1.12 Associational Aesthetics Jakub HavlĂk
Associational Aesthetics
Abstract The fact why we find certain objects aesthetically pleasing and others not does not really depend on their qualities as much as it depends on the association which this objects evoke in us. First part is a brief introduction clarifying the main keywords such as aesthetics or structarilsm. Based on structuralism´s argument that the relationships between elements exceed the importance of the elements themselves, it is suggested that our perception of objects depends on relationships in which we are with these objects rather than the objects themselves. The objective of this text is not trying to get objects rid of all their attributes by stating that only the relationship between the subject and the object matters and nothing else, such as the structuralists did. However, the actual attributes of the viewed object, no matter if they are attributes of the object itself or something constructed by our minds, play a very little importance here. The main area of interest is to decompose these relationships into smaller entities. This text speculates, that the vast majority of the entities forming relationships between object and subject are associations. Many types of associations, creating hierarchies, patterns of associations. Associations with major importance, associations with minor importance, personal associations, cultural associations, etc.
2
In the second part, in order to be more specific, the discussed topic is narrowed down to the field of aesthetics showing correlation between aesthetics and associations. Two examples will be provided briefly showing how an association can be created, how it affects subject´s perception of objects, his/her judgement as well as how associations can change over time. An important factor in formimg one´s associations nowadays are social media, which will be mentioned in one of the examples. The final part of the text is questioning the role of architect. According to what the associational aesthetics theory is stating, architect´s traditional position as “the one who assigns meanings to forms“ is being threatened, since the way how forms are being interpreted depends mainly on individual´s associations.
0. Introduction Have you ever wondered why do we like something and why something not? Have you ever wondered why you didn´t like something at first, but later you changed your mind? Or vise versa? Why is negative event in one´s live capable of evoking positive memories ? This objective of this text is to reconsider the established perception of aesthetics. It proposes that subject´s aesthetical judgement of objects does not depend on their qualities as much, but rather on the associations which these objects are evoking in him/her. The objective of this text is not trying to get objects rid of all their attributes by stating that only the relationship between the subject and the object matters and nothing else, such as the structuralists did. However, the actual attributes of the viewed object, no matter if their are attributes of the object itself or something constructed by our minds, play a very little importance here. The main area of interest is to decompose these relationships into smaller entities. This text speculates, that the vast majority of the entities forming relationships between object and subject are associations. Many types of associations, creating hierarchies, patterns of associations. Associations with major importance, associations with minor importance, personal associations, cultural associations, etc.
4
The fact why we find certain objects aesthetically pleasing and others not does not really depend on their qualities as much as it depends on the association which this objects evoke in us.
1. Keywords Perhaps the best way to start this text is by clarifying the meanings of main keywords which will be appearing often throughout the text. The following definitions are dictionary definitions which I have been working with: Aesthetics: “Aesthetics (/ɛsˈθɛtɪks/; also spelled æsthetics and esthetics also known in Greek as Αισθητική, or “Aisthētiké”) is a branch of philosophy dealing with the nature of art, beauty, and taste, with the creation and appreciation of beauty. It is more scientifically defined as the study of sensory or sensoriemotional values, sometimes called judgements of sentiment and taste. More broadly, scholars in the field define aesthetics as “critical reflection on art, culture and nature”. In modern English, the term aesthetic can also refer to a set of principles underlying the works of a particular art movement or theory: one speaks, for example, of the Cubist aesthetic.” Beauty: “Beauty is a characteristic of an animal, idea, object, person or place that provides a perceptual experience of pleasure or satisfaction. Beauty is studied as part of aesthetics, culture, social psychology and sociology. An “ideal beauty” is an entity which is admired, or possesses features widely attributed to beauty in a particular culture, for perfection. The experience of “beauty” often involves an interpretation of some entity as being in balance and harmony with nature, which may lead to feelings of attraction and emotional well-being. Because this can be a subjective experience, it is often said that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”
6
Association: Association in psychology refers to a connection between conceptual entities or mental states that results from the similarity between those states or their proximity in space or time. The idea stems from Plato and Aristotle, especially with regard to the succession of memories, and it was carried on by philosophers such as John Locke, David Hume, David Hartley, James Mill, John Stuart Mill, and Alexander Bain. It finds its place in modern psychology in such areas as conditioning and in neural network models of memory. With the term association, I am referring to meaning, which we assign to an object. The origin of this meaning may vary. It may be attained by education, by personal experience, by tradition. Simply said, it means what the thing reminds us of.
2. Association Few words about structuralism: In the fields of sociology, anthropology and linguistics (its origin is from linguistics), structuralism is a methodology which understands the elements of human cultrure in terms of their relationship to a larger system or structure. It works to uncover the structures that underlie all the things that humans do, think, perceive, and feel. Alternatively, as summarized by philosopher Simon Blackburn, structuralism is: “the belief that phenomena of human life are not intelligible except through their interrelations. These relations constitute a structure, and behind local variations in the surface phenomena there are constant laws of abstract culture.“ Few words from Stravinskij: “For I consider that music is, by its very nature, essentially powerless to express anything at all, whether a feeling, an attitude of mind, a psychological mood, a phenomenon of nature, etc....Expression has never been an inherent property of music…It is simply an additional attribute which, by tacit and inveterate agreement, we have lent it, thrust upon it, as a label, a convention – in short, an aspect unconsciously or by force of habit, we have come to confuse with its essential being.” So Stravinsky wanted to do away with a subtle but pervasive notion: that of a pre-existing idea or emotion that a composer will then set to music. A composer does not “feel sad” and then write “sad” music; that is a childishly reductive view of how music is created. It is the listener, after all, who assigns meaning, ideas and emotions to music once he or she hears it. We commit a blunder when we imagine a transcendental idea that existed before music, like one of Plato’s ideal Forms.
8
“Expression has never been an inherent property of music…It is simply an additional attribute which, by tacit and inveterate agreement, we have lent it, thrust upon it, as a label, a convention”
3. Examples Two persons one building Giving a hypothetical example inspired by real life: Let´s say, that person 1 finds a certain work of architecture aesthetically pleasing, which in this case could be, for instance, a soviet cultural centre somewhere in Moscow built in the late 70s, in a brutalist style. Suppose that this person is a resident of some western european country, architecture student, having enough theoretical background about architectural styles, enough knowledge to construct decent arguments to lead a dialogue with other architectural colleagues. He/she saw an image (haven´t visited it yet) of this building just recently on instagram group “socialist modernism“, with more than 80000 followers, recently becoming more and more popular among architects or anybody somehow related to the field. And found that building beautiful (gave it a like). Person 2 is, for instance, a russian citizen, living in Moscow, older generation (could be a parent to person 1), not an instagram user, not an architect. Person 2 lives in the suburbs of Moscow in one of the blocks of flats, and passes by that cultural centre everyday twice (on his/her way to work and back). Person 2 does not find this building aesthetically pleasing. Does not like it. Not at all. For a few reasons such as: During childhood, person 2 and his/her family were evicted from their rural house with a garden and moved to new block in a new neighbourhood of blocks. (Without being asked if they wish this to happen or not) However, they didn´t to move too far away since this neighbourhood was erected on the ruins of that village. According to the planners back then, the sight for the new cultural centre was overlapping with the site of the church. So the church had to (without being asked) to cede its site to the new cultural centre. The family of person 2 and himself/herself were very religious – so the loss of the church has affected them strongly. Now it may seem, that the way person 1 perceives the cultural centre may be free of associations (in this case negative), and therefore is able to appreciate its architectural beauty, whereas the person 2 will hardly ever be able to separate the building from the memories attached to it, and therefore never be able to appreciate its architectural beauty. 10
It may seem that person 2 is victim of injustice juxtaposed with person 1 who is an objective observer free of associationsW. Not exactly. Person 1 is not free of associations at all. He/she is just as affected by associations as person 2 is. Person 1 and person 2 are absolutely equal in this sense. Let me tell you why: We already know that person 1 is an architectural student. His/her desire is to be avantgarde, advanced, provocative, against the mainstream, .... etc. All his/her colleagues and favorite architects whom he/she admires have tendency to go against the mainstream, for instance by showing sympathy of architectural styles, which the majority finds unpleasant, or by stating something controversial which provokes the public – therefore person 1 assumes, that showing sympathy to such work of architecture is the right step on the path of becoming an avantgarde (advanced) architect. For this reason, person 1 finds the cultural centre beautiful. To sum it up: The association of person is: socialist modernism = avantgarde, intellectual, advanced, provocative, controversial (Person 1 assumes that socialist modernism has to be good since 5 respected architectural offices are following this group on instagram as well)
Through our likes, we are projecting „what we would like to become“, or „which social group we would like to belong to“ Appreciating brutalism induces certain associations in him/her such as the sense of belonging to the desired group. We read, listen, see things – because we are recommended to do so, however, only some of the recommendations will make it through the filter, only for a few we will find worth our time. Why do we start reading a book ? Why do we pay more attention to a certain text? Because our association with this “someone“ is for instance “intellectual“ – which resonates with our desire (to become intellectual as well) – therefore we pay attention to that text more than to any other. Would you spend hours deciphering Deleuze if it was recommended to you by somebody interested in esoterics or astrology ? If Slavoj Žižek stated that Harry Potter is the most essential text of 21st century, how many of us would read it (again)? * An important remark – this process is fully uconscious – in vast majority of cases, we are completely unaware of this – therefore the most of the time, when someone asks us why do like something we struggle to give a proper answer. Context can change Memories (associations), if not refreshed once in a while, have tendency to fade out, to get forgotten. Therefore books are written, but books have tendency not to be read, And even if they are, it often happens, that their interpretation depends on current cultural context as well as the reader.... therefore it is very difficult for a memory (association) to transfer from one generation onto another one. This has both disadvantage and advantage. The disadvantage is that same mistakes are likely to repeat, therefore history us full of repeating patterns. The advantage is, that children of person 2 will be partly free of their parent´s association with the cultural centre, despite the fact they will be told the history numerous time. They will create their own associations. Eventually, the grandchildren of person 2 will be even more free – free of their grandparent´s association – but not free of association.
12
In my understanding, the context of an object is sum of associations that people which in some realtion with this object have, and due to the unstable character of associations, context is unstable as well – and because of that the context can change. A good example is Mauerpark in Berlin. Less than 30 years this piece of ground was a no man´s land, monitored from watchtowers, surrounded by barbed wire from one side, and Berlin wall from the other. Back then, a symbol of division, enmprisonment, an iron curtain..... Nowadays, a symbol of coexistence, a cultural melting pot, where on 100 square meters you can find a muslim family with all their members having a barbecue, a homosexual couple having a sunbath, african emmigrant transforming old buckets into a drumkit and american hipster who has been told that Prenzlauer Berg is the right place to go to. All of this flavoured with the omnipresent smell of cannabis. This would not be possible if the context and the associations which it consits of were stable and transferable.
5. Conclusion What would this mean for architecture ? I considering the previous lines, we could arrive to a conclusion that form plays a very little role in architecture, since its users are the ones who assign it meaning, regardless of the creator´s intention. What is the role of architecture ? Why all that effort to design something when nobody will read it anyway? Well, for me, this realization is not as tragic as one would think. In architectural sense, I am finding this very inspiring. According to this realization, the way that space surrounding us is designed could be reconsidered. With the awareness that objects can be interpreted in as many ways as the amount of people in relation with this object, with the awareness that each of these people creates their own associations, the spaces could be designed, in more open sense. Capable of absorbing and evoking as many associations as they can. Capable of adjusting to their context.
14
“....we could arrive to a conclusion that form plays a very little role in architecture, since its users are the ones who assign it meaning, regardless of the creator´s intention.”
Copyright © 2014 Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia All rights Reserved. IAAC BITS TAK 2016 - 2017
IAAC BITS
IAAC
DIRECTOR:
IAAC SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE:
Manuel Gausa, IaaC Co-Founder
EDITORIAL COORDINATOR Jordi Vivaldi, IaaC bits Editorial Coordinator
EDITORIAL TEAM Manuel Gausa, IaaC Co-Founder Silvia Brandi, Communication & Publication Jordi Vivaldi, IaaC bits Editorial Coordinator
ADVISORY BOARD: Areti Markopoulou, IaaC Academic Director Tomas Diez, Fab Lab Bcn Director Mathilde Marengo, Academic Coordinator Ricardo Devesa, Advanced Theory Concepts Maite Bravo, Advanced Theory Concepts
Nader Tehrani, Architect, Director MIT School Architecture, Boston Juan Herreros, Architect, Professor ETSAM, Madrid Neil Gershenfeld, Physic, Director CBA MIT, Boston Hanif Kara, Engineer, Director AKT, London Vicente Guallart, IaaC Co-Founder Willy Muller, IaaC Co-Founder Aaron Betsky, Architect & Art Critic, Director Cincinnati Art Museum, Cincinnati Hugh Whitehead, Engineer, Director Foster+ Partners technology, London Nikos A. Salingaros, Professor at the University of Texas, San Antonio Salvador Rueda, Ecologist, Director Agencia Ecologia Urbana, Barcelona Artur Serra, Anthropologist, Director I2CAT, Barcelona
DESIGN: Ramon Prat, ACTAR Editions
IAAC BIT FIELDS: 1. Theory for Advanced Knowledge 2. Advanced Cities and Territories 3. Advanced Architecture 4. Digital Design and Fabrication 5. Interactive Societies and Technologies 6. Self-Sufficient Lands
PUBLISHED BY: Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia ISSN 2339 - 8647 CONTACT COMMUNICATIONS & PUBLICATIONS OFFICE: communication@iaac.net
Institut for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia Barcelona
16
Pujades 102 08005 Barcelona, Spain T +34 933 209 520 F +34 933 004 333 ana.martinez@coac.net www.iaac.net