Critical Theory and Interpretation Architectural Humanities III
Sophie Rose 4103788
The Level Centre, 2008, in Rowsley, Derbyshire (fig 1) designed by Clash Architects, is a modest creative space produced with the aim to bring local artists and people with learning disabilities from all over the East Midlands together to learn from, interact with and inspire each other. The versatile yet resilient structure, built on a budget of ÂŁ0.85 million, sits comfortably in a small light-industrial estate overlooked by the rounded hills of the Peak District. The homogeneous walls with its pre-weathered zinc cladding give the building a unique character with its bold architectural forms, playful in the sunlight. Fig: 1
North/West view.
As the clientele for this design construction was extremely specific, many key aspects of the building had to be carefully considered. These features range from the lever door handles used, the actual size doors chose (wider than the general door to allow for wheelchair access) to the overall layout of the build. The building contains a range of adjustable spaces to facilitate for a various range of dramatic, media and visual arts projects; these spaces include two large rooms, smaller studio/meeting rooms and offices with three lettable units as a separate block from the main structure. These elements form an enclosed courtyard space around the main entrance of the building. The Level Centre was created by the architect to be a container of positive experience for it users and its intention is to ‚encourage creativity and lift the spirit‛ [1]. Inspiration and individual motivation is achieved through the conscious and subconscious perception of the spaces methodically crafted by the architect himself. A simple structural ingredient in the building is the 5 metre high ceiling of the central circulation space as the overall
large volume of the building helps to maintain a lower noise level. The reduced background noise creates a consequent lack of distractions, therefore subtly creating calm and composed space. 1
The fluid arrangement of the integrated seating and passage areas makes for a welcoming atmosphere and gives a sense of inclusivity. Henri Bergson viewed the body as a tool to perceive an experience; ‚The objects which surround my body reflect its possible action upon them‛ (Bergson, 1892 pp:7). This space is experienced through freedom of movement which helps to subconsciously avoid a sense of regimentation thus playing on the social consciousness of the person, encouraging them to gain a feeling of individualism. In order to promote creativity it is crucial to nurture the self-belief, particularly in the case of disabled people who may have been subject to rejection in the past. The result is a contemporary attitude that ‚Art can be made by anyone, out of anything; and producing it is no less rewarding than consuming it‛ [2]. Fig 2:
Fig 3:
Fig 4:
The exterior of the building is expressive in nature with its striking shapes erupting out of the ground yet it is not overpowering in its dimensions and for this reason I believe it is clear that Clash Architects understood their responsibility to inspire. The continuous curve of the west wall (fig 2) and sharp nose of the southern wall (fig 3) prompts movement around the building which therefore encourages exploration. John Dewey who was a major believer in ‚Progressive Education‛, which exposes the person as a social being, was an advocate of allowing ‚the Live Creature‛ to perceive an object which hence generates an experience which is personal to them (Dewey. 1934). The fluidity of the curved walls is interrupted by abrupt fractures which informs a change in pace. As a result, this provokes a subconscious response and in a sense creates a further awareness in the user and ultimately, awareness of themselves. This relates to Dewey’s theory of ‚An experience is a product, one might say bi-product, of continuous and cumulative interaction of an organic self with the world‛ (Dewey. 1934 pp:220). One particularly successful feature of the building which arouses thought is the overhang that projects from the long curved wall (fig 4). In addition to providing shelter and enclosing the central courtyard, the gap that is created between itself and the next structure subtly challenges the user. Through this architectural expression, you look into the eyes of the architect, realise each other and the environment which consequently provides a strong phenomenological experience. It is evident from the exterior arrangement, that the Level Centre is an instrument to stimulate the individual experience. However, it is debatable whether the architect approaches the interior of the building in the same manner. Firstly, the alienating white walls of the interior spaces are a stark contrast to the engaging materiality
of the exposed ‚imperfect, fruity brick‛ [3] (fig 5) and weathered zinc (fig 6) of its exterior. Perhaps this distinction is intentional in order to create as sense of a blank canvas, where the user is not overwhelmed by stimuli. In Husserl terms of all consciousness is conscious of something (Osborn, 1949), it could appear that the architect has made the external the ‚noema‛, which inspires a sense of consciousness by allowing the building to perform as an abstract component of specific types of emotional reactions which then transpires into an action. Fig 5:
Fig6:
Fig 7:
Then, a different phenomenological condition is created when entering the ‚blank canvas‛ (fig 7); this space does not demand an embodied response by shocking the person into awareness, unlike the exterior. Nonetheless, the interior spaces are not completely void of architectural expression as there some instances where the natural light is ‚permeated by sculptural windows‛ [4] (fig. 8). It is also difficult to know how much the architect was constrained by the budget and we can only speculate on the disproportion in quality of the design. Daylight which enters the building through the skylights (fig 8 and fig 10), appear to have been implemented more for convenience purposes regarding the original function of the space. However, whether it was unintended or not, by reducing the catharsis of a space; the whole environmental experience of the room helps the judgment to function with the perception and create the emotional environment which is conducive to concentration and learning the confidence to be creative. ‚Each individual existence is what each individual makes of it‛ Jean-Paul Sartre on Structuralism (Kearney, 1994 pp:245) Fig 8:
Fig 9:
Fig 10:
The level centre not only creates a piece of architecture that is accessible to people with developmental and physical disabilities but it also corresponds to a recent social movement in itself. The Disability Rights Movement formed in the 1960’s, brought about notable change in past decades in terms of transportation, the material environment and architecture. These amendments have assisted in seccuring equal rights for people with disabilities; in which even a new lexicon is being fashioned, ‚dis/art‛. In previous days, lack of humanistic planning did not make provisions for the comfort. The innovative concept of The Level Centre reaches beyond accomodating; it responds to the human spirit of the people. th
Karl Marx was a 19 Century philosopher who developed in a unique direction of theories of humanism from those of his European predecessors and contemporaries towards more practical and materialistic conclusions (fig. 11). Being a man and critic of his times he was influenced greatly by how industrial urbanisation was affecting the living and working conditions of ordinary citizens and by the unfortunate lack of progress toward any form of socialism emphasised by the failure of the Chartist Movement and the 1848 revolution (fig. 12). This, together with his interest in British economics, French Republicanism and German Philosophy combined to encourage him to move away from simply abstract Humanism, Synthesise Humanism and Materialism by introducing Politics and Economics to Philosophical Humanist Theory. In his opinion, the declarations and laws regarding individual’s rights etc. Emitted by various governments in the mid 19th Century were simply a confirmation of the status quo and the individual’s right to own property ‚Property of ownership is theft‛ and to sell their labour on the open market resulting in different levels of remuneration and status was all simply a reinforcement and continuation of capitalism (Proudhon, 2008). In contrast, his own developed theory of humanism and materials sometimes called economism envisages the negation of individual liberty, moving towards collectivism resulting from a communist revolution which finally produces pure collective urbanism and industrialism. Latterly, he accepted that this utopian social spacial environment could only be achieved peacefully by class struggle involving international workers movements. Fig 11:
Fig 12:
Marx and Engels among workers by A. Venetsian (1961)
Photograph of Russian factory workers during the Industrialisation 18th C.
It is clear that Marx did not set out any coherent ‘Marxist Theory’ of architecture, aesthetics or space but some of his texts made reference architecture and special culture and he maintained that ‚the social... is always at the same time intrinsically special‛ (Cunningham, Goodbun. 2006. Pp:5) and he continued to explore the relationship between spirit and matter in other texts in which he refers to architectural production consciousness and alienation he concluded that ‚man is affirmed in the objective world not only by the act of thinking but with all his senses‛ (Fromm, 2004. Pp:135). I feel strongly that the architecture for the Level Centre was approached in this manner as it is evident that utter care was taken to compose a receptive environment through the use of texture, materialistic qualities, colour and formation. The spirit of the space is defined by the spatial condition produced by the curves, light patterns, blemishes etc... in the edifice which makes the place distinctive from any other which may provide the same functions.
Because Marx was essentially a nontechnical theoretician, it is therefore difficult to accept that the influence of his theories on architecture could be contradictory in that his egalitarianism would demand equal status, treatment, position etc.. in the social spatial which implies a uniformity of buildings and cities which is difficult to reconcile with his humanistic caring for the nurturing of the human spirit which would require perhaps a more motivational and inspirational human social environment. Marx interest in the avant-garde school would have been more phenomenological than technical and it would have received his approval on the basis of it being new, innovative and revolutionary and possibly saw potential for it to accommodate his theories on social spatial. Indeed, anything contrary to the then existing capitalist style of industrial urban development which he considered alienating would have been preferable to Marx. The concept of the Level centre, even in its outward appearance, is a demonstration of the new innovative thinking which is required by architects today. This building in particular, supports a compassionate community where everyone’s aptitude and experience is respected and nurtured. It is not only phenomenological response to the architectural detail that generates a unique experience and sense of the place, but also the obvious notion that the building is in opposition to artificial suppression and negation of the human spirit. Therefore, in Marxist terms, consciously provides for a better social and spatial situation. A summary of sophisticated Marxist phenomenology emphasised that a too rapid change in populace’s rhythms of the body, urban stress would be the modern term, produced by the fast, fundamental social special changes introduced by capitalism modernity and urban development would add to the general alienating effects of the rampant consumer capitalism of the mid 19th century. In relevance to The Level Centre, it appears that Clash Architects have had a sensitive and conscious approach to the brief and have clearly understood the intended client for the space. It is, in my opinion, for the most part successful in its exterior shell as it demonstrates understanding of the importance of creating a sense of place for the user through employing the use interesting architectural elements. As a result of the use of its distinctive shapes and imperfect, weathered fabric; a phenomena is produced which is accessible to every one of of the senses. The appearance of the building, creates an experience. On the other hand when you look at the building through its interior, it may appear that the architect put less consideration into the phenomenology of its spaces as there is an obvious distinction between the two. Although, whether the overly simplistic interior is was intentional or not, it appears to be triumphant in the sense that it provides a ‚blank canvas‛ for creativity. However, It would not be unreasonable to presume that too large of proportion of the budget was spent on the external fabric in an attempt to establish a reputation amongst architects, nevertheless this can only be speculated. It is obvious that the tiny Level Centre has managed to create a stir in the East Midlands, along with RIBA award Judge stating ‚the building fits well into its setting and promises to inspire more imaginative designs for the area‛[5]. The Level Centre’s avant-garde approach to architectural design pushes the boundaries of ‚Inclusion‛, which is already new social, cultural direction in society. The building further supplements this innovative idea in its attempts to explore social spatial conditions which is evidence of Clash Architects actively engaged in the phenomenology of architecture.
Bibliography: Bergson, Henri (1911). Matter and Memory, translated by Nancy Margaret Paul and W.Scott Palmer. London: George Allen. Osborn, Andrew Delbridge (1949). Edmund Husserl and his Logical investigations. New York: Garland Pub. Husserl, Edmund (1970). Logical Investigations, translated by J.N. Findlay. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Kearney, Richard (1994). Modernist Movements in European Philosophy – Phenomenology, Critical Theory, Structuralism. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Dewey, John (1934). Art as Experience. New York: Minton, Balch & Co. Romdenh-Romluc, Komarine (2011). Routledge philosophy guidebook to Merleau-Ponty and Phenomenology of perception. Abingdon: Routeledge. Fromm, Erich (2004). Marx’s Concept of Man. London: Continuum. Fine/Saad-Filho (2010). Marx’s ‘Capital’ (5th Edition). London: Pluto Press.
Websites: Architecture Today. (2009). Artistic Endeavour: Clash Associates’ Level Centre in Peak Distict. Available: http://www.clasharchitects.co.uk/assest/uploads/0902-at-level.pdf Last accessed 9th Jan 2012.
Rose, Steve. (2008). The theatre that’s inside-out. Available: http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2008/nov/25/architecture-art. Last accessed 11th Jan 2012.
[2]
Lyall, Sutherland. (2008). Heavy Metal. Available: http://www.clasharchitects.co.uk/assets/Uploads/level-ajspec.pdf Last accessed 9th Jan 2012.
[3]
Hawkins/Brown. (2008). East Midlands Art. Available: http://www.clasharchitects.co.uk/assets/Uploads/Aj-Level-Double-Page.pdf Last accessed 11th Jan 2012.
Hale, Jonathan. (2011). Lecture Notes, WebCT. Available: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk Last accessed 8th Jan 2011.
Cunningham/Goodbun. (2006). Marx, Architecture and Modernity. Available: http://www.webct.nottingha.ac.uk/webct/urw/tp0.Ic4130001/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct
http://www.clasharchitects.co.uk/assets/Uploads/159Level03hi.pdf
[1] [4] [5]
www.architecture.com/RegionsAndInternational/UKNationsAndRegions/England/RIBAEastMidlands/Awards/EMAward Winners2009/LevelCentre.aspx Last accessed 11th Jan 2012
Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph. (2008). What is Property? An Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government. Available: http://www.books.google.co.uk/books?id=KZcysiWmMoQC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false Last accessed: 11th Jan 2012
http://www.first-movement.org.uk/index.php/home/creative-industries/level-centre12 Last accessed 9th Jan 2012. http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php Last accessed 12th Jan 2012