Sie sind auf Seite 1von 38

FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF VISION TILL THE PERSPECTIVE OF EXPERIENCE

PHENOMENON OF VISUAL PERCEPTION SEEN OVER


WEXNER CENTER FOR VISUAL ARTS AND
KNOWLTON SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

THESIS

Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirement for


the degree Masters of Architecture
In the graduate School
At Ohio State University

By
Fatema Quresh Kabir, B.Arch
*****

The Ohio State University

2009

Dissertation Committee
Professor Jeff Kipnis Approved by
Associate Professor Ashley Schafer
Assistant Professor John McMorrough Advisor
Masters of Architecture Graduate Program
Copyright by

Fatema Quresh Kabir

2008
ABSTRACT

The visual world is about an individual's perception or understanding, while one

unfolds the concepts of visual phenomenon multiple unknown characters come to fore. The

realization of these changes is accredited to elapse of time and cognition of brain and eye.

There are multiple layers involved in visual perception for knowing the intended

phenomenon.

In the first layer the characters are neutral and unidentified on the given picture plane.

They create what is called the retinal images in the back of the eye. Once the brain registers

these fragments in each other's proximity it is able to recognize the image as whole. The

recognition may also be accredited to historicizing.

The essence of visual perception lies in the analysis of the view; this could be in

either of the following two ways; exploring the real from the created illusions or

experiencing the overall space by getting integrated within, through the view. For a writer

experiencing is the most important is well said by Maurice Merleau-Ponty; “How would the
1
painter or poet express anything other than his encounter with the world?”

1 - Pallasma, Juhani. The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the Senses, Touching the World. Great Britain, TJ international

III
For a writer of any field, experiencing what they write would be their practical

knowledge. It plays the role of chemistry or biology laboratory. Similarly in architecture

understanding human perceptions needs personal experiencing. Knowing that visual

perception has multiple phenomenons to display, minimum number of structures studied

could not be less than two and considering the factor of laboratory backup to my thesis (as I

would call it), It was ideal for them to be located on Ohio State University campus.

The cases studies carried out during the Thesis; explore the multiple layers of

perception that happen in the structures. Peter Eisenman's Wexner Center of 1989 is

probably one of his unintentional design that envelopes the optical illusion phenomenon of

visual perception in it very artistically. The structure is one that functionalists might refute

but experientialists would support. They would also support Mack Scogin Merill Elam

Architects' Knowlton School of Architecture of 2004 which identifies Maurice Merleau

Ponty's phenomenology it its spatial quality.

IV
Dedicated to my God Father

V
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all I want offer my gratitude to the architect/ designers of the two case study

structures involved in my Thesis; Peter Eisenman's Wexner Center of 1989 and Mack Scogin

Merill Elam Architects' Knowlton School of Architecture of 2004. In order to read the

structures based on visual phenomenon; understanding of Phenomenology provided by

Maurice Merleau-Ponty, visual grammar provided by Kepes were leading tools of analysis.

I also acknowledge the support of my graduate advisor John McMorrough,

Department head Ashley Shafer and thesis committee member Jeff Kipnis in successfully

accomplishing the undertaken project.

VI
VITA

October 06 1982 .................................................Born - Mumbai, India

2006........................................................................B.Arch, Mumbai University India

2008........................................................................M.Arch, Ohio State University

2008 - present.......................................................Graduate Research Associate,

Ohio State University

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Architecture

VII
TABLE OF CONTENT
Page
Abstract ...............................................................................................................III
Dedication ............................................................................................................V
Acknowledgment .................................................................................................VI
Vita .......................................................................................................................VII
List of Figures .....................................................................................................IX

Chapters:

1. Visual Phenomenon In Wexner Center For Visual Arts .....................1


1.1 Historicizing ..................................................................................1
1.2 Changing Sets In The Wexner Gallery .....................................5
1.3 Setting Out ...................................................................................10

2. Visual Phenomenon In Knowlton School Of Architecture .................12


2.1 Space-Time Overlap ....................................................................12
2.2 Phenomenology Of Visual Perception .......................................16

3. Perception Of Perspective .......................................................................19


3.1 History ...........................................................................................19
3.2 Kepes Over Perspective ...............................................................23

4. Bibliography ..............................................................................................26

VIII
LIST OF IMAGES

Image Page

1.1: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Center For Arts - 1989,


Lattice Walkway.........................................................................................4

1.2: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Center For Arts - 1989,


Exhibition Gallery – Andy Warhol Set up (fall08)..............................8

1.3: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Center For Arts - 1989,


Exhibition Gallery – 1/25/07 Winter Exhibition Opening Party..........8

1.4: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Center For Arts - 1989


Exhibition Space – Andy Warhol Set up (fall08).................................9

1.5: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Center For Arts - 1989,


Exhibition Space – Wegman set up.......................................................9

1.6: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Centre For Arts- 1989,


Armory Towers and North Sitting..........................................................11

1.7: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Centre For Arts- 1989,


Armory Towers and South Sitting..............................................................11

2.1: Mack Scogin Merill Elam Architects, Knowlton School of Architecture


View of central open staircase from the ramp......................................14

IX
2.2: Mack Scogin Merill Elam Architects, Knowlton School of Architecture
Opposite Central Open Staircase - Jury.................................................15

2.3: Mack Scogin Merill Elam Architects, Knowlton School of Architecture


Ramp...........................................................................................................18

2.4: Mack Scogin Merill Elam Architects, Knowlton School of Architecture


Library........................................................................................................18

3.1: Filippo Brunelleschi, Florence - 1413


Linear Perspective Painting of Baptistry................................................21

3.2: M.S Escher, The corner house drawing


Complexity of Multiple Perspectives......................................................21
VISUAL PHENOMENON IN WEXNER CENTER FOR VISUAL ARTS

Multiple personalities of characters


Deceiving the mental labyrinth
Play on the stage of design
At Wexner - The center for visual arts

HISTORICIZING

Wexner Center for visual arts tests the intellectual perception of the viewers.

Deceiving the mental labyrinth at every step through the phenomenon of visual perception,

the structure evolves as a multiplication of fictions. The act involves multiple scenes and

characters. The characters change masks as one gets a closer look of their generic nature. As

mentioned by Thomas Fisher in his 'Intro/duction' article on Wexner; “Through such

surprises of inconveniences the building forces us to question not only our assumptions of

the physical world..... - but about our conventional behavior”2. Owing to the unexpected

changes, multiple characterization of the structure leaves its viewer wondering between real

and virtual.

Wexner Center is set up on a stage at Ohio State University campus facing the North

High street of Columbus. Viewers walking to the structure are unaware of the complexity

hidden within.

2 Fisher, Thomas. 1989. [Wexner Center] intro/duction. Progressive Architecture. 70 (10):88

1
The undefined horizontal lattice standing before the main entrance, is strangely inviting. The

viewer wonders of its function, realizing the individuality of the entrance. The lattice still

exists, letting the viewer wonder the purpose. It is still a good start for a structure that holds

surprises at every step for the viewers. Once the viewer reaches the podium, it's just a matter

of turning to the right to know what the lattice is about. While the turn answers previous

questions, it raises new complexities. The horizontal lattice is now seen in perspective along

the walkway.

For example Vincent Scully's statement in his article on Wexner; “I was powerfully

moved by its illusionary perspective of the Lattice that runs through and alongside it”3. It has

and will always amaze the critiques who walk over it, in any era, probably by exploring the

new ways through which the lattice weaves ambiguity. The tilt of the scaffolding suggests a

slope in the ground of the walkway. The depth is illusionary and the ground is flat in its

generic existence. This was efficiently realized and mentioned by Vincent Scully. The

walkway height is divided into two rather unequal halves by an off central layer of horizontal

beams. The reducing lengths of the beams make the height seem reducing towards the end of

the walkway while also giving the slope to the ground as mentioned above. They also create

the effect of dual perspective in the walkway, which is realized only at the start of the

walkway. While there is the generic perspective created in the walkway in one direction, the

viewer will also see a second perspective in the opposite direction happening above him/her.

While one walks through the lattice, elements of optical illusion of Parthenon

resonate from it. Parthenon manipulates visual perception phenomenon to recreate the real.

3 - Scully, Vincent Joseph. 1989. Theory and delight. Progressive Architecture. 70 (10):86-87.

2
The prevailing theory that a long line appears to be concave in-spite of its inherent

straightness is a known phenomena of visual perception. Entasis is the correction of this

theory in Parthenon. This was exploited to bring reality to fore. The trend in late 1900s was

vice versa and hence the Wexner center seems to play on the opposite lines. The long, thin,

square, vertical grids appear concave and seem to bend inwards for the viewer, when actually

they are any day straighter than the Parthenon columns which were intentionally bent. The

reflection of the horizontal and vertical grid in the mirrors on the left side of the walkway also

make the columns appear curvy, reinforcing the non-straightness of the grid, emphasizing

the deceptions of the structure though not claimed by its writer.

3
Image 1.1: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Center For Arts - 1989
Lattice Walkway
4
CHANGING SETS IN THE WEXNER GALLERY

Exhibit areas that open to the left of the walkway lead the viewers onto a new scene.

The scene unexpectedly ends into not more than 1.5ft wide staircase. The staircase takes the

viewer down the ramp, back to the start to once again replay and enter the second stage of the

act; the second exhibit room. If not closely noticed the staircase could be missed, it's at the

ultimate position of the exhibit room confirming the viewer's successful completion of the

scene. It appears to be a false stair more of a rebate or a piece of artifact on display;

interestingly enough the rather permanent piece of art functions. The staircases are not the

only inbuilt permanent artifacts of the gallery that function when any exhibition is up, the

cubicles that appear suddenly from no-where in the walls of the structure seem strange and

are not realized until they are closely viewed.

The changing quality provided to the exhibition space and the gallery is undeniably

intentional and is inescapably deceptive, even though it is a normal function of a stage. The

changes that take place in the gallery in every show happening at Wexner are drastically

different and they considerably mask the original face of the gallery's interior. Every exhibit

show puts on a new face on the existing, giving a changed dress to the stage and its

characters. The exhibition cubicles are also plain empty spaces that are available to adapt the

fresh set ups. From display products to the seating, flooring and even ceiling achieve altered

affects, covering the original blank white walls, floors and ceiling.

5
There have been multiple acts played on the stage of Wexner gallery. Couple of them

that happened last year, like the show of charles Long introduced a new scaffolding on the

walls. The viewers were allowed to play with the exhibits and create their own façade,

involving the viewer from the visual to physical level. Spring exhibition of 2007 also

adopted similar idea. Continuous black boards were available for the visitors to write on,

making the visitors interact with the exhibits physically also. The stages, then dint remain

limited for the players of the act but the viewers also became part of the play.

Though Andy Warhol's4 exhibition seems to be limited to visual interaction for the

visitors, there is an unexpected element introduced at the end of the gallery walkway. While

walking up the gallery the sight created at the end evokes multiple questions. There are some

floating figures that can be seen, and one may wonder how they manage to get such huge fish

and create an aquarium at the end. The curtain wall in between obstructs the vision enough to

deceive the real perception, until the viewer gets into closer proximity with the exhibit. They

are helium filled, metallic, plastic film, silver clouds suspended in the end triangular corner.

The clouds float in air and are in continuous movement. Visitors are allowed to touch them.

While the curtain is nothing but a double layer of strings suspended from the ceiling,

functionally to keep the clouds within their assigned area.

The string curtain is repeated at every intersection of gallery and exhibition area. The

transition from the gallery path into the exhibition realm is defined artistically enough for the

viewer to mentally perceive and yet not get visually disturbed. The new ambience inside the

exhibition area; matching print carpets to the new seating, the suspended movie screens etc.

4 - Andy Warhol. Other Voices, Other Rooms Exhibition. Wexner Center for Visual Arts. Fall08

6
all the more define the new exploration, which ends at the narrow staircase. From the

drastically different interiors of the exhibition area back into the gallery walkway space is

strategically transitioned through the narrow staircase to control the viewer's concentration

on the on going drama of Andy Warhol.

The original stage of the structure can never give an idea of the vast adaptations it

may have gone through or can go through in future. Drama is also like a piece of art, which

cannot be imagined by a viewer until it is written and played by the characters on the stage.

Similarly Wexner was unimaginable until before Eisenman drew his diagram of illusions in

perception.

7
Image 1.2: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Center For Arts - 1989
Exhibition Gallery – Andy Warhol Set up (fall08)

Image 1.3: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Center For Arts - 1989


Exhibition Gallery – 1/25/07 Winter Exhibition Opening Party
8
Image 1.4: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Center For Arts - 1989
Exhibition Space – Andy Warhol Set up (fall08)

Image 1.5: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Center For Arts - 1989


Exhibition Space – Wegman set up
9
SETTING OUT

When the play seems to end, the viewers yet don't realize the scenes awaiting them

after the curtains fall. Walking out of the gallery at the first floor level reaches the viewer

under the second lattice walkway. This walkway does not complicate the viewer instead

provides space for the reminiscence of the 1897 armory demolished in 1959 is re-built by

Eisenman to play its illusions. While the east towers are lost in the lattice; the west side

towers hide the lattice. The split and repositioned brick layout of the towers make them

appear as ruins of the past and hence resonate the past not only mentally but also visually. The

armory appearing as a block, release a C shaped space enclosed within them. The viewers

remain in kind of misconception of viewing block columns until they are seen from the

hollow side.

Similar to the illusion of depth at the walkway here the walls next to the armory

create a feeling of recession, making the land appear underground. The seating area

developed along the wall adds to the underground seating experience. While this seating on

the left of the armory appears underground the seating on the right side of the armory appears

extra elevated. There is an amphitheater kind of area created on the right side of the armory.

These steps have varying tread and riser sizes. Each step grows in its riser and treads size

from right to left making the steps appear to end or vanish at the reducing end.

Walking away from the structure, viewing it from the west the armory defines the

entrance. It is flanked by seating areas on both sides; left is sunken and right is elevated. Over

all the stage unusually welcomes the viewer back inside through its west facade. The act of

illusion continues even after the play is over.

10
Image 1.6: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Centre For Arts- 1989
Armory Towers and North Sitting

Image 1.7: Peter Eisenman, Wexner Centre For Arts - 1989


Armory Towers and South Sitting
11
VISUAL PHENOMENON IN KNOWLTON SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

Encompassing the world around


Staging phenomenology in perception
The architecture institute Knowlton School of Architecture
Experiments, functional experiential realm of perception

SPACE-TIME OVERLAP

Exploiting the tools of visual perception in Knowlton hall; Mack Scogin Merill Elam

Architects have walked through the mental labyrinth of the users and viewers. Located in

Ohio state university, since 2004 the structure stands covered in its rectangular marble clad

shell that domesticates space and time in its self, enabling the viewer to experience a dual

continuum as they travel through the structure. The visitors as well as the actors of the play

are enticed by the space-time domain.

Beginning at the entrance with the administration block on the right the viewer is

facing the ramp which carves its path all the way to the fourth floor. Obstructed view of the

ramp achieved from in-between the shear walls and circular columns develop an interest of

the unknown. Literal transparency of modernist material provided clarity in view and

interpretation, while the spatial juxtaposition and overlapping planes introduced a use of

phenomenal transparency; as was identified by Rowe. The bare faced shear walls and

12
concrete columns running across multiple floors; reflect phenomenal transparency. They

break the vision due to their opacity. The broken view continues again after the end of the

element. The part hidden by the walls or the columns is assumed by the viewer through their

memory of past. This interaction of the material with the viewer's perception evokes the

experience of being in a temporal continuum. The opaque elements register a questionable

depth while the combinations of the planes as an elevation let there be variation in

interpretation.

These columns and walls introduce play of shadows in the structure. Shadows may

be either attached or cast. Attached shadows lie directly on the source of creation. Cast

shadows are thrown from one subject onto another. The shear walls create light and dark

areas around it self by casting shadows. The central open staircase documents interactive

play of cast and attached shadows. Attached shadows are subconsciously perceived in the

whole space through the realization of height, depth etc of volume/space. Interaction of these

shadows with the psychic of the viewer takes the viewer into a realm of fantasies and dreams.

Not just the present or the past, it's an act of the virtual.

The wide ramp area ahead of the administration block flanked by gui gallery on one

side and open staircase on the other is realized with additional pleasure after the walk

through the narrow paths built between the double height shear walls. The juries happening

in the central open space and the workshops of Gui gallery, are events whose moments are

captured within the history of the structure. These spaces resonate the past and reflect it in

their existence. Viewers can hence perceive the past through the historicizing of the space.

13
Image2.1: Mack Scogin Merill Elam Architects, Knowlton School of Architecture - 2004
View of central open staircase from the ramp

Ultimately the concepts of visual perception of architecture tie past, present and future to the

existent body. These three phases of time are experienced by the viewer or the user;

phenomenologically, by being a part of the space, physically and mentally.

Moving up the ramp, the viewer reaches the strategically positioned two hundred

seat auditorium at the second floor mid-landing. It connects to the lower floor classrooms,

second floor administration and the third floor studios through the ramp.

14
Image 2.2: Mack Scogin Merill Elam Architects, Knowlton School of Architecture - 2004
Opposite Central Open Staircase - Jury

15
PHENOMENOLOGY OF VISUAL PERCEPTION

From second floor to fourth floor the ramp is flanked by forty-five undergraduate and

graduate studios on its both sides. Overlooking from either side of the ramp, the orthogonally

juxtaposed; classrooms, studios, recreational spaces and administrative activities are visible.

The ramp not only overlooks the interior but also some of the exterior spaces of the structure.

At the second floor mid-landing of the ramp, the glazed wall looks onto the entrance porch.

Though the ramp runs throughout the structure, it has multiple obstructions in-between like

the shear walls or the columns, hence its views are not defined at any point, yet it defines and

controls the behavior in the structure. The classrooms, studios, library, administration etc

situated on either side of the ramp, provide a peripheral vision to the viewer, hence

integrating the viewer and or the inhabitant within the structure. As stated by Juhani

Pallasmaa; there is medical evidence of peripheral vision having higher priority in our

perceptual and mental system5. The unconscious peripheral perceptions of spaces transform

the retinal gestalt into spatial and bodily experience. Juhani calls this architecture as Haptic,

as it engages and unites with the viewer not only physically but also phenomenologically.

The phenomenological experience of walking through the ramp is not accredited

only to the spatial juxtaposition but is also extended to the overlapping time factor of the

ramp. The ramp travels from first to fourth floor, covering an ideal journey of the students

from the time they enter till the level of graduation.

The vector of time flows freely through the multiple changing spaces explored by the

student on their journey. A viewer when crosses the floors while walking over the ramp, is

5 - Pallasma, Juhani. The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the Senses, Touching the World. Great Britain,
TJ international:
16
visualize the multiple layers of life captured in the structure and is also able to experience the

elapsing time as the years of the student or the floors of the structure begin and end.

End of the ramp journey or the fourth floor of the structure seems like the brim of

knowledge with the location of the thirty thousand volume library. It's not only the ultimate

assemble of knowledge but is also the end of the sojourn that started at the entrance. Students

enter as undergraduates and move to their graduation exploring themselves and the multiple

domains of architecture. The library culminates multiple scenes of the Knowlton hall act.

Play of light, transparency, peripheral vision etc. all together makes the library.

A piece of black velvet which absorbs much of the light it receives, may under strong

illumination send out as much light as a dimly lit piece of white silk, which reflects most of

energy. Similarly in the library; in the interaction of multiple objects, colors and materials

variety of illumination strengths are observed. Luminance power of surfaces tricks the

viewer's perception of light in the space. Some surfaces like glass reflect their property of

transparency and some appear opaque much clearer under the play of light. Transparency

and opacity add an experience of privacy and openness in the respective areas. Unlike the

private cabins of standard library, the peripheral vision of students doing various activities

advances the integration of the viewer into the space, even if not supporting concentration.

By balancing time context in the given space and making it realizable for the viewer

and the inhabitant; Knowlton hall achieves the consent of user's requirements. It puts up an

act which is unending for the user. Even after reaching the fourth floor the viewer wishes the

play to continue and himself to be a part of it perpetually.

17
Image 2.3: Mack Scogin Merill Elam Architects, Knowlton School of Architecture - 2004
Ramp

Image 2.4: Mack Scogin Merill Elam Architects, Knowlton School of Architecture - 2004
Library
18
PERCEPTION OF PERSPECTIVE

The art of Wexner Center


The experience of Knowlton Hall
Are the perceptions of Perspective

HISTORY

In visual perception, perspective does not seem as a new phenomenon from

Brunelleschi's definitions to Michelangelo's exploration for realism and Escher's

exploitation to achieve the virtual; perspective is a part and whole of visual perception. Not

that perspective always works towards realism; still the word itself forms its complex

inescapable domain. It frames itself not only over architecture but all forms of art; painting,

sculpture, drama/movies etc. Should the perspective be limited to architecture only the

world would have an unrealistic perception.

Yearn of realism in paintings reflected around 1413 when Brunelleschi painted a

picture of the Baptistry in Florence on a burnished silver surface, right on top of its own

reflection. To demonstrate that his painting was an exact replica that could fool the eye, he

drilled a small hole in the surface and then stood directly in front of the Baptistry, looking

through the peephole to see the real building. He then held up a second, mirror in front of his

19
panel. The second mirror blocked the view of the real building, but reflected his painted

version, which appeared nearly identical. The idea of holding a mirror was to capture the

reflection of sky in it and hence emphasize the reality. This new technique, called linear

perspective, was a revolutionary development in the history of art. From art to sculpture to

architecture was not a slow journey. Perspective was taken up in different perspectives.

Michelangelo understood the concept of perspective and explored it in his sculpture

of David to achieve the realism in it. Considering that the statue would be placed at a great

height (platform) and now knowing that any object at distance is viewed smaller than its

usual size. Michelangelo increased the size of the head so that the viewer at the foot of the

statue would perceive the head in proportion to the whole figure.

After renaissance other painters modified and disrupted the spatial unity of the linear

perspective by introducing multiple vanishing points. Escher introduced multiple

perspectives and stepped away from the real. Unlike Michelangelo, Escher incorporated the

phenomenon to add complexity in the image and confuse the viewer with multiple planes of

perception. For example the diagram of concave and convex, where the walls become floors

or mid-landings and vice versa or the drawing of corner house where the perception of the

corner could be as concave or convex are complex representations that trick the real to be

perceived as virtual.

20
Image 3.1: Filippo Brunelleschi, Florence - 1413
Linear Perspective Painting of Baptistry

Image 3.2: M.S Escher, The corner house drawing


Complexity of Multiple Perspectives
21
But the growing abstraction and complexity in response to the postwar solutions of

modernism and the strong societal influences like the media and consumer culture lead to

loss of meaning and purity from the fields of art. Architects realized the necessity to

reinvigorate the essence of architecture from within itself, to evolve it as a discipline with its

individualistic language. At this time Kepes a Hungarian-born artist and art theorist

attempted to define the language of visual perception in art and architecture through his

writings in 1964.

He redefined the grammar and syntax of visual perception by explicating it in three

phases; the plastic organization, the visual representation and the dynamic iconography.

According to kepes an artist could interact with the viewer and achieve the varying

perceptions through visual phenomenon by following the above mentioned three steps in

design. Plastic Organization is the establishment of the basic visual perception phenomenon

on an interpretable ground. Visual representation is using the plastic organization language

on the image for creating a comprehensible view. Dynamic iconography is re-establishment

of the view to elevate and or redefine the understanding of the phenomenon.

22
KEPES OVER PERSPECTIVE

Talking about perspective in Kepes' language; its existence is old, but the concept

needs to be re-established for the viewer to acknowledge it in unique sense; ie the dynamic

iconography needs to be reworked on. Kepes also considers the above mentioned study of

the history of perspective; he leaves it after that expecting the new generation to explore

ahead of the existing. For example as a phenomenon to refute the real; Escher explored the

perspective and introduced a new concept at his time. Dynamic iconography of Kepes is a

yearn to explore the existing visual phenomenon in new directions and hence establish a new

culture in visual perception with the already known concepts.

At Wexner Centre, the perspective appears at multiple places with uniqueness in

every occurrence. Dual perspective affect at the walkway and the changing effects of

perspective in the gallery both as explained before play out as new characters in the act.

They have been observed and critiqued on multiple times. They are the known

representation of visual phenomenon in plastic organization vocabulary; as Kepes would

say. The dynamic iconography is left enough ambiguous by Kepes for the future generations

to explore, in their new ways, responding to the on going culture. The Lattice perspective; an

optical illusion happening at dual level; makes the structure a piece of art of the Art Center

that befits the name functionally. The Wexner Center for Arts represents its name not only at

the functional level but is a representation of itself in its visual perception also. As rightly

questioned by K.B Jones “is it a building yet”6. No it is not just a building; it is a piece of art

representing the function enthralled in it self. The phenomenon of perspective represented in

6 - Jones, Kay Bea. 1991. Post Partum: Wexner fragments. Reflections: the Journal of the School of
Architecture University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (8):12-21.
23
architecture entertains the aesthetical as well as functional needs of the structure. Hence

holding up the concepts of its era since 1989 and answering the questions of dynamic

iconography of Kepes.

The experiential layer of visual perception may be termed as Phenomenology of

Visual Perception. According to Maurice Merleau-Ponty; Phenomenology is the analysis of


7
the experience of the existential environment as perceived by humans . Ponty also states that

knowing the essence is not the ultimate goal. Idea is to incorporate that knowledge into the

perceivable environment as it exists in relation to human, space and time context. We witness

this incorporation in various fields like; painting, Sculpture and Architecture.

While by Kepes' dynamic iconography was limited to vision, Ponty's

Phenomenology still seems to befit its requirements. The word perspective here is not

limited to the literal representation; it is the intellectual perspective experienced. While the

ramp establishes a view representational perspective ahead of the viewer, as one walks up or

down the ramp, it also opens up psychological perspectives of non architectural elements.

Intellectual perspective develops at functional and phenomenological level. The

ramp establishing view of the studios around, as explained before controls the behavior of

the students in the studio, is a perspective of the viewer and the user to adopt to the design in

that particular manner. The organization of the studios around the ramp is the development of

the peripheral perspective as discussed before; evokes a feeling of integration in the viewer

and hence the viewer is just not a viewer but a part of the representation.

7 - Ponty. MM. Phenomenology of Perception, Preface. New York: Routledge Classics, 1962. Pxvi
24
While unfolding the unknown
Of illusions and deception
Of function and Phenomenology
Visual phenomenon encounters
Multiple perceptions of perspectives

25
BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Language of vision by Kepes Gyorgy - 1906

2. Phenomenology of perception by Maurice Merleau-Ponty - 2002

3. Theories of visual perception by Ian E. Gordon

4. Art & Physics: parallel visions in space, time and light by Leonard shlain - 1991

5. The eyes of the skin: architecture and the senses by Juhani Pallasmaa - 2005

6. Fragments of infinity, a kaleidoscope of math and arts by Peterson -

7. Theory and delight from Progressive Architecture by Scully, Vincent Joseph - 1989

8. [Wexner Center] o-O from Progressive Architecture by Somol, Robert E. - 1989

9. [Wexner Center] intro/duction from Progressive Architecture by Fisher, Thom


as - 1989

10. Post Partum: Wexner fragments and Reflections from The Journal of the School of

Architecture University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign by Jones, Kay Bea. - 1991

26
11. Wexner Center for the Visual Arts, Ohio from Architectural Design by Eisenman,

Peter. - 1988

12. Taking risks: Eisenman in Ohio from Inland Architect by Davidson, Cynthia - 1990

13. Wexner Center for the Visual Arts, The Ohio State University / a building designed

by Eisenman / Trott Architects; critical essays by Rafael Moneo and Anthony Vidler
New York : Rizzoli - 1989

14. Programming aspiration - Mack Scogin, Merrill Elam: Knowlton Hall. from Praxis:

Journal of Writing + Building by Schafer, Ashley - 2006

15. Program is as program does from Praxis: Journal of Writing + Building by Dean,

Penelope. - 2006.

16. At Ohio State University, Mack Scoggin Merrill Elam's new Knowlton Hall from

Architectural Record by Hart, Sara. - 2005.

17. Mack Scogin Merrill Elam--Knowlton Hall by Todd Gannon, Margaret Fletcher,

Teresa Ball - 2005

27

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen