# Architectural Experience by Luca  ## Metadata - Author: [[read]] - Full Title: Architectural Experience by Luca - Category: #books - Summary: insert summary - My notes: - Document Tags: [[toread]] - Summary: This paper explores architectural experience, which is how people engage with and perceive architectural objects. It argues that this experience is complex, involving not just sensory perception but also cognition, imagination, and agency. Different attitudes toward architecture can shape how individuals interpret and interact with built environments. ## LLM Chats ## NotebookLM ## LLM Audio ## Highlights > AOs ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms5w8w55bd6ybb3fd2md94a)) - Note: this abbreviation seems pointless. Especially considering you are not doing it with architectural experience > To this end, in the first part of the paper I show that AOs are artifacts imbued with both a technical and an experiential function and I argue that a proper account of architectural experience must encompass both aspects (Section I). Specifically, I first contend that, as artifacts with a technical function, AOs are structures designed to host (accommodate and constrain) our activities and agency, and that there is a distinctive experience associated with the technical function of AOs: the experience of inhabiting built spaces (Section II). I then claim that, as artifacts imbued with an experiential function, AOs prescribe various forms of perceptual engagement, as well as distinctive cognitive and agential engagement (Section III). Finally, I claim that a proper account of architectural experience must also consider the different attitudes individuals can adopt towards AOs: I identify two main attitudes – the user’s attitude and the contemplative attitude – and I argue that these attitudes shape, colour, and structure architectural experience, leading to a variety of such experiences (Section IV). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms5tjexcpqb7wjjpfkem029)) - Note: do we really need such a long introduction? couldn't all of this be cut by like 50%? > Wybo Houkes and Pieter Vermaas (2010) call its “use plan”: even though an artifact can carry out a variety of functions, the use plan, which can be made explicit through a user manual, individuates its primary function, which is its ratio essendi, what it is for. [[4. Objections]](#ftnt4) ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms60p1tb5m8f9dvd1rpp0at)) - Note: is this right? I thought they differentiated function from use. i didn't think they were explaining function in terms of use plan > defined by both their structural organization and their function (whether intended or subsequently attributed), with the former enabling the latter through the specific arrangement of elements. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms63ctb6h9xrv9z97dfrqdt)) - Note: this feels like a repeat of what you have just said. > The diversity of functions fulfilled by AOs, I show, is reflected in their classification into various types (Gowans et al. 2024): for example, residential AOs are built structures designed to provide living spaces; religious AOs are built structures that host functions associated with spiritual practices; governmental AOs are built structures that accommodate institutions of governance; recreational AOs are built structures that facilitate leisure activities; welfare AOs are built structures that support social welfare services; educational AOs are built structures that provide spaces for teaching and learning; commercial AOs are built structures that enable trade and commerce; and industrial AOs are built structures that support manufacturing and production processes. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms64zrzw277005jzq75wqcg)) - Note: why are you telling the reader this? it is really not a concept that needs explaining at all, let alone seven times > They are also designed to (c) elicit an experience: in this sense, AOs are also experiential artifacts (Terrone 2024). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms673hnrb7a325kjx1wv1js)) - Note: a) are they? all of them? b) AN experience? > AOs are similarly brought into existence through intentional human activity not solely with a functional purpose in mind, but also as creations meant to provoke meaningful experiential and aesthetic responses. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms68h3tcy0j4rrs90kk6sm2)) - Note: a strong claim. > I take that works of art can be understood as honorary members of a specific class of technical artifacts, referred to as experiential artifacts: technical artifacts that perform the function of generating experiences through their structure. [[](#ftnt7) ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms69je7q5m1j4dxkqr40945)) - Note: again, you just said this. why are you saying it again? > imposing a certain duration on lived temporality ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms6bvzkwbqvgv3r35bdqpq4)) - Note: unclear and a bit pompous > mandates ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms6e6pzmw0w4ffmythtxxpa)) - Note: a strong word > – contrary to Terrone’s suggestion. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms6j4ddedcvz3ra3vdekpha)) - Note: WHY WRITE THIS? WHAT DOES IT ADD? > provoke agency ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms6k6v9vd8tcc0xx3yrvw2g)) - Note: 'provoke' and 'elicit' are loaded terms, are they going to be explained? > In this section, I argue that using AOs as technical artifacts does not inherently elicit agential experiences – contrary to Terrone’s suggestion. I ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms6s2dq3cdtrc0z8jhbfzpt)) - Note: what does it mean to elicit an agentive experience? > This involves experiencing a built space as a “playground” for our activities and recognising how the space accommodates, facilitates, or constrains those activities. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms6v3wp3g8arhpkjex80br4)) - Note: hmmmm... > building on Forsey’s (2013) account of dependent beauty ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms6z2cd6202cx7zbjvrky4d)) - Note: not sure we would put it like this... > Young and Terrone under review ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms70m6cr8py82whr26wvpa4)) - Note: you don't have to put the ference again and again. just 'ibid.' now? > This becomes evident when we consider the diversity of functions fulfilled by AOs, as reflected in their classification into various types discussed in the previous section: residential architecture provides spaces for living; religious architecture accommodates spiritual practices; governmental architecture hosts governance institution; recreational architecture supports leisure activities; welfare architecture houses social services; educational architecture creates spaces for teaching and learning; commercial architecture enables trade and commerce; and industrial architecture supports manufacturing and production processes ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms72c5f0p3v19x51ywry7n4)) - Note: jesus christ why? > (and all activities related to our everyday life: cooking, eating, sleeping, bathing, etc..). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms7e4cn3mf1bdq51e3ag6kr)) - Note: .... > These examples underscore that the use of AOs does not directly elicit agential experiences. Instead, architecture hosts agential experiences by offering structured spaces where activities can be performed – spaces that support these activities in ways that make them more effective, convenient, and comfortable than if performed in the natural environment. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms7m5bgx2qeab7xk8nmxt36)) - Note: i'd like a lot more detail here... > Its role is to provide the conditions for agential experiences to unfold, hosting activities in ways that support or enhance them. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms7nrn46f5d6tk91n3vfn4e)) - Note: and here. > If games are the art of agency, then I claim that architecture, in its technical function, is the art or craft of hosting agency. To put it differently, in contrast to design: if designed objects have a proper function that inherently shapes specific engagements – such as playing, holding, or driving – architectural objects primarily provide a structured space where agency can unfold. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms7yhqndxpadsj723d4dfft)) - Note: main claim ok > It means, I claim, that AOs are not merely passive spaces where activities simply take place; rather, they shape, limit, and guide our actions in specific ways. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms81bnhzmyq0r7qtsggkn8b)) - Note: didn't you just differentiate architecture from design in terms of design shaping agency? > transitions that subtly influence our behaviour. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms8aqqbxfa410w8p00w70g0)) - Note: bit vague > AOs afford certain uses while discouraging or preventing others – a classroom layout encourages attention toward a focal point, shaping patterns of engagement; the altar rail (in older churches) physically separates the sacred space from the laity, constraining access to the most significant part of the church. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms8dsccdw65y657c5n2mb20)) - Note: this seems very much like what designed objects do > The way space is structured can shape decision-making, as seen in urban planning strategies that guide pedestrian flow or prevent certain types of social interaction ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms8hzkt6e5kq6xezf45ffm2)) - Note: this seems interesting > One might wonder whether these architectural constraints are not, in the end, something that operate along the lines of games and design constraints which structure and sculpt our agencies and activities; hence that architecture is, after all, an art of agency, and not of merely hosting our agencies. et I contend that, while games, design objects, and architectural objects all impose constraints on agency, the nature of these constraints differs, reflecting their distinct characteristic and peculiar artifactual character. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms8p4a9b9ebnjr1j43ngk20)) - Note: now I'm interested. > Architectural constraints are typically more spatial and environmental, influencing the broader environment in which activities occur. Design objects, on the other hand, impose constraints that are more immediate and tied to specific functions or interactions. AOs host and constrains our agencies, while design and games sculpt, structure and guide it. This distinction highlights how architecture frames the conditions for action, while design often directly structures the ways in which actions are performed. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms8qbs3rjbnwa3179w54bxw)) - Note: vague and so unconvincing. i still don't get it. Is this not just a matter of degree? > My claim is that the experience of AOs as technical artifacts is best characterised as the experience of inhabiting built spaces, or of living the built environment, where the notion of ‘built space’ refers to a space intentionally structured to host a variety of activities and agential experiences. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms8x7zvgy12zxmh64a059zj)) - Note: also a little vague. > “playground” ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms8yd1mfggb49gphe9q36sq)) - Note: don't like this metaphor > AOs define the spatial conditions under which action unfolds. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms904w3sz0fymf0gfd2evee)) - Note: more interesting. > Similarly, a bedroom is experienced primarily through the act of resting and sleeping, with its walls, lighting, and insulation functioning not as focal points of attention but as elements that shape the experience of comfort, enclosure, and security. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms927ad0pm3hs36s0g007qd)) - Note: a) this smells tautological b) it's not very spatial. c) a room can be the bedroom or the living room. yeah the furniture is arranged differently, but then we aren't talking about architecture are we we are talking about interior design... > Even when such expectations remain implicit – i.e. they remain at the periphery of our experiential attention – they structure how we move, behave, and interpret our surroundings when inhabiting the architecture. What about agential phenomenology, which I have excluded as the defining feature of architectural experience (at least, for now, in relation to its technical function)? While AOs do not explicitly direct agency in the way that games or design objects do, they frame, mediate and constrains agential experiences. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms9rvvg0mc49r9tf83k3c33)) - Note: periphery stuff is somewhat interesting. You never really gave a definition of agential phenomenology.. > To put it another way, if games and design objects actively sculpt agency, then architecture hosts, frames and accommodates it. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms9vbwf6c9r9rmezpzh9zvn)) - Note: this puts the problems of this idea quite starkly i think > III. AOs and Their Experiential Function ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsa1121kbymmrsntchxkhjz)) - Note: why is this one massive paper? Why not just split these claims up. > In this section, I show and specify how, in addition to their technical function, AOs are also imbued with an experiential function: AOs are structures built (more or less consciously) with the experiential effects they will produce in their audience in mind – not only owners and users, but also visitors and those who may simply see them while passing by. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms9zahbqamvd54mqyep0bda)) - Note: over egging this a little bit > “imaginative perception account” ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsaa5ypd5m09sc3j2mtnay3)) - Note: italics maybe? it seems weird to quote the words "imaginative perception" twice in a row > Scruton proposed this account in the 1970s, and his idea appears to be rooted in a notion that had already been circulating for some time—namely, that some form of mental or complex categorization is always present in our perception of the world (Gombrich 1960; Goodman 1968; Wittgenstein 1958). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsahy54xngnnd78v1et5qbv)) - Note: i don't think this should be here. > The most natural way to interpret Scrutonian imaginative-cum-perceptual experience is, I claim, as a form of cognitive penetration of perception (Brewer 2004; Byrne 2004; Siegel 2012; Raftopoulos and Zeimbekis 2020; Stokes 2024). Cognitive penetration, broadly construed, refers to cases in which higher-level cognitive states – such as beliefs, expectations, knowledge, or conceptual frameworks – shape or modify perceptual experience itself. In the case of architecture, this means that our experience of built environments is not purely sensory but is always cognitively mediated, often in ways that significantly influence what and how we perceive. Scruton’s imaginative perception can be understood as a process in which perception is not merely receptive but interpretative, shaped by prior cognitive dispositions and attentional and interpretative acts. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsakecfn9w2tmpfnne174jd)) - Note: cogpen ain't the only game in town though. plenty of perceptual categorisation ideas don't rely on it. > When we perceive a colonnade, for instance, we do not just see vertical structures – we “see” order, rhythm, and spatial depth, often automatically. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsanghevqqe8w6rd1z49hyy)) - Note: this is not cognitive penetration. > Scruton focuses on architectural experience as primarily visual. Sauchelli (2012), expanding Scruton’s account, highlights that other sensory modalities also play a role, as changes in aesthetic judgments follow changes in these sensory experiences. Sauchelli, like Scruton, focuses on the aesthetic impact of multisensory experience in architecture: ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsarbzvmv4av6npzzdcsqr9)) - Note: the beginning and end of this bit contradict each other re: Scruton > cognitive phenomenology ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsawyhq7v5nkdnfa2bedx1a)) - Note: even taken as a seperate second paper, there still seems to be way to much going on here. ideas are introduced, messed around with and then droped. we've had cogpen, we are now getting cogphenomolgy > when experiencing an AO, we do not just perceive its physical properties, we also think about its relationship to its environment; this includes recognizing whether a building harmonizes with or disrupts its surroundings, understanding its historical or cultural significance in that location, or considering how it interacts with natural and urban landscapes. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsaz29yp2pak7wbpmvn9mfx)) - Note: hardly ever though. > (iii) Cognitive phenomenology underlies how we recognize architectural function and how that recognition colors our experience. When we enter a space, we do not simply perceive its structure; we also anticipate and interpret its intended purpose based on our conceptual understanding of architectural types. These expectations are not purely perceptual; they are shaped by thought. Recognizing that a building is a church rather than a train station immediately alters our engagement. This mental framing guides attention, influencing what details we notice (e.g., sacred symbols in a cathedral vs. signage in a station) and how we navigate the space. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsb2aktdhdvkz24pcp40ghv)) - Note: i don't get this. > Fisher (… ) has argued that architecture can be experienced narratively, not just spatially. Some buildings unfold experientially as we move through them, creating a structured sequence of cognitive engagements. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsb48kazhb4m66h3q5p9nrg)) - Note: this seems interesting > I argue, relies on cognitive phenomenology, as we mentally structure and conceptualize our engagement with space as unfolding meaningfully over time. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsb5cjdjrmsexfj4e8znnv7)) - Note: come the fuck on. > This kinaesthetic dimension deepens the experiential engagement with architecture, creating a dynamic interplay between perception and action. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsbf7pb9f01q610smtjgsgc)) - Note: chatgpt much? > These experiences do not arise from the technical function of an AO – which, as I previously argued, is to host agency – but rather emerge from its experiential function. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsc2y2kq6sdrb8pdwjrftzy)) - Note: i don't really understand this distinction. > Often, architectural explorations involve free roaming within the architectural objects. Often, architectural explorations involve free roaming within architectural objects. This agency – which I call the agency of the free explorer – is activated when individuals move through a space with curiosity and intention, uncovering the AO’s formal properties and, through them, its aesthetic, symbolic, or emotional dimensions. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmsc4v2c01bw9jr059gzyv1n)) - Note: double sentence sort of thing going on here. > the explorer’s agency is often felt as being guided by the AO itself: ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jmscc7qjch7dg0kwncmd4r9t)) > [[8]](#ftnt_ref8) In other words, AOs are technical artifacts imbued with both a technical and an experiential function. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jms6h18nxw2act3g1cfjz0w8)) - Note: why are you bothering to say this?