Two independent channels of resistance proffer themselves against the ubiquity of the Megalopolis and the exclusivity of sight. They presuppose a mediation of the mind/body split in Western thought. They may be regarded as archaic agents with which to counter the potential universality of rootless civilization. The first of these is the tactile resilience of the place-form; the second is the sensorium of the body. These two are posited here as interdependent, because each is contingent on the other. The place-form is inaccessible to sight alone just as simulacra exclude the tactile capacity of the body.23

         While the preoccupation with the body has become a progressive theme in recent architecture, in Frampton’s work it remains tied to a somewhat reactionary urban agenda – slightly too reminiscent of Heidegger’s nostalgic longing for the “rooted” vernacular lifestyle of the pre-industrial Black Forest.

The Body in Space – Movement and Experience 

Other architects who have worked on this theme of the perceiving body in its relation to space have begun to break away from the restrictive archetypes suggested by Frampton’s critical regionalism. Among these might be counted Tadao Ando in Japan, Herzog and De Meuron in Europe and Steven Holl in America. With each of these architects, as in Louis Kahn’s work, there is a desire to articulate material qualities, in order to heighten our perceptual awareness of the encounter between the body and the world of things. In Holl’s own recent book Intertwining, he specifically engaged with the work of Merleau-Ponty and even used the term “Kiasma” to label his project for the Helsinki Art Museum. Among younger architects, Ben van Berkel has also been exploring this theme of movement, particularly in the Mobius House, recently completed. The design is based on interlocking use-patterns and the sequence of possible movements throughout the day and it 

11 Carlo Scarpa – Architectural Institute of the University of Venice, Venice, 1966: Entrance.(David Short)

12 Carlo Scarpa – Architectural Institute of the University of Venice, Venice, 1966: Detail of bridge.(David Short)

On a smaller scale, this can also be seen in the design of the Fisher House in Pennsylvania, where the simple arrangement of timber boxes provides a dramatic “viewing-platform” over the landscaped site.

         In the work of another writer, Kenneth Frampton, some of these ideas have been taken further, with the attempt to provide a programme for what he called a “critical regionalism”. This would again address the idea of place but within the context of a “global” architecture, through a “critical” reinterpretation of vernacular building types and the use of local materials and craft skills. Frampton was again picking up on Heidegger and his attachment to the sense of place, though he identified a number of recent architects he felt had also been working on a similar theme. In the final chapter of his book Modern Architecture: A Critical History, he looked at the work of the Italian architect Carlo Scarpa, both as an example of regional architecture and a seductive collage of sensuous materials. Frampton has since developed a more specific interest in tectonic culture in modern architecture and in a recent book he reinterpreted a number of key buildings in terms of their construction. This shift of interest towards architectural detail shows a further influence of phenomenological thinking, as the expressive potential of a building’s materiality is seen as enriching the experience of form and space. As Marco Frascari – a former assistant of Scarpa’s – wrote on this theme:

         In architecture feeling a handrail, walking up steps or between walls, turning a corner and noting the sitting of a beam in a wall, are coordinated elements of visual and tactile sensations. The location of those details gives birth to the conventions that tie a meaning to a perception.22

         These two themes of place and bodily experience become for Frampton a mode of “resistance” – a way of countering the alienation of the city and the emphasis in our media culture on the sense of vision:

10 Louis I. Kahn – Fisher House, Pennsylvania, 1960. (Jonathan Hale)

7 Louis I. Kahn – Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas, 1966-72: Interior. (Jonathan Hale)

8 Louis I. Kahn – Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas, 1966-72. (Jonathan Hale)

9 Louis I. Kahn – Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas, 1966-72: Interior. (Jonathan Hale)