Beyond [Spatial] Experience

Left: Cadaqués, Span; Right: Holiday house by Sergison Bates
Image Source

This week I focused on the 2012 article by architect Jeremy Till, “Scarcity contra Austerity”, published in Places Journal.  I found the heart of Till’s argument to be intriguing and important for consideration. “The focus of the designer needs to shift away from simply using less, as under the rule of austerity, to understanding the constitution of scarcity – where and why and how resources are lacking – and grappling with this in a creative manner,” writes Till.  

For the most part I am in agreement with Till.  Certainly the current one percent’s “architecture of austerity” or the ninety-nine percent’s “diminished architecture” are not addressing the issue of rapidly decreasing resources.  However, I believe that there is a place for the “architecture of austerity” that is championed by architects such as Caruso St. John and Sergison Bates.  I’ve followed their work for a few years now, and I genuinely think work like theirs is important for keeping the language of Architecture alive in a market hell-bent on reducing the value of Architecture in society.  This is especially true when we consider the value of permanence and craftsmanship.  But as I said, I understand where Till is coming from in his comprehensive argument.

My hesitation about an architecture that is a construction of scarcity is what happens to the bodily experience of architecture when our current understanding of tectonics and tactility, shapers of this experience, is deconstructed by moving away from the object?  Say we solve the issue of designing for scarcity, but then what happens to the issue of phenomenology in our built environment?  Additionally, I want to revise Till’s use of “object” as a descriptor for architecture with “spatial object” to emphasize architecture of austerity as beyond form.  I understand phenomenology is not a major concern for many, particularly the public since this requires a dive into theoretical territories.  But most, if not all, examples of phenomenological architecture approach the architecture of austerity dismissed by Till.  If we shift away from the spatial object, we must reconsider the entire language of architecture as full of mechanisms that are in contradiction with scarcity.  However some of these mechanisms are important for creating a meaningful place for our lives, even if they are not always economical or resource savvy.

How do we focus away from the spatial object to its processes while retaining the essential forces of the spatial object in our lives?