Reading1 Pallasmaa | The Geometry of Feeling Q&A

Q1) His central point is that “the effect of architecture stems from more or less shared images and basic emotions connected with building.” (p.90)

To what extent do you agree with this?

Q2) If we agree with Pallasmaa and his attack on the architecture that privileges form and imagery...

What is the importance or significance of form in architecture?

I think as form in architecture, its significance is mainly in two aspects:

1.Physical level. 

        The form itself is expressed as content:as Pythagoras said,  “beauty itself is the proportion of numbers”. Therefore, in classical architectural forms, geometric methods such as symmetry and golden section show the beauty in the laws of nature. The Pantheon is an example. Its entrance space and main interior space follow the division of nine-square grids each. The huge circular dome aroused the ancient people's imagination of cosmic space.

      During the period of modernism, as Sullivan said,“form follows function”. Architectural forms are required to faithfully reflect structure and function. That is particularly evident in many buildings designed by Le Corbusier. However, I also have to admit that modernism overlooked the importance of function, and its popularity resulted to the fact that buildings around the world are always the same, which is also criticized by Pallasmaa in this article.But the form also inherits the classic geometry of the classical period by many great architects.

     The monopoly of modernism stems from the objective need for large-scale reconstruction after the war. However, it is undoubted to contradict humanity's different pursuit of beauty by completely resorting architecture to functionalism and attempting to provide standard answers of all dimensions with ergonomics，which promoted the emergence of postmodernism

      Sublime, geometric system and structural rationalism are the main meanings of architectural forms cross the age.

2.Spirit level

      “A great building must begin with the unmeasurable, must go through measurable means when it is being designed and in the end must be unmeasurable”-Louis Kahn

      The slogan of modernism was reversed by him: "Form evokes function" He believes that form conveys a sense of balance, which has nothing to do with the internal activities.Form itself became the purpose of existence, the origin of architecture. If it mixes real-life factors such as information, thought, enlightenment, it will no longer be pure. (I don't really understand this idea)

      You say to brick, “What do you want, brick?” Brick says to you, “I like an arch.” if you say to brick, “arches are expensive and I can use a concrete lintel over an opening. What do you think of that, brick?” Brick says: “I like an arch.” —Louis Kahn

      Kahn did not design the form first, but focused on expressing the characteristics of the material, and then came to the form.

      Take two examples seen on the Internet, using small material bricks as long-span arches. Then using a reinforced concrete beam to offset the side thrust. The beam was therefore unstressed, so the cross section of the beam could be small.

      The hole bolts on the concrete wall were retained. Although not good-looking, they were naturally left over during the construction process.

    

      I think the nature of architecture pursued by Kahn is the same as the shared images and motions explored by Pallasmaa. Even if people have different growth experiences, they will share something the same. Taking myself as an example, I have never lived in a rural hut, but I still yearn for it. This is deeply in the subconscious, inheriting the spirit of the millennium. After all, we have just walked out of the wooden shelter and stepped into the reinforced forest, just over a hundred years ago.