_Pallasmaa, J. (2005). The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the senses. Chichester, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Academy.

For a while, designers usually create with vision as their forefront. In the Eyes of the Skin, Pallasmaa tackles the “bias towards vision, and the suppression of the other sense.” The engagement of our senses in architecture plays a very significant role, it informs us of our presence and existence in space. The encounter of a multi-sensory space is discussed as well, explaining the objective of such spaces and the importance of it. Pallasmaa also emphasizes how engaging other senses aside from just our visual is connected to how we perceive and engage the space as well as our capacity of thoughts.

_Busch, A. (2004). The uncommon life of common objects: Essays on design and the everyday. New York: D.A.P./Distributed Art Publishers.

Although Akiko Busch describes the intimate relationships that one has with certain objects, one could argue that these object focused relationships could also foster certain intimate experiences within the space that they occupy. These stories explore and describe to us how we often learn to understand and also redefine our relationship without object. Busch elegantly describes to us the cherished relationships that her family, friends and as well as herself has with objects such as a stroller, a cereal box, a vegetable peeler, and many more. As we all know, all objects are designed and they are usually designed for efficient function. However, the intimate experiences that users have with these objects reveals something much grander. It reveals humane and genuine moments, moments that help us understand these artefacts in a much deeper level. Any of these everyday objects “compose a profile”, they shape us, they “tell a story not only about them, but also about the rooms, the landscapes they inhabit.”

_Gallagher, Winifred. The Power of Place: How Our Surroundings Shape Our Thoughts, Emotions, and Actions. New York: Poseidon, 1993. Print.

_Ellard, Colin. Places of the Heart: The Psychogeography of Everyday Life. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

_Malnar, J. M., & Vodvarka, F. (2004). Sensory design. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

_Beatley, T. (2011). Biophilic cities: Integrating nature into urban design and planning. Washington, DC: Island Press.

The idea of a biophilic city includes not only lush greens of various scales but citizens would also be actively involved with the nature that is offered around them as well. A biophilic city allows for “urbanites” to be exposed to native foliage and also helps us realize the potentials of how our city can include greenery. Beatley describes how a biophilic city can be executed through our infrastructure, our roofs, our patios, our small urban gardens, our buildings’ walls; the list can go on really. A green wall by the botanist Patrick Blanc in Paris stood out from Beatley’s list of green precedents. Incorporating such designs has demonstrated its social benefits, this wall evoked amazement, wonderment, engagement, and participation. Being a part of a biophilic city sounds like something out of a fairy tale. It may seem impossible to do, but it is gradually getting there, many cities are taking steps towards it. Although Beatley describes the benefits and strategies of how to develop a biophilic city, these recommendations could also be scaled down to be better fit for facilities.

_Giesecke, A., & Jacobs, N. (2012). Earth perfect?: Nature, utopia and the garden. London: Black Dog Publishing.

In this book of essays, Earth Perfect? Nature, Utopia, and The Garden, the author Donald Dunham explores the relationship between the garden with architecture. Here he emphasizes about how the idea of a garden has the usual connotation of gardening as merely a chore or as a hobby, which also pairs with backbreaking work and dirty knees. Many also describe the garden as tamed nature. The place of a garden could also be seen as a clearing of a space that allows for reflection, for people to become aware of the edge condition between nature and the built. To be the mediator between architecture and nature. The birth of a garden is conscious, it requires place and human intervention. Dunham explains the importance in his text, “A deliberately planted tree in a clearing or space in the forest certainly reflects intentional action, but without continued acknowledgment of its existence, it becomes another tree in the forest, no longer able to claim the right of place. It is at the complete mercy of nature untamed.”

_Almusaed, A. (2011). Biophilic and bioclimatic architecture: Analytical therapy for the next generation of passive sustainable architecture. London ; New York: Springer.

Almusaed encapsulates the discipline of biophilic architecture and different methods of how to apply it into our lives. He also references to how the application of biophilic architecture can  benefit us in our overall health and well-being. The introduction of indoor plants has also been proven that it improves indoor air quality. He supplements this by providing the background information of different plants and vegetations, all varying in terms of application and environment.

Many people now typically spend long work hours in built environments, in a detached and dispassionate environment. Such environments can be one of the factors of mental stress, restlessness, and dissatisfaction. Facilities that harbor such long work hour routines should accommodate to the occupants’ needs. Many of these built environments tend to ignore our inbuilt human need for sensory variety. Instead, many spaces are typically designed to solely be visually appealing. Engaging with only our visual senses and not the others doesn’t do the space justice; our eye works together with our body and our other senses to help strengthen our sense of reality.

Considering this, shouldn’t it be critical to design a multisensory space that harmonizes with the occupants, an affectionate space that sympathizes with the them? Perception of our environment is always mediated by our senses. A passive way to engage our senses within facilities could be through botany; it activates our sense of smell, touch, hearing, and sight. The theory of biophilia is that humans have an innate connection to living systems, such as humans, animals and plants. Using the concept of biophilia as leverage to create a multisensory spacescape can be one of the few ways we can help give more meaning and spirit to our disengaging environments.

Introducing natural elements, such as plants, indoors undoubtedly helps improve the indoor air quality but it will also help evoke positive responses in people. Intervening a living system into a facility can also encourage engagement. A series of orchestrated interventions can help reveal the influences and beneficial impacts that they have within facilities. The propinquity, versatility, and arrangements will help define the possibilities and limits of the different interventions. Analyzing the engagement that occupants have with these interventions will help develop design recommendations. These temporal interventions will be executed in the 2nd floor student lounge located within Hayes Hall. It is an ideal(?) location due to the heavy foot traffic, accessibility, and access to daylight.

The involvement and experiences that these interventions may cultivate within our built and cultural environment can be far more significant than the shell that happens to house them. Each intervention will be generate different attributes of engagement. Some would encourage occupants to tend to the plants, while others may encourage occupants to lay down with it.

With everyone’s’ busy schedules and routine days, it is very easy to become restless, bored and eager to give ourselves a mental break. Especially in facilities such as office buildings and schools, a typical user would spend a good majority of their time indoors undertaking multiple tasks.

“Our beds are empty two-thirds of the time. Our living rooms are empty seven-eighths of the time. Our office buildings are empty half of the time. It is time we gave this some thought”         – Buckminster Fuller

People usually spend at least eight hours working, socializing, existing, in  built environments, in  a detached and dispassionate environment. Many built environments tend to ignore the inbuilt human need for sensory variety. Considering the fact that the average human spends a majority of their time in their workplace, shouldn’t it be critical to design a space that harmonizes with the occupants, an affectionate space that sympathizes with the occupants? The concept of a biophilic environment exhibits the instinctive and deep-rooted bond between living systems (such as plants) and humans. Bringing natural elements indoors undoubtedly helps improve indoor air quality, but it can also help evoke positive responses in people, and offers the sensory variation that us humans are frequently yearning for.

This study is intended to study social aspects through the lens of botany within detached facilities, an attempt to evoke cheerfulness in users through the interventions of botany. Can a biophilic environment help produce a more joyful and exuberant place?  Can a biophilic environment help turn space into place? The interventions will be generated as passively as possible to remain unintrusive to the results. If the outcomes are deemed effective to the occupants, then interventions will be implemented within studios/office spaces as well.

With everyone’s’ busy schedules and routine days, it is very easy to become restless, bored and eager to give ourselves a mental break. Especially in facilities such as office buildings and schools, a typical user would spend a good majority of their time indoors undertaking multiple tasks.  

“Our beds are empty two-thirds of the time. Our living rooms are empty seven-eighths of the time. Our office buildings are empty half of the time”  

–Buckminster Fuller

People usually spend at least eight hours in a built environment, in  a detached and dispassionate environment. Many built environments tend to ignore the inbuilt human need for sensory variety. Considering the fact that the average human spends a majority of their time in their workplace, shouldn’t it be critical to design a space that harmonizes with the occupants, an affectionate space that sympathizes with the occupants? The concept of a biophilic environment exhibits the instinctive bond between human beings and living systems. Bringing natural elements indoors helps improve indoor air quality, evoke positive responses in people, and also offers sensory variation.

This study is intended to study the relationship of indoor biophilic environments and the beneficial social impacts on occupants within facilities. Through multiple series of interventions of placing indoor plants in designated area, the frequency of occupants that decide to utilize the space will be observed. The interventions would increase as weeks go by to help calibrate the amount of greenery the occupants would prefer. The interventions will be generated as passively as possible to remain unintrusive to the results. If the outcomes are deemed effective to the occupants, then interventions will be implemented within studios/office spaces as well. Surveys will be conducted to note the effects of botany in the spaces. (What kind of effects though?)

The results of these experiments will ideally help designers appreciate the benefits of a biophilic environments and a sensory conscious space. (What else?) Prodigy, social understanding of botany/biophilia, sense of community, increased appreciation, satisfaction?

Architects/designers are told that they have a very important role within society. They are held responsible for doing and providing improvements/enhancements to the lives of the people. Doing good and enhancing lives involves understanding how humans operate and why they do the things that they do. Occupying a stimulating environment can help enrich the experiences of the space, ideally enhancing the lives/well being of the occupants as well. Many built works are very understimulating therefore may result in restlessness or feeling drained. When focused on the visual it ultimately ignores the inbuilt human need for sensory variety. (This may be due to the lack of “designer friendly” data) At some level, nature engages with majority of our senses, and produces a minor sense of arousal/pleasure.  This study is an initial attempt to research the relationship of a biophilic environment and the engagement of the occupants. Visual data will be produced in hopes to encourage designers to design more for wellness.

Utilizing wonderment, and awe to break up everyday rhythm to pursue wellness. (Not entirely sure how to word this quiet yet, working on it.)

An “Artificial Science” of Architecture – Philip Steadman

1. “In craft production and vernacular architecture new tools or buildings are produced by copying old ones, and the craftsman or woman may be unaware of why or how they function, just that they do work in practice. ”
   I’m slightly confused by this statement. Shouldn’t the craftsman understand how and why certain tools function because they are replicating it?
2. “One might even venture the proposition that more can be learned about the process of design of artefacts by studying those objects directly than by studying designers in action.” However these artefacts were chosen by the designers. Would studying the designers methodology also help give us insight in their process as well?
3. “Martin and March’s theoretical built forms were not just a random selection of geometrical solids: they were chosen carefully the way in which they satisfy the same two generic functions, while making use of land in distinctively different ways.” Does this mean that their findings only pertain to a specific category then? And may not be completely applicable to every building?

“Even More Than Architecture” – Richard Coyne

1. Coyne begins his article about how it is important and critical for the discipline to borrow from others. It “supports healthy and vital architecture research”. I think this is an important thing to keep in mind, coordinating with other fields helps broaden our field as well as others. Allowing designers  of all kinds to be able to really take on their responsibility within society.
2. “…the issue of what constitutes architectural research is decided dramatically by who i prepared to fund its projects, which journals or venues will it be published in…” Would this mean that some research may be bias or no?
3. “Study one and you’re studying them all.” So this would mean that if I were studying medicine, then I would understand architecture, art, sociology, etc  as well, but rather in a medicinal point of view?

‘A Two Fold Movement’: Design Research as Dialectical Critical Practice -Murray Fraser

1. “Nothing can be prefigured. All has to be questioned.” At what point can researchers stop uncovering new investigations?
2. Would Wood’s process of research be considered social research/design?
3. “It was sort of functionalism in reverse. But what he was attempting most of all was to switch who held the power over what kinds of spaces were built in cities, who could use them, and for what this was to be removed from official governments and design professionals.” To some extent, would society be considered as the designers?

A Way With Words: Feminists Writing Architectural Design Research – Jane Rendell

1. Rendell mentions in the text “the importance of exchange across art and architecture, the participation of users in the design process…” Is this movement essentially stating to the world “we care about people now”?
2. “Although muf architecture/art have never referred to themselves as feminists…” Then why use this practice as an example?
3. “One particularly important aspect of feminists critical spatial practice has been its desire to relate theory to architectural design, to make connections between built practice and written text.” Isn’t this done everywhere?