Dissertation - Breanna Wallace

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors?

BREANNA WALLACE

Bachelor of Interior Architecture Final Year Dissertation – INTA 2411 UNSW Built Environment University of New South Wales Australia 2019

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

Table of Contents ABSTRACT: ............................................................................................................................................................ 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ............................................................................................................................................ 5 INTRODUCTION:...................................................................................................................................................... 6 CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ON PHENOMENOLOGY AND TECHNOLOGY IN INTERIOR SPACE ............................................. 8 1.0 Multi-sensory Design and Phenomenology in Architecture ..................................................................... 8 1.1 The Extended Senses .............................................................................................................................. 10 1.2 The Need for a Multi-sensory Experience .............................................................................................. 11 1.3 An Imbalance of Senses ......................................................................................................................... 12 1.4 Role of Technology................................................................................................................................. 13 1.5 Computation .......................................................................................................................................... 13 1.6 Incorporation of Technology in Space.................................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER 2: THE TECHNO-SENSORY SPACE; INTEGRATING TECHNOLOGY INTO MULTI-SENSORY DESIGN ................................. 18 2.0 Integrating technology in space ............................................................................................................ 19 2.1 Human Perception of Technology in Space ............................................................................................ 20 2.2 Competing Perspectives and the Hyper-body ........................................................................................ 23 CHAPTER 3: CASE STUDIES...................................................................................................................................... 27 3.1 The d’Arenburg Cube ............................................................................................................................. 28 3.2 Leafy Shade ............................................................................................................................................ 33 3.3 Fun Palace.............................................................................................................................................. 35 CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................................ 40 REFERENCE LIST: ................................................................................................................................................... 42

2

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

Abstract: Exploring the impact of contemporary technologies on multi-sensory space this dissertation explores its current involvement in ocularcentric experiences as well as its potential to impact on our other senses.

It argues that incorporating current and future technology into our designs has the potential to heighten our spatial experience if careful consideration is taken to ensure that technology is incorporated into the spatial design rather than as a feature added as an afterthought which has the potential to leave visitors with an unpleasant experience.

Through three chapters the dissertation will attempt to argue that incorporating future technology into our designs has the potential to heighten our spatial experience if careful consideration is taken to ensure that technology is incorporated into the spatial design rather than as a feature added as an afterthought which has the potential to leave visitors with an unpleasant experience.

3

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

Acknowledgements:

I would like to thank Belinda Dunstan for her unwavering support and encouragement through the development of this dissertation.

To Dr Sing d’Arcy for his advice, support and passionate attitude towards architectural theory and academia.

To Vanessa Huolohan, Jose Siccion and Donna Helm for their constant companionship, support and reassurance through this process.

And to my mother, always my love.

4

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

Introduction:

This dissertation seeks to discuss the impact of contemporary technologies on sensory space exploring its current involvement in ocularcentric experiences as well as its potential to impact on our other senses. Could further incorporation of technology into sensorial schemes help or hinder our experience of space?

It will argue that incorporating future technology into our designs has the potential to heighten our spatial experience if careful consideration is taken to ensure that technology is incorporated into the spatial design rather than as a feature added as an afterthought which has the potential to leave visitors with an unpleasant experience.

Through three chapters the dissertation will attempt to argue that incorporating future technology into our designs has the potential to heighten our spatial experience if careful consideration is taken to ensure that technology is incorporated into the spatial design rather than as a feature added as an afterthought which has the potential to leave visitors with an unpleasant experience.

Firstly, an exploration of past and current literature from theorists on Multi-sensory design and the role of technology and multi-sensory design in the Modern realm will provide a foundation for which this argument will be grounded in. It will also discuss the prominence of ocularcentrism in our current architectural designs due to a rise of social media as a prominently visual and audio platform.

Further exploration of technology and multi-sensory design as combined elements will be undertaken with an inspection of the hyper-body as a potential architectural style opposing

5

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

concerns from prominent theorists in Chapter 2. It will also acknowledge the effect of previous technology on our current perception of technology in interior spaces.

Finally, three case studies will seek to demonstrate prime examples of multi-sensory design that incorporates the use of technology in the design phase and eventual experience. It will reveal that the contemporary buildings of today are not perfect, however, they display leading edge ideas and ways to utilise modern technology with theories and design conceived conceptually before modern technology existed.

Ultimately, a conclusion based on contrasting theories and case studies will be made to answer the question: could further incorporation of technology into sensorial schemes help or hinder our experience of space?

6

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

Chapter 1: Literature Review on Phenomenology and Technology in Interior Space

To explore the impact of emerging technologies in sensory schemes and understand its potential to enrich our experience of space, we must first understand multi-sensory design and notions of phenomenology as discussed by notable early theorists on phenomenology including German Philosophers Edmond Husserl (b. 1859 – d. 1938), Martin Heidegger (b.1889 – d. 1976) and French Philosopher Maurice Merlau-Ponty (b. 1908 – d. 1961) alongside modern theorists on the importance of the senses, the rise of ocularcentrism and phenomenology in architecture Juhani Pallasmaa, Peter Zumthor and Steven Holl. Secondly, the role of technology in contemporary architecture through a theoretical lens will be examined both before construction in the effect of computation and after, in a multisensory spatial experience.

1.0 Multi-sensory Design and Phenomenology in Architecture

Multi-sensory design, or design that keeps sensory experience at the core of its development takes into consideration not only the five senses, seeing, feeling, hearing, tasting and smelling but also three other factors; kinaesthesia, synaesthesia and hapticity.

Explored later, these factors transform a two-dimension sensory experience into a third dimension that harbours movement, emotion and feeling.

7

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

A concept developed initially by Edmond Husserl (b. 1859 – d. 1938) and Martin Heidegger (b.1889 – d. 1976) in a series of articles between 1932 and 1950 but popularised by Maurice Merleau-Ponty (b. 1908 – d. 1961) is that ‘the body and the space are one entity’ (Seamon, 2010). This differed from the Cartesian Dualism Philosophy that developed off work stemming from Rene Descartes (b. 1959 – d. 1650 that space and the body are separate, mutually influencing and shaping each other (Peperzak, 1983). Within Merleau-Ponty’s philosophy he explored aspects of human perception through “a lived dynamic between [the] perceptual body and [the] world” (Seamon, 2010). Merleau-Ponty claims that it is this perceptual body that allows us to distinguish the cold, heavy hardness of stone, the warm textured wood or the cool clinical smoothness of a touch screen from each other, through each sense alone (Moran, 2000). Elements within space evoke their individual experiential qualities that our living body interprets those factors mentioned afore (Tamari, 2016). These elements are often referred to in architecture as the ‘weight’ of a space (Seamon, 2010).

According to Merleau-Ponty (2010) and reaffirmed later by Seaman (2010) our experience of space is not as individual sensory outputs (Merleau-Ponty, 1962). Rather, space is experienced in a cohesive perception of these senses through the consciousness of the vessel. As Seaman states “the senses intermingle and mutually resonate” with one another to create this conscious perception (Seamon, 2010). However, this view is lost in parts with later interpretations from modern theorists including architect and theorist Steven Holl (b.

1947) not as clearly linking the senses as one cohesive perceptual entity.

Key to the contemporary understanding of the phenomenology of architecture and the senses is Finnish Architect and Philosopher Juhani Pallasmaa (b. 1936). Discussing elements of spatial experience in The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses (2012), Pallasmaa

8

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

considers the power of the lesser considered senses, sound, touch and smell in developing dynamic spaces and highlights the current bias in the hierarchy of the senses skewed towards an ocularcentric experience. Key to his theory Pallasmaa (2012) argues that if we don’t urgently reconsider our relationship to reality and the power of architecture to change this relationship we will end with the disturbing “de-sensualisation and de-erothisation of human relationships to reality” which ultimately will epitomises the necessity of sensory design and its future in a technologically run future.

1.1 The Extended Senses

The systematic concepts of Kinaesthesia, Synaesthesia and Hapticity also have a significant role in our experience of multi-sensory space. As discussed in Technology and the Senses: Multi-sensory Design in the Digital Age (2010) by Rebecca Breffeilh they each play an integral role in the experiencer’s ability to process and comprehend space. Put simply, “these systems take the five senses and reformulate them into an active inclusive system that directly impacts the experience of architecture” (Breffeilh, 2010).

As Breffeilh describes, senses are merely used to mentally develop the extents of physical space, but our actual emotional and intellectual experience of space according to Breffeilh (2010) and lecturer Kamiel Van Kreij (2008) is formed through hapticity – our three dimensional comprehension of physical touch, kinaesthesia – the experience of physical space through movement as affected by hapticity similar to the activity of parkour that essentially sees people experience the urban landscape through movement and

9

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

synaesthesia – the phenomena that collects and processes information eventually transferring it to others (Breffeilh, 2010). Even further from these extended senses are concepts such as the vestibular sense (Wraith, 2011) and the proprioceptive sense (Oosterhuis, 2003).

1.2 The Need for a Multi-sensory Experience What has yet to be discussed is the importance of designing a sensory feast and why designers should always consider senses other than sight when designing, especially in consideration of the rise in technology imbedded in our daily lives as Maria Ferreira discusses in her thesis A Phenomenological approach to computation to explore empathy through architecture (2012). Our bodies depend on both mental and physical sensory stimulation to ensure a healthy balance between digital cyber space- or that time spent on phones or digital devices and physical presence. Hyper stimulation in the cyber space particularly in the ocular and occasionally aural senses leave the sensory aspects in the physical space imbalanced. As discussed, Pallasmaa’s (2012) argument that if we don’t reconsider our human relationship to reality and the position of architecture to alter this relationship we will end with a disturbing de-sensualised and de-eroticised level of relationship to reality ultimately meaning that if we limit our bodies to only one form of stimulation i.e. visual, with only limited bodily movements coming from our hands; we risk not only eroding our relationship with spatial reality but also have the potential to increase the risk of serious medical conditions such as, depression, insomnia, diabetes and increased stress (Ferreira, 2012). These conditions stemming from the hyperstimulation in digital space are becoming more prevalent in youth who have grown up in the ‘digital age’ and are

10

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

rarely switched off from our visual existence further compounding the need for a methodology revolution (Ferreira, 2012).

1.3 An Imbalance of Senses

Currently in architecture most spaces are considered ocularcentric; valuing the ‘look’ over the holistic experience and expressing the visual narrative over an entire sensory narrative (Ferreira, 2012). The clean, sharp architectural elements found in today’s interiors express what Ferreira labels “the dehumanisation of contemporary architecture” which “can be understood as a consequence of a neglect of the body and the senses… an imbalance in our sensory system [driving] today’s growing experience of alienation and loneliness”(2012).

Discussions in this region of research also consider the importance of body in relation to space. A concept explored by Jose Gill, translated by Ferreira determines that the body creates forms in space with its own movement that reflect either emotions or intentions both consciously and unconsciously (Ferreira, 2012). An example given of this describes sadness making a place feel ‘small’ or an ecstatic personal may ‘fill’ a whole room (Ferreira, 2012). From this it has been discussed by Ferreira, that if the movement of our bodies has the potential to reflect emotions and if movement generates physical space, then it is possible to design space from a place of emotion and develop an emotional effect in future experiencers that can be expressed through a process of empathy in the reactions of their body and behaviour (Ferreira, 2012). In simpler terms, this means it is possible, even on a subliminal level to alter people’s emotions and behaviours through design (Silva et al., 2015). Even further from engaging the body in movement to affect user experience, 11

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

engaging other elemental senses along with elements which affect emotions such as colour, texture or temperature, has the potential to create in theory a heightened holistic sensory experience (Silva et al., 2015).

1.4 Role of Technology

Unlike the more philosophical engagement of the senses into spatial design, the role of technology in contemporary space is a more tangible physical presence. As discussed individually, technology has two main aspects attached to it that have both direct and indirect effects on the spatial experience of visitors in interiors. The first being the more indirect impact of computation software used in the design development stage of space before its construction (Ferreira, 2012) and the second being the direct integration of technology into dwelling space (Oosterhuis, 2003).

1.5 Computation

Design Computation has a significant role in the design of structures today. Far removed from the wholly pen and paper method before computer aided design became available, the architects and designers of today have the potential to push designs further and faster than they ever have before (Pallasmaa, 2017). Parametric modelling is commonplace and three-dimensional visuals of designs can be as simple to generate as a click of a button 12

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

depending on which program one uses. However, there are limitations to every piece of software (Ferreira, 2012). Identified in essay A Phenomenological approach to computation to explore empathy through architecture (Ferreira, 2012) the actual level of design produced varies greatly between complexity of programs used with simpler computer aided design (CAD) programs such as AutoCAD, or Google Sketchup (a 3D modeller) producing overall simpler designs especially in curved and detailed forms than more advanced programs such as building information modeller (BIM) programs ArchiCAD, Rhino and Revit. A different type of design thinking is used with these programs (Ferreira, 2012). There is much less consideration of the body in relation to proposed space and more interest in the functionality and cost effectiveness of design (Tamari, 2016).

Here also, we may briefly discuss the effect of computation in social media platforms and its effect on sensorial space creating the rise of “media generated architecture” (Breffeilh, 2010). Current social media platforms including Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, YouTube and Pinterest have had a profound effect on the spaces that have been designed in recent times (Ferreira, 2012). Instagram in particular, a platform catering for a variety of differing interests provides a space to display and share a curated feed of images. Each image is carefully edited and tailored to meld into a particular feed’s ethos; the aim, for many ‘influencers’, is to stand out and gain more ‘followers’. With the limitations of technology as it currently is, only visual and audio experiences can be shared; the feel, smell, atmosphere and weight of the experience of a place is completely lost in a singular image posted on a feed (Silva et al., 2015). The problem for design in architecture then is that with this being the case, architects and interior architects are inadvertently led to produce exciting or profound visual experiences that can be framed in a square for a phone screen (Santayana,

13

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

2012). Whilst fantastic visually, this can leave spaces with sensory elements other than its visual presence all but neglected (Oosterhuis, 2003). The focus of visual stimuli over the other senses expresses “the superficiality of media culture and some architecture” with a significant number of architectural works now being designed with only visual experience in mind (Ferreira, 2012).

1.6 Incorporation of Technology in Space

As mentioned afore, technology plays a role in interior space during both the computation phase and after construction. The current incorporation of technology in our spatial world lies in two aspects, the first being in hidden systems generally for more functional programs that analyse and monitor surrounds for changes and adjust accordingly for auxiliary systems to subsequently work from (Ghaffarian Hoseini, 2013) an example of this would be the technology found in ‘smart homes’ that monitor energy, water and food consumption of the house or in a larger commercial scale the use of photovoltaic cells in double-curved glass as seen with Zaha Hadid Architects’ design of the Kazakhstan Pavilion for the 2017 EXPO (Ghaffarian Hoseini, 2013). The second use of technology in space commonly exists in a front of house scene providing elements that can assist in the spatial experience of an interior whether it is a more practical experience in terms of orientation and wayfinding in a seamless way or a more experiential sensory experience as seen in the 2018 installation “The Night. Reimagined.” (see fig 1 & 2) Samsung’s light and sound installation at the Sydney Opera House forecourt for the 2018 Vivid Sydney light festival where visitors could

14

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

walk through a tunnel filled with 2km of LED light strips that changed colour and pattern along to music (Leo Burnett, 2018).

Figure 1: The Night. Reimagined, Sydney Opera House Forecourt, 2018 <https://www.vividsydney.com/event/light/nightreimagined>

Figure 2: The Night. Reimagined, Sydney Opera House Forecourt, 2018 <https://www.vividsydney.com/event/light/night-reimagined>

In some wayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s contrary to Multi-sensory Design in its importance for the sensory wellbeing of inhabitants, Modern Technology has a significant established role in todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s society. In this examination of the roles of multi-sensory design and technology in contemporary architecture it is clear that each spatial element has the ability to positively influence and enrich human perception of interior space in some capacity. A consideration of Past and Modern theorists has revealed a general praise for multi-sensory design but have somewhat criticised the rise of ocularcentric designs popularised by modern social media platforms. In addition to this, an exploration of the role of technology exposed two modes of influence on contemporary architecture; direct and indirect impacts.

However, these elements have only been examined independently of each other. With multi-sensory design tending towards qualities that evoke natural human responses,

15

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Breanna Wallace

modern technology has the potential to overshadow these qualities. Further discussion on the effect of integrating these elements will take place in Chapter 2 where a consideration of how humans perceive technology in space presents a challenge for architectural design but could also provide opportunities for further integration to enrich human perception.

16

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Breanna Wallace

Chapter 2: The Techno-sensory Space; Integrating technology into Multisensory Design

Seeking to unpack theories for what stands as a successful integration of technology into sensory designed schemes, Chapter 2 will consider potential challenges and opportunities for technological integration and will ultimately argue that successful integration comes from initial design as well as the final outcome to engender an enriched experience for visitors.

As society progresses further into a world driven by modern technology and its rapid advancements there stands the challenge of integrating technology into our Modern Architecture (Fairburn, 2003). Discussed later within this Chapter, the implementation of technology in interiors in the digital age has often been seen to overshadow the effects of a multi-sensory design experience (Kreij, 2008) and further grounds the status of the ocularcentric space (Pallasmaa, 2017). It will be argued that itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the lack of careful integration of modern technology that leaves a lacklustre experience for visitors in space instead of an incompatibility of multi-sensory design and technology as spatial influencing elements.

17

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

2.0 Integrating technology in space

The integration of technology in sensory space has been discussed in elements by notable theorists including Edmond Husserl and Martin Heidegger who developed their theories individually in a series of articles between 1932 and 1950, Heidegger in his 1936 lecture warns that the inclusion of technology in sensory space has the potential to create a rift between design aesthetics and culture (Peperzak, 1983). In Saedieh Feizi Azarshahr’s New Technologies in Modern Architecture and its Interaction with Traditional Architecture this sentiment was shared with Heidegger claiming that “modern technology has had a role in eradicating the identity and the importance of [intimate space]” (Azarshahr, 2013). Perhaps a challenge for the integration of technology is our own changing “perception of space”, the dynamic nature of spatial perception varies both between individuals and within one’s own perception “continuously changing by various extents” (Kreij, 2008).

Similarly, Juhani Pallasmaa in his works The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses (1996) and The Thinking Hand: Existential and Embodied Wisdom in Architecture (2009) he considers his perspective on sensory design alongside the rise of technology and its connection to notions of phenomenology that layers elements of emotion derived from light, shadow, material and perception into our spatial experience over the more tangible elements of the built solid form (Pallasmaa, 2012). In essence, the deliberate tying of tangible and intangible elements generates the spatial experience we perceive that is unique to each individual, and in turn human perception influences form and function in

18

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

multiple aspects of circulation and program to produce what one may call ‘sensory architecture’ (Pallasmaa, 2017).

Whilst Ferreira argues that the advancement of computation has allowed for an array of complex architectural ideas to be formed she agrees with Pallasmaa in his view that handdrawing is integral in the comprehension of spatial and haptic elements of architectural design (Pallasmaa, 2017: 97) over a wholly digital design process in the modern age. In addition to this, Pallasmaa argues that the introduction of modern computation technologies has and may continue to ignore our other ‘sensory nodes’ and further our ocularcentric determination of space (Pallasmaa, 2017: 98).

2.1 Human Perception of Technology in Space

The tenuous relationship between human perception, technology and space as well as the necessity of maintaining a balance between these elements to harbour an experience that allows the body to connect and respond to elements in space is discussed in (Breffeilh, 2010). Technology should be used as an aid in the experience of space over the current tendency to use modern technology as a gimmick or introduced as an afterthought (Breffeilh, 2010). In this way, the seamless integration of technology into sensory architecture is integral is the creation of a positive experience.

It is this factor in the integration of technology in space that has in part presented the slight difference in opinion between theorists. The divide comes between those who see

19

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

technology as a potential detriment to the design practice (Pallasmaa, 2017) and eventual spatial experience and those who take the position that when integrated with care throughout the design process, with care technology has the potential to stimulate our senses and positively affect the experience of space (Ferreira, 2012).

As academic Ghaffararian Hoseini claims, people’s perception of technology is negatively affected if technology mis-performs even if only in one instance (2013). This mentality, according to (Ferreira, 2012) developed out of a predisposed negative perception of technology cultivated from when modern digital technologies were first introduced in design and architecture. An example of this as discussed in The Essence of Future Smart Homes (Ghaffarian Hoseini, 2013) is the introduction of Smart Screens into classrooms. The lack of awareness and practical knowledge of newer technology left a barrier to the seamless integration of technology (Ghaffarian Hoseini, 2013). If people do not understand how to utilise technology, they are more likely to view it as ‘bad’ or ‘faulty’ by their own incompetence and often see it as something to avoid (Ghaffarian Hoseini, 2013). This set a precedent for the poor integration of modern technology and is compounded with the significant risk and cost associated with technology that constantly sways human perception of technology (Ghaffarian Hoseini, 2013). The gap between the technology available on market and what consumers are exposed to as ‘possible’ through media outlets is significant and leads to an even larger gap between ‘affordable’ technology and wider consumer expectations (Ferreira, 2012). With these barriers, the integration of technology into design and architecture is vastly harder; however, with the rate of development there is the aforementioned risk that the technology may already be obsolete or superseded, in which

20

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

case, one can and often does question the purpose of taking the risk and wasting money to integrate technology into design (Ghaffarian Hoseini, 2013).

Whilst, people’s perception of the technology we have currently and have had previously is a challenge for the incorporation of technology into future architectural pieces, ultimately, with our progression further in the information age the integration of technology is ever more inevitable (Silva et al., 2015). Until recently, sensory experiences haven’t had much consideration due to the competing philosophies in architecture from the Cartesian Dualism Philosophy to Rationalism – the philosophy that every problem can be solved with rational solutions over emotional response - and further from that, variances in Multi-sensory Design Philosophy. However, there has been a resurgence of phenomenology and multisensory architecture through a revival of phenomenological theory by modern theorists, most notably Juhani Pallasmaa and Steven Holl as well as an influx of modern technology with the ability to alter sensory experiences (Tamari, 2016). New technology in computation includes new developments in software technology such as developing software River Fox that allows for real-time design in a 3D visualisation of space which has enabled a faster transition between CAD model and VR technology (Ferreira, 2012). This development has advanced processes in design and provided the possibility for spatial architects to design in 3D with relation to space and the body. In addition to this, developing sensory augmentation devices that have the ability to alter how we perceive individual senses including visual altering goggles (Auvray and Myin, 2009) and audio changing headsets (Bertram et al., 2013). These devices, although new and strange could lead to a realm only found in film till now. With these devises the world of body modification and upgrades

21

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

looms one step closer and raises ethical questions to be answered in the future (Auvray and Myin, 2009).

2.2 Competing Perspectives and the Hyper-body

Whilst, Pallasmaa and Silva et al. see the inclusion of technology as a challenge with the potential to be detrimental to our personal need for sensory stimulation and quality spatial experience Ferreira and Breffeilh argue that technology in space is integral to the future of civic space. With theorists at both ends of the spectrum, what can be agreed upon is that when there is thoughtful consideration and care towards the integration of technology in sensory spaces it has the potential to enrich our experience of interiors as well as provide the sensory stimulation our human bodies need to exist healthily both mentally and physically.

As discussed by Dutch architect Kas Oosterhuis, modern production technology and techniques, mass production is no longer the standard means of design producing catalogue copies of singular designs, rather, mass customisation has become the flavour of interior architecture and design (2003). Formerly following the guides of linear industrial production methods and constructing our world from there is now the ability to produce interiors customised to architects’ specifications (Oosterhuis, 2003). The concept of the ‘hyper-body’ imagines buildings and other products “as running processes in real time” with humans being part of those processes (Oosterhuis, 2003). Interactions through sensory nodes, particularly in the haptic and visual senses where they are pushing, pulling, triggering, opening, closing, comprehending and controlling elements throughout interior space 22

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

determine that humans become the switches (Oosterhuis and Bier, 2019). In this way, human’s form part of the information flow of the technology that is imbedded in our modern civic architecture (Oosterhuis, 2003). Notions of connections between humans, between body and space and between the body and the interface arise and provide an outlet for sensory schemes to intertwine with technology.

An interesting hyper-body concept space designed and discussed by Oosterhuis intended for a space station module, Oosterhuis (2001) explores the possibilities of integrating technology into astronauts’ lives by tapping into how they perceive space. The eventual design proposed a module sleeved in LCD screens that could perform both practical tasks and provide much needed sensory stimulation. Stemming from a study of how astronauts orientate themselves in space; touch, sound, directional colour and most importantly smell proved to be the key unconscious markers for astronauts to orientate themselves by (Oosterhuis, 2003). A cognitively driven body intuitive pod, the space is designed to replicate earthly sensory environments and heighten spatial related emotions unique to each individual through LCD panels that are responsive to human interaction and stored data (Oosterhuis, 2003). Consequently, this hyper-body space has no set finish due to the constantly active electronic skin (Oosterhuis, 2003) displaying real-time data of earth’s breaking news, weather, images, commercial ad breaks and heightened visual simulation use humans as its centre point of data. The combination of sensory and technological data simulation enriching astronaut’s spatial perception in a generally unstimulating

23

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

environment. With this in mind, Oosterhuis’ Oosterhuis Space Station Pod is a solid example for the amalgamation between technology and sensory space.

Figure 3: Oosterhuis Space Station Pod Interacting with Surrounds, Conceptual Work ONL Studios, 2001 <http://www.onl.eu/projects/space-station>

Figure 4: Oosterhuis Space Station Pod- Changing Surroundings, Conceptual Work ONL Studios, 2001 <http://www.onl.eu/projects/space-station>

After discussing key theorist’s viewpoints on the integration of technology in sensory schemes, this chapter has exposed human perception and expectations of technology as perhaps the most distinctive challenge for seamless integration. With current available technologies it was found that people were already predisposed to have a negative reaction to technology in space based on previous experiences. Often this led to a negative or a lacklustre experience of technology in architecture and formed a barrier to successful the integration of technology into sensory schemes thus, integration of technology comes from not only seamless physical implementation but mental acceptance from experiencers. From this, new technology for sensory design was discussed briefly; progressing in this direction brings new room for technology to impact human senses. In addition to this, explored in this Chapter was the rise of the ‘hyper-body’ in Contemporary Architecture that uses humans as

24

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Breanna Wallace

part of its technical processes through sensory nodes. The hyper-body seeks to merge sensory schemes with technology into one experience but as discussed with reference to Pallasmaa, our dependence on technology often overshadows tactile hand-drawn methods of design which can negatively impact dwellerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s experience of interiors.

Following this, an examination of three key case studies will explore successful interior schemes that both explicitly and cleverly exhibit instances of success in techno-sensory schemes.

25

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

Chapter 3: Case Studies

As discussed, the need to seamlessly integrate technology into modern multi-sensory design is increasingly crucial to achieving an enriched spatial experience. Chapter 3 will examine post-war and contemporary examples of architectural that demonstrate the possibilities of spatial experience when contemporary technology and multi-sensory design are integrated together and included from conception. The three poignant civic examples to be evaluated in this chapter include “The d’Arenburg Cube” (2017) in South Australia’s McLaren Vale wine region designed by owner Chester Osborne and ADS Architects featuring five levels of sensory stimulation backed by an almost seamless set of technology, A-Asterisk’s office lobby refurbishment “Leafy Shade” (2006) that exemplifies the power of technological computation in the design and production of ephemeral interiors and finally Cedric Price’s conceptual leisure centre design Fun Palace (1964) will be examined which stands as an incredible precedent for the possibilities of technology when combined with multi-sensory design.

3.1 The d’Arenburg Cube

Conceived in 2003 by eccentric fourth-generation and chief winemaker of the d’Arenburg wine company Chester Osborne alongside Nic Salvati of ADS architects, ‘The d’Arenburg Cube’ excites the senses and challenges the boundaries of traditional cellar doors through

26

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

its unique additions to the average wine tasting experience (Chester Osborn & Narrative Marketing, 2018). Winning the 2018’s Good Design Award Winner for Architectural Commercial and Residential Category ‘The d’Arenburg Cube’ or ‘The Cube’ opened in 2017 in South Australia’s popular McLaren Vale wine region as the new centrepiece to expand and provide a larger space for wine tasting and premium wine experiences at the d’Arenburg estate (Good Design Awards Australia, 2018). The glass encased concrete and steel form of the building resembles the iconic shape of a slightly abstracted Rubik’s Cube and is arguably restrained in comparison to its colourful vibrant interior (Good Design Awards Australia, 2018). A five storey multi-function centre ‘The Cube’ houses idiosyncratic additions to the wine tasting experience including an Alternate Realities Museum featuring a Wine Sensory Room, a 360-degree alternate reality experience room, a virtual wine fermenter, a technology paired wine tasting room and a whimsical restaurant pairing wine with experimental food including 3D printed desserts (Osborn, 2019).

Perhaps the most unusual inclusion to the centre, the Alternate Realities Museum on the lower floors of ‘The Cube’ pairs technology with multi-sensory design to engage visitors and enhance their overall experience of the d’Arengburg Estate. The incorporation of smell in the spatial experience of the visitor in the Hypogeum Room links the visually exciting interiors of the museum with the memory of wine, a spatial device similar to that described

by Pallasmaa where “the most persistent memory of any space is often found in smell” in his essay Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses (2012). Motion activated spray nozzles imbedded amongst the flower and fruit covered walls displaying the scents and notes of featured wine themes - flowers and fruits- spray highly curated scents for visitors to ‘experience the wine’ before they enter the wine tasting floor above (Chester Osborn &

27

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

Narrative Marketing, 2018). In addition to this, the added layer of manual interaction with bicycle horns attached to flagons containing distinctive wine flavours create a physical link with the memory of the wine scented notes; develop an effect of the systematic concept of synaesthesia that stores and processes sensory data transferring it onto similar elements (Breffeilh, 2010). Further from this, Pallasmaa suggests that is our tactile touch which “connects us with time and tradition” thus linking the visual, scented and haptic elements with the eventual taste of the wine and memory. In this way, visitors’ enhanced spatial experience transcends from its immediate effect of excitement and childlike wonder to be revived when notes similar to those found from the scents in the sensory rooms are smelled elsewhere be it in the wine tasting room or when drinking wine far removed from the grounds d’Arenburg Estate.

Figure 6: Screen Room, d'Arenburg Cube, 2017 < https://www.who.com.au/darenberg-cube-mclaren-vale>

Figure 4 Sensory Room, d'Arenburg Cube, 2017 < https://www.who.com.au/darenbergcube-mclaren-vale>

28

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

The Alternate Realities Museum also features a vastly popular 360-degree viewing room that explores the journey and experience of wine in a hyper-surrealist way (O’Sullivan, 2017). Initially grounded in reality, this audio-visual experience slowly develops into surreal visuals that abstractly illustrate the experience of d’Arenburg’s wine in the perceived visual experience of owner Chester Osborn (Chester Osborn & Narrative Marketing, 2018). The abstract video pairs with vocal commentary on the experience of wine alongside sound bites of running liquid, proported to be wine to complete the viewing room’s experience (Chester Osborn & Narrative Marketing, 2018). The audio and visual elements combined to create a sense of space and shape in order to widen visitor’s perceptions and gain a sense of immersion in d’Arenburg’s constructed wine culture (Good Design Awards Australia, 2018).

Surreal art experiences in the lower levels open visitors up to similarly unusual practices in the wine tasting room. Whilst perhaps the least unusual floor in the centre, haptic activated screens encased in a Perspex protective casing form the counter and provide information about the wines and respond to human interaction (Chester Osborn & Narrative Marketing, 2018).

The unusual cellar door journey is culminated on the fifth-storey of ‘The d’Arenburg Cube’ which houses the highly experimental restaurant. Utilising newer methods of food technology and combining them with visual and tactile surrounds such as the heavy grained wood of the tables, hard stone plinths that some of the dishes are presented on or the perceived qualities within those elements; warmth from the wood or coolness from the stone to create a holistic immersive experience (Chester Osborn & Narrative Marketing, 2018). The visual and tactile surrounds contrasting with those of the food produced to

29

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

heighten the experience. Developing techniques in the presentation of food, desserts in particular, have allowed for the striking presentation and construction of some intricate deserts; 3D food printing allows for the visitors to experience the food as a spatial element that ultimately directs and controls the visitor’s experience through scented and tasted sensory nodes as described as possible in Pallasmaa’s Eyes of the Skin; Architecture of the Senses (2012: 74). The process of consumption reveals a new appreciation of d’Arenburg’s wines in tandem with more tangible tactile elements found in the interior space (Chester Osborn & Narrative Marketing, 2018). Whilst not a permanent spatial element, this temporal but recurring sensory element affects the dweller’s spatial comprehension of the restaurant and of ‘The Cube’ in this highly curated cellar door experience.

Puzzle-like, The d’Arenburg Cube references the Rubik’s Cube Puzzle form for the structure being an overarching metaphor for the “puzzle of wine” (Chester Osborn & Narrative Marketing, 2018). From this, puzzle like elements are scattered throughout the site and in each interior element working to form part of the brand’s ethos in an abstract way and evoke a sense of wonder. However, this effect is almost removed. Whilst The d’Arenburg Cube stimulates the senses in many ways with the aid of technology the experience is not without flaw. The Alternate Realities Museum app by d’Arenburg aim to mesh the fivestorey experience together utilising location-based technology to present “information about the art installations on display, as well as the sensory and tactile experiences” (d’Arenburg, 2017). Occasionally working, the app is great until mis-performs fundamentally harming in a similar effect to the Smart Boards in Australian schools the overall experience of the holistic d’Arenburg experience (Ghaffarian Hoseini, 2013). Nonetheless, The d’Arenburg Cube makes great progression to a level of design that utilises modern

30

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Breanna Wallace

technologies into sensory schemes seamlessly in most respects and poses as a prime example for the integration of technology into sensorial schemes.

Figure 7 The d'Arenburg Cube, 2017 < https://www.who.com.au/darenberg-cube-mclaren-vale>

Figure 8 3D printed food, d'Arenburg Cube, 2017 < https://www.who.com.au/darenberg-cubemclaren-vale>

31

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Breanna Wallace

3.2 Leafy Shade

Light and shadow, both visual elements that stand alone as factors that define and shape space are important in the development of multi-sensory design. Shadow in particular has the ability to emphasise given light and in turn deepen itself in contrast to the light. Leafy Shade (2006), A-Asteriskâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s redesign of a former hotel lobby into Shanghai Haitai Real Estateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office building entrance utilises light and shadow as spatial elements to draw from the surrounding natural exterior elements and bring them into the interior lobby to create a forest like atmosphere (A-Asterick, 2014). As with Leafy Shade, not all interiors are designed to influence all the senses to achieve a multi-sensory design (Breffeilh, 2010). The focus of light and shadow produces increased stimulation without the need to introduce potentially unappreciated senses such as taste or smell in a space that people are expected to pass through quickly (Kreij, 2008).

Whilst the importance of multi-sensory design has long been established; modern technologies are a much newer element to be introduced into architecture. As a result of this it is vital to utilise past tested methodologies with our current capabilities (Breffeilh, 2010). Introducing newer technologies into design slowly allows for a more transitional acceptance of technology in interior space (Ghaffarian Hoseini, 2013).

Initially a seemingly low-tech space inspired by the shadows of trees, the interior features Glass Fibre Reinforced Gypsum (GFRG) panels over translucent white glass that contrast to from a silhouette of the forest pattern (Fairs, 2008). An innovative material itself, the GFRG panels were cut via CNC router and placed in an organic curved dome to cover the entire back wall and ceiling of the entrance (Paul et al., 2016). The textured surface of the panels 32

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

are in direct contrast to the smooth polished concrete floor, clinical elevator lobby and shining columns that frame the interior space. These uncomplicated additions demonstrate the “possibilities of manufacturing [techniques in allowing] the communication of more abstract qualities of brand and culture” through the integration of the visual elements of light and shadows along with developed manufacturing technology (Gagg, 2011). The space through this process has obtained a sense of ‘wonder’ to what would otherwise be a typical office building thereby enriching workers and visitors experience of public civic space.

Figure 9: Leafy Shade, A-Asterick <https://www.dezeen.com/2008/08/25/leafy-shade-by-aasterisk/>

Figure 10: Leafy Shade, A-Asterick <https://www.dezeen.com/2008/08/25/leafy-shade-by-aasterisk/>

33

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

3.3 Fun Palace

Inspiration for Richard Rogers and Renzo Piano’s Pompidou Centre in Paris in addition to the ongoing influence on prominent architects including Rem Koolhaus and Bernard Tschumi, architect and lecturer Cedric Price’s (b. 1034 d. 2003) conceptual design Fun Palace (1964) explored the possibility of technology as an integral piece in a sensory interior scape as describe by Research Academic Stanley Mathews in his papers The Fun Palace: Cedric Price’s experiment in architecture and technology (2005) and The Fun Palace as Virtual Architecture: Cedric Price and the Practices of Indeterminacy (2006). Ahead of its time but grounded in the social and political milieu of its immediate context the Fun Palace sought to consider the rapidly increasing effect of technology on the way people produce and experience architecture (Mathews, 2006). Introducing technology as a key element of the design and its ability to alter our individual and hive behaviour when exposed to change, Price also introduced layers of ‘techno-scepticism’ that questions human relationship and dependence on technology now and into the future (Mathews, 2005). These concepts in relation to Fun Palace were discussed by Price in numerous lectures, most poignant was his line “Technology is the answer, but what is the question?” in a 1966 lecture to his students which then became the title of one of his critical books in December 1979 (Mathews, 2005).

Further to this, the Fun Palace also addressed a range of contemporary issues of the time such as the emergence of cybernetics, information technology and game theory (Mathews, 2005).

34

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

Designed with input from avant-garde theatre director Joan Littlewood, the Fun Palace sought to house a living leisure centre as a part of a socially interactive machine that broke away from the constricting post-war identity (Smith, 2017). Littlewood’s background as a theatre director meant that most of the architectural gestures leant towards the theatre as a way to comment on the state of society and became a mode for constant change similar to the constant changes of theatrical sets ultimately developing interactive and variable architecture (Smith, 2017). It was in this design that people became performative elements in space, not the audience almost in the form of a large-scale social experiment (Mathews, 2006). Contemporary elements of the time; rotating stairs, elevators, escalators, mechanical ducts and environmental controlling systems like that of smart homes today became spatial defining features of the floor-less design (Mathews, 2006).

The eventual proposed design featured a synthesis of conventional architecture and exaggerated theatre design in collaboration with technological and cybernetic advancements alongside bold, visually impacting colour and architectural gestures to evoke a sense of ‘fun’; the ultimate aim of the leisure design (Mathews, 2006).

Within this, Price sought notions of Virtual Reality (VR) before VR was a developed concept years later (Mathews, 2005). Fantastical techno-sensory elements were proposed for the design with elements of Virtual Reality attached, including suggestions such as: The inhabited universe Why not try a trip around the moon in our realistic space-capsule Simulator?

Captain Nemo’s cabin: An underwater restaurant The grotto of kaleidoscopes The maze of silence 35

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

The cybernetic cinema The fantasy generator Climb the tree of evolution The calligraphic cavern (Mathews, 2005) These wonderous ideas were designed to be experienced through advancements in technology and cybernetics as a part of the living and evolving leisure centre.

As Mathews states in his discussion of Price’s works, the inclusion of technology and cyber advancements in the Fun Palace “were the means, but never the objective”. His “antiaesthetic architectural organism in continuous process” was determined to be an instrument of social development and understanding (Mathews, 2005). Unfortunately, it was the anti-aesthetic nature of the design which eventually became the Fun Palace’s downfall. After being dropped from its proposed location, Price declared the project obsolete in 1975 having lost its importance in the rapidly developing world of post-war architecture where it’s critical components of “impermanence, process, control and interchangeability” had become standard elements of design albeit not on the same scale as Price proposed nor in such a unconventional way (Mathews, 2005). In other words, Price saw that it could no longer “awaken the passive subjects of mass culture to a new consciousness” in the initial intended way (Mathews, 2005). Later revealed by Price as transcribed by Mathews in April 2000 “The Fun Palace wasn’t about technology. It was about the people” (2005).

Although unfortunate that the Fun Palace was never constructed, Price’s concepts ultimately eventuated in a small scale version of the Fun Palace named the InterAction Centre (1976) and in later works by architects such as in Glen J. Santayana’s “Of the Senses” 36

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

(2012) a conceptual technology and senses centre that explores the ‘building of the future’ ultimately proving the importance of integrating contemporary technology with sensory design to excite and stimulate visitors. Thus, whilst Price’s architectural works and theories have been contested over time due to their fantastical nature, his provocative Fun Palace and subsequent works that followed illustrate the poignant relevancy of his concepts in contemporary society.

These examples have provided a broad case for the integration of technology into modern civic spaces. Determining that technology must be integrated carefully with sensory design so as not to overshadow subtle nuances of design and that concepts explored in Chapter 1 still have relevancy in modern society.

37

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Breanna Wallace

Figure 11: Fun Palace, Cedric Price < https://www.moma.org/collection/works/845>

Figure 12: Figure 11: Fun Palace Interior, Cedric Price < https://www.moma.org/collection/works/845>

38

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

Conclusion

Throughout the three chapters a discussion on varying theorist’s positions on multi-sensory design and contemporary technologies individually and in tandem with each other producing conflicting theories and arguments. An understanding of role of technology and multi-sensory design was defined and ultimately established as vital as elements in contemporary civic architecture.

A significant connection has been made in this dissertation between multi-sensory design and the need for architects and designer’s to carefully integrate modern technology throughout the process; during design as well as within the eventual experience.

Technology has been seen to vastly enrich a human’s experience of space when it is integrated seamlessly from inception but has also shown that technology has the potential to produce the opposite effect as demonstrated with the app for The d’Arenburg Cube.

Chapter 1 explored theories of past and current literature from prominent architects and theorists on Multi-sensory design alongside an analysis of the role of technology and multisensory design in the Modern realm which provided a foundation for which this argument will be grounded in. It also discussed the prominence of ocularcentrism in our current architectural designs stemming from a rise of social media as a prominently visual and audio platform.

39

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Breanna Wallace

Next, further exploration of technology and multi-sensory design as combined elements led to an inspection of the hyper-body as a potential architectural style opposing concerns from prominent theorists found in Chapter 1 & 2. It also acknowledged the effect of previous technology on our current perception of technology in interior spaces.

Finally, an analysis of three case studies demonstrated prime examples of multi-sensory design that incorporated the use of technology in the design phase as well as the eventual experience. It revealed that the contemporary buildings of today are not perfect, however, they display leading edge ideas and ways to utilise modern technology with theories and design conceived conceptually before modern technology existed.

Ultimately, the analysis throughout all three chapters on prominent theorists and case studies has led to a conclusion that technology has the ability to enrich our experience of sensorial civic space when integrated at the inception of a design.

40

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

Reference List:

A-ASTERICK. 2014. Leafy Shade [Online]. Available: http://www.aasterisk.com/En/leafyshade [Accessed 6 May 2019].

AUSTRALIA, G. D. 2018. The d’Arenburg Cube Architectural: Commercial and Residential Winner [Online]. Good Design Australia. Available: https://gooddesign.org/projects/the-darenberg-cube/ [Accessed 26 April 2019].

AUVRAY, M. & MYIN, E. 2009. Perception With Compensatory Devices: From Sensory Substitution to Sensorimotor Extension. Cognitive Science, 33, 1036-1058.

AZARSHAHR, S. F. 2013. New Technologies in Modern Architecture and its Interaction with Traditional Architecture. Research Journal of Chemical and Environmental Sciences, 1.

BERTRAM, C., EVANS, M. H., JAVAID, M., STAFFORD, T. & PRESCOTT, T. Sensory Augmentation with Distal Touch: The Tactile Helmet Project. In: LEPORA, N. F., MURA, A., KRAPP, H. G., VERSCHURE, P. F. M. J. & PRESCOTT, T. J., eds. Biomimetic and Biohybrid Systems, 2013// 2013 Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 24-35.

BREFFEILH, R. 2010. Technology and the Senses: Multi-sensory Design in the Digital Age. UNC Charlotte.

D’ARENBURG 2017. The Alternate Realities Museum. Google Play Store: d’Arenburg.

FAIRBURN, S. 2003. Skins by Design: Humans to Habitats.

41

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

FAIRS, M. 2008. Leafy Shade by A-Asterick. Dezeen [Online]. Available from: https://www.dezeen.com/2008/08/25/leafy-shade-by-a-asterisk/ [Accessed 7 May 2019].

FERREIRA, M. 2012. Embodied Emotions: A Phenomenological Approach to Computation to Explore Empathy Through Architecture. New Design Concepts and Strategies. eCAAADe. GAGG, R. 2011. Basics Interior Architecture 05, CH, FAIRCHILD BOOKS. GHAFFARIAN HOSEINI, A. H. D., NUR DALILAH BERARDI, UMBERTO ALI MAKAREMI 2013. The essence of future smart houses: From embedding ICT to adapting to sustainability principles. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 24, 593-607.

KREIJ, K. V. 2008. Sensory Intensification in Architecture. Technical University Delft.

LEO BURNETT, S. 2018. The Night. Reimagined. [Online]. Vivid Sydney, Samsung. Available: https://www.vividsydney.com/event/light/night-reimagined [Accessed 20 April 2019].

MARKETING, C. O. A. N. 2018. Be Unforgettable with Chester Osborn at the d’Arenburg Cube. YouTube.

MATHEWS, S. 2005. The Fun Palace: Cedric Price’s experiment in architecture and technology. Technoetic Arts, 3, 73-92.

MATHEWS, S. 2006. The Fun Palace as Virtual Architecture: Cedric Price and the Practices of Indeterminacy. Journal of Architectural Education (1984-), 59, 39-48.

MERLEAU-PONTY, M. 1962. Phenomenology of perception. London & New York: Routledge.

MORAN, D. 2000. Introduction to phenomenology, London & New York, Routledge.

OOSTERHUIS, K. 2003. Hyperbodies : Toward an E-motive Architecture. Basel : London: Basel : Birkhäuser 42

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? – Breanna Wallace

London : Momenta.

OOSTERHUIS, K. & BIER, H. 2019. Real Time Behavior in ONL-Architecture.

OSBORN, C. 2019. d’Arenburg Cube [Online]. Available: https://www.darenberg.com.au/darenberg-cube/ [Accessed 1 May 2019].

O’SULLIVAN, J. 2017. The d’Arenburg Cube Opens it’s Doors [Online]. Tourism Australia: Australian Government: Trade and Investment Commission. Available: http://www.tourisminvestment.com.au/en/research-insights/news/dArenbergcube.html [Accessed 26 April 2019].

PALLASMAA, J. 2012. The eyes of the skin : architecture and the senses, Hoboken, Hoboken : John Wiley and Sons.

PALLASMAA, J. 2017. Embodied and Existential Wisdom in Architecture: The Thinking Hand.

Body & Society, 23, 96-111.

PAUL, S., CHERIAN, P., MENON, D. & MEHER PRASAD, A. 2016. Use of glass fibre reinforced gypsum panels with reinforced concrete infills for construction of walls and slabs.

PEPERZAK, A. 1983. Phenomenology - Ontology - Metaphysics: Levinas' Perspective on Husserl and Heidegger. Man and World, 16, 113-127.

SANTAYANA, G. J. 2012. Of the Senses [Online]. Available: http://glensantayana.com/Of-theSenses [Accessed 6 May 2019].

SEAMON, D. 2010. Merleau-Ponty, Perception, and Environmental Embodiement: Implications for Architectural and Environmental Studies. Carnal Echoes.

SILVA, M. J., FERREIRA, E., ANDRADE, V., NUNES, O. & DA LUZ CARVALHO, M. 2015.

Embodied education: Senses, emotions, and technology.

SMITH, O. 2017. Cedric Price Works 1952-2003: A Forward-Minded Retrospective. Apollo.

43

The impact of contemporary technologies in sensory space: does integrating technology have the potential to enrich our experience of civic interiors? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Breanna Wallace

TAMARI, T. 2016. The Phenomenology of Architecture: A Short Introduction to Juhani Pallasmaa. Body & Society, 23, 91-95.

WRAITH, M. 2011. The Five Senses: A Philosophy of Mingled Bodies by Michel Serres, trans.

Margaret Sankey and Peter Cowley. The Critical Quarterly, 53, 106-111.

44