarse, it closes and is heavy ( ibid., 23).
THE WALL AND WINDOW AS EXAMPLES
In the three main sections of Archetypes, Thiis-Evensen examines the ways
through motion, weight, and substance that floors, walls, and roofs express
insideness and outsideness. This work marks the start toward a descriptive
language delineating the invariant elements of the built environment that
have significance for human experience and dwelling.
One example is Thiis-Evensen's explication of the wall, which, of the three
archetypes, he shows to reconcile most potently the relationship between
inside and outside, since it is by way of the wall that one "passes through"
between exterior and interior, either physically or visually through doors
and windows. The wall resolves the existential tension between inside and
outside in two ways: either the wall draws exterior space inside, or the wall
draws interior space outside. In turn, this degree of penetration from inside
to outside or vice versa can vary: on one hand, there can be complete
openness and invitation; on the other hand, there can be complete closure
and rejection.
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
7 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
One way in which the wall expresses this dialectic between openness and
closure is through its windows, which are said by Thiis-Evensen to
contribute to a building's sense of inside and outside in that they announce
the mode of life within the building. Windows are "always an expression of
the interior to the world at large" (ibid., 251):
While the door is determined by its relation to what is outside, the
window is the symbol of what is inside. Just like the eye, it
expresses the interior's outlook over exterior space.... (ibid.).
Thiis-Evensen points out that a window is much more than a wall opening:
a window that is only a gaping hole makes the wall "a lifeless skin around
a dead and empty interior" (ibid., 259). In clarifying how windows actually
give life to a building, he examines the parts of a window-the opening, the
face in the opening, and the frame around the opening. He then considers
how each of these components contributes to a sense of insideness and
outsideness.
For example, the frame of a window is important because it makes a setting
for the inside space and brings it toward the viewer on the outside. If the
window has no frame, the outside forces its way in. The frame is important,
therefore, because it leads the inside out. This "leading out" occurs in
varying ways, depending on what parts of the frame-sill, lintel, and
jambs-are emphasized or deemphasized (figure 1). If all its parts are
emphasized (a in figure 1), then the entire interior space seems to reach
outward. On the other hand, if only the lintel is highlighted, then an upward
movement and roofs take precedence (b); or, if only the sill is highlighted,
a sinking movement and floors take precedence (c). In addition, the sense
of movement for a wall as a whole can be affected by the arrangement of
window frames (figures 2 & 3).
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
8 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
Figures 1, 2 & 3
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
9 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
10 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
11 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
In his explication of the floor, wall, and roof, Thiis-Evensen assumes that
there are various shared existential qualities-insideness-outsideness,
gravity-levity, coldness-warmth, and so forth-that mark the foundation of
architecture. Thus, a wall with windows whose lintels are emphasized
suggests a sense of upward movement and levity, just as a wall with
windows whose sills are emphasized will feel heavier and in relationship to
the ground. Or, if one studies the experienced qualities of stairs, one
realizes that narrow stairs typically relate to privacy and a faster ascent,
whereas wide stairs often relate to publicness, ceremony, and a slower
pace. Similarly, steep stairs express struggle and strength, isolation and
survival--experienced qualities that frequently lead to steep stairs' use as a
sacred symbol, as in Mayan temples or Rome's Scala Santa. On the other
hand, shallow stairs encourage a calm, comfortable pace and typically
involve secular use, as, for example, Michelangelo's steps leading up to the
Campidoglio of Rome's Capitoline Hill (ibid., 89-103).
Thiis-Evensen argues that his work has direct design implications. He
claims, that, too often, an architect's aesthetic sense is subjective because
he or she has not thoughtfully considered how architectural forms arise
from and translate themselves back into shared existential qualities like
motion, weight, substance, insideness, outsideness, permeability, closure,
and so forth. Thiis-Evensen believes that understanding the archetypes
and their expressive potentialities is essential when [a design] vision is to
be turned into a realization" (ibid., 387). The result might be a building
whose formal qualities resonate with its practical needs. The possibility
becomes greater that human beings and their built world are reconciled and
the quality of dwelling strengthened.
CHRISTOPHER ALEXANDER AND PATTERN LANGUAGE
This reconciliation between people and their built world is also a major aim
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
12 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
13 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
14 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
a pattern language that begins with larger patterns and then incorporates
smaller patterns. In this way, the larger qualities of environmental
wholeness are held in sight as smaller qualities are fitted around them. He
also emphasizes that the 253 patterns in Pattern Language are illustrative
and far from complete. New design problems and environments may
require revised patterns or even entirely new patterns that the architect will
need to create from scratch (e.g., Coates and Seamon, 1993). In the end,
pattern language is not a finished product but an on-going process of
dialogue among architect, client, user, builder, and site. Pattern language is
not a master list of unchangeable design principles that must be
incorporated in all buildings and places. Instead, it is a way of looking at
and thinking about buildings and environments so that one can better
understand how their parts might work together to create a whole. As
Alexander (1987, p. 16) explains,
Design must be premised on a process that has the creation of
wholeness as its overriding purpose, and in which every increment
of construction, no matter how small, is devoted to this purpose.
ASPECTS OF AN ARCHITECTURE OF DWELLING
Like Heidegger, both Thiis-Evensen and Alexander believe that the built
world can help illuminate and sustain essential qualities of human
understanding, life, and experience, though the two architects thinking is
somewhat different as to what these essential qualities are. Alexander
would no doubt appreciate Thiis-Evensen's effort to understand
architectural elements existentially, but he might ask that Thiis-Evensen
give more attention to how individual archetypes join together into a larger
sense of human meaning, environment, and place. For example, Alexander
would probably accept Thiis-Evensen's interpretation of the way that
architectural qualities support a sense of insideness and outsideness, but he
would also emphasize that these architectural qualities are of little use if
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
15 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
16 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
17 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
dwelling, only then can we build. The work of both architects helps us
better to dwell because they help us better to see one part of our
worldthe way that architecture can contribute to human being-in-theworld. In different ways, both architects seek a virtuous circle in which
people and world, thinking and designing, designing and building are all
mutually supportive. In this sense, Heidegger would no doubt cheer these
works, seeing them as a pragmatic complement to the larger philosophical
questions that he reopens in his own writings.
NOTE
1. Thiis-Evensen's book is a rewritten version of his 1982 doctoral
dissertation done under the direction of Norwegian architect and
architectural theorist Christian Norberg-Schulz, one of the major figures in
developing a phenomenology of architecture and environment. Though not
discussed here, Norberg-Schulz's work also draws centrally on Heideggers
thinking and is another major contribution to grounding Heideggers notion
of dwelling practically. See Norberg-Schulz, 1971, 1980, 1985, 1988.
REFERENCES
Alexander, C., 1987. A New Theory of Urban Design. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Alexander, C., 1993. A Foreshadowing of 21st Century Art: The Color and
Geometry of Very Early Turkish Carpets. NY: Oxford University
Press.
Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M. 1977. A Pattern Language.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Chaffin, V. F. 1989. Dwelling and Rhythm: The Isle Brevelle as a
Landscape of Home. Landscape Journal, 7: 96-106.
Coates, G. J., and Seamon, D., 1993. Promoting a Foundational Ecology
Practically Through Christopher Alexanders Pattern Language: The
16/11/2015 09:42
New Page 0
18 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
New Page 0
19 di 19
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/heidegger.htm
16/11/2015 09:42