1Gernot Böhme at the presentation of OASE 91, 29 April 2014, Amsterdam.

2Juhani Pallasmaa’s reaction to: Gernot Böhme, ‘Encounerting Atmospheres’, OASE 91 (2013), 99.

3Klaske Havik, Hans Teerds, Gus Tielens, ‘Editorial’, OASE 91 (2013), 11.

ed: ‘Architecture always has produced atmosphere, for instance atmosphere of holiness and power. But archi-tecture beyond modernity rediscovers the perspective of the user. It is not only about the building as such, but it is dealing with felt space, mindful bodily presence. This might become an explicit topic in architecture’1. In line with Böhme, Juhani Pallasmaa seems to derive his inter-est in the concept of atmosphere from the user’s point of view. He is mainly interested in the relation between man and place and the tactile and haptic experiences in buildings in an existential sense. Pallasmaa states: ‘It is this haptic sense of being in the world, and in a specific place and moment, the actuality of existence, that is the essence of atmosphere.’2

Starting point for atmospheric experiencesIn OASE 91, according to the editors, also Christophe van Gerrewey defines atmosphere as ‘an intimate rela-tionship between building and man’3. In line with these definitions, the focus on materiality, detail and also aging in the work of Zumthor can be explained in this way as atmosphere has to do with scale, with things happening close to people. Moreover, this relationship between building and man has a deeper meaning if we are to believe Zumthor. In response to the question raised by Michiel Riedijk about tendencies towards nostalgia of the farmer life in the mountains and how one ever can convey these notions based on one’s own intuition and feelings in communal knowledge or practice, Pe-ter Zumthor answered: ‘We all come from houses and landscapes. That’s where we start, it is our basis. These

During the preparation of this issue of Archiprint, we attended the conversation between Gernot Böhme, Pe-ter Zumthor and Juhani Pallasmaa organized by OASE Journal for Architecture, on 29 April 2014 in Amster-dam. OASE organized this evening on the occasion of their 91st publication called Building Atmosphere. A topic of which we think is strongly related to the sub-ject identity. We attended to this evening to get a hint about the relation between atmosphere and identity. The evening, introduced and led by Klaske Havik, con-sisted of short introductions from Böhme, Zumthor and Pallasmaa on the theme Building Atmosphere followed by a conversation between the speakers.

Giving voice to the user perspectiveIn his introduction, Gernot Böhme argued that atmo-sphere as meant in Building Atmospheres departs from a critical stance to modernism of which the style is overly dependent of the visual. After having shown his personal contribution to misty photography, Gernot Böhme stat-

Gernot Böhme’s ‘misty photographs’, OASE 91 presentation, 29 April 2014, Amsterdam [photo: Michael Maminski]

Atmosphere and Identity—A Reflection on OASE 91

Paul Kersten

29Archiprint6—Creating & Experiencing Identity

are starting points for atmospheric experiences. If you want to create atmospheres, this is where you should start. It has nothing to do with nostalgia’4. A well–known example of how one’s memory strongly influences one’s understanding of what certain spaces mean comes from Peter Zumthor’s book Thinking Architecture where he describes his aunt’s kitchen. He states that the atmo-sphere of that room is ‘insoluble linked’5 to his definition of a kitchen.

Linking Building Atmosphere to identity via theconcept of ‘engagement’

The explanation by Zumthor of how the past contributes to the practice of building atmospheres strongly relates to the work of Christian Norberg–Schulz regarding the identity of places. In The Phenomenon of Place, Nor-berg–Schulz argues that future experiences are prede-termined in the past: ‘[…] the objects of identification are concrete environmental properties and that man’s rela-tionship to these is usually developed during childhood’ and ‘the child gets acquainted with the environment, and develops perceptual schemata which determine all future experiences’6. So as Zumthor states that atmo-sphere is based on the places we come from, Norberg–Schulz states that human identity depends on schemata developed in the places where our roots lay. What atmosphere and identity of a place have in common is that both involve engagement with a certain place. The question is how to facilitate this engagement?

Influencing moodsAfterwards we asked Juhani Pallasmaa about his ideas on the relation between atmosphere and identity and he referred to tune management as a method to hold the different ingredients of a place together that influence the mood of people. While the quality of a space is there for everyone to be experienced, it is there in an objec-tive sense and in this way the identity of or identification with this space can take shape through the perception of people. Moreover, Pallasmaa argued that atmosphere is the accumulation of ingredients of the identity of a place. This relates to what he stated earlier that evening: ‘why do some spaces make us feel like outsiders, while others make us feel like insiders?’7.

Building identity: challenging and riskyAs the essence of atmosphere is the actuality of exis-tence, identity and atmosphere come very close to each

other. Could we imagine Building Identity as a topic in architecture? Can identity also be a strong concept or a counter-balance to come to an architecture that redis-covers the perspective of the user? Can identity as a concept also pursue a specific aesthetic? Christian Nor-berg–Schulz argues that we need existential foothold to orientate ourselves in and identify with places. Moreover, states that ‘Human identity is to a high extent a function of places and things’8. To identify with a place has to do with concrete objects that fit one’s personal schemata. Building Identity would be a very challenging and at the same time risky task. On the one hand it would insist that a certain situation or context is taken seriously and that one makes efforts to build sustainable, on the other hand, identity is a concept subjected to personal perception and therefore one risks to build on quick-sand: the identity of the place might change through the perception of people or through contextual changes in a physical sense.

A hidden agenda in Building Atmosphere?Throughout the evening organized by OASE increasingly it seemed that the referred atmosphere is a very specific sort of atmosphere in itself, characterized by vagueness, slowness and rootedness. It seems that atmosphere is a very subjected concept here; subjected to misty photog-raphy and mountain life, tradition and ageing of building materials. In this sense atmosphere seems to have a hidden agenda: propaganda for certain aesthetics.

We should ask ourselves if we should fill a certain concept or place with a very defined meaning. Subse-quently, as future architects, how can we take the user perspective seriously, including its indeterminateness, and take the inherent dynamics of human life for granted as well?

4Peter Zumthor at the presentation of OASE 91, 29 April 2014, Amsterdam.

5Peter Zumthor, Thinking Architecture (Basel: Birkhäuser, 1998), 9.

6Christian Norberg–Schulz, ‘The Phenomenon of Place’ in: Kate Nesbitt (ed.), Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture. An Anthology

of Architectural Theory 1965-1995 (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1996), 424.

7Juhani Pallasmaa at the presentation of OASE 91, 29 April 2014, Amsterdam.

8Christian Norberg–Schulz, Genius Loci: To-wards a Phenomenology of Architecture (New York: Rizzoli, 1991), 21.

30Atmosphere and Identity Paul Kersten