Architecture & Spirituality; an Architecture-Centered Aesthetic Experience Shae R. Grimm May 2010 Submitted towards the fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Architecture Degree. School of Architecture University of Hawai‘i Doctorate Project Committee: David Rockwood, Chairperson William Paulch Roger T. Ames Architeotute a $Ritituality; an Architectute-Genteteil Aesthetic truefi ence Shae B. Gfimm May 2010 We certify that we have read lhrs Doctorate Project and that, in our opinion, it -ls i n e-^na and nttal'i f tz i n Dd^-+: LIJLA.LLULy-$tnrarrz LtJ DVVIJe Qltv YuuLLe )l ful-fil-ment as a Doctorate Project for the degree of Doctor of Architecture in the Schoof of Architecture, University of Hawai ri l/5^^- (a-+ L L"tdrlL)a . 00ct01ate Proiect Gommittee: llauiiluu_L Bocltwood, Chairperson William Paulch --/qh r4 Architecture & Spirituality AN Architecture-Centered Aesthetic Experience Shae Richard Grimm May MMX Preface i believe it is important to include a brief preface with my doctorate project for a couple reasons. Not I only because it is generally insightful to do such, but because it is almost essential for the future reader of this dissertation to understand how this project came into being, how the idea was developed, and therein why it subsequently transpired in the manner it did. In doing so, my hope is that the content of the project will then become ever more clear to the ‘would-be reader,’ and compel them to contrast my position with whatever position they might hold as their own. That, in part, I feel is the instrumental value of this dissertation. Therefore, given that notion, it is useful to divulge a few things about myself to better explain how the idea for this project came into realization. Perhaps one of the most significant aspects one should know about me is that I am a child of the United States military, and I believe that I am fortunate to be one. As such, I have had the privilege to consistently alter my living environments, and undergo the wide range of experiences that comes in doing so. While the concept of traveling might not be foreign to most, I think the concept of complete immersion into varying environments is. For, I feel it is only through my continual engagement with various environments throughout the course of my life that I was able to acquire a more inquisitive awareness as to the extent our environment – and our built environment in particular – effects our being. Nevertheless, while I might be more sensitive than others to this phenomenon, I myself did not fully understand it in its totality in any regard. In 2008 I was further fortunate in that I lived in, and traveled throughout, Mainland China and Taiwan. Additionally, that year I took intermissions from my Asiatic travels by means of European stints to countries such as Germany, France, England, Czech Republic, and Luxemburg. Needless to say, that was a very productive year on many experiential fronts. It was a year that got me thinking evermore so about humankind’s exceedingly complex and profound relationship with their milieu, and with their architectural structures in particular. It further reinforced my inclination that humankind formed a Preface ii substantial, dynamic and reciprocal exchange of tacit understanding with their environment. Moreover, an understanding that contributes to the quality and character of our existence, overall well-being, and – ultimately – our spirituality. During the abovementioned year I - as an architecture student – like most tourist, visited many of the more notable sites which quite often took the form of religious edifices such as cathedrals, monasteries, temples, and the like. Many of these buildings had histories of thousands of years; while others still were quite modern. These types of buildings, by common conception, epitomize the embodiment of spirituality; or the capability of spirituality to manifest via architecture. For instance, if I were to ask an individual (as I have many times) to describe to me a spiritual experience they had which involved architecture (if in fact they ever had what they considered to be one) the vast majority of the time they would speak of an experience comprising of the architectonic forms inherent in cathedrals or temples; if not directly of cathedrals or temples themselves. If by chance, they did mention anything else, they would mention something about family or nature. While not architecture parse, I would later come to find out that both family and nature would still – in their own unique ways – manage to play an important piece in solving this architecture-spirituality puzzle. As for me, no matter how many of these ‘spiritual’ buildings I visited – regardless of their grandeur or lack thereof – I was skeptical that those architectural embodiments of spirituality exemplified the potential height of a spiritual experience that architecture was capable of manifesting in our lives on earth. That is not to say that my experience of these structures was always flat and void of spirituality, because that was not always the case, but I became convinced that there was other more successful alternatives. I needed to understand what they were, and how they manifested. To do that however, I needed to firstly understand how to conceive of them so they could even be recognized. Lastly, I also need to find out if it was then possible to capitalize on their existence as an Preface iii architect and architecture appreciator alike. Gaining that understanding, in short, became the goal of my project. While, perhaps a seemingly simple goal if taken at face value – to understand the association between architecture and spirituality - I had no leads into the means in which this profound association occurs. The occidental ideology in which I am versed mandates a rather exclusive association and understanding of architecture and spirituality. One that I feel quite often serves as a hindrance, rather than an aid, to what I am compelled to believe is an authentic ‘spiritual’ experience. By ‘authentic’ I mean not only respecting the implications embedded within the concepts of architecture and spirituality, but also containing the ‘universality’ I felt this subject matter requires. All I knew was that these overtly ‘religious’ structures were too far removed from the everyday experience in which we live our lives to be the quintessential embodiment of spirituality via architecture; the same ‘everyday experience’ which I felt should also be accessible to the realization of spirituality. I did not feel it necessary to have an understanding for Christianity to allow the domes or spirals of cathedrals to manifest spirituality. Nor did I feel it necessary to have an understanding for Daoism to allow for the manifestation of spirituality via the hierarchal or figurative floor plans of temples. Furthermore, I questioned if this type of spirituality, afforded by this type of architecture, was truly even a spiritual experience to begin with? Why should the realization of spirituality via architecture start and end there? Why could it not manifest amongst the everyday architecture in which we carry out our lives? I felt that these stereotypical architectural embodiments of spirituality were merely one of many more enthralling aspects of architectural understanding and sensibility pertaining to spirituality. Additionally, other ‘nonreligious’ buildings serve as testament to this notion as they are often described as providing a ‘spiritual experience’ or ‘embodying spirituality’ while containing one or none of the above formal architectonic characteristics. Preface iv My quests for an answer eventually lead me to the philosophical realm of aesthetics. The ensuing documentation takes the ‘would-be reader’ down the course of my investigation. Furthermore, I understand that just mentioning subjects such as ‘spirituality’ can be significantly off-putting to some individuals. Believe me; I’m not one to preach, and I don’t like to tell anyone about spirituality (or architecture) just as much – if not more – than they would probably like to be told. And while the motivation for this project may have been largely self- centered in that regard, I truly feel its content is of great value to everyone. Therefore, I invite the ‘would-be reader’ to take the time to examine this documentation, and let the concepts contained herein marinate. My hope is that others might find this dissertation as insightful as I do. Lastly, I would like to thank my entire committee: David Rockwood, William Paulch, and Roger T. Ames, for working with me in this somewhat unconventional direction, and for believing in the importance of this project. It has been a long pursuit, but one I feel well worth the return in its investment. - S.G. Table of Contents: Preface Page i Section I The Introduction: 1 a. Abstract 2 b. Methodology 3 Section II The Aesthetic: 9 c. Philosophical Aesthetic Background 10 . Analytic & Pragmatist Aesthetic 11 Naturalistic Dialectic Interested/Disinterested Individual/Whole Dialectic Subject/Object Dialectic . Architectural Aesthetic History 23 d. Spiritual Aesthetic Background 30 . The Analytical Aesthetic Path 30 . The Oriental Aesthetic Path 35 e. Spiritual Scientific Background 38 Section III The Spirituality: 45 f. Spirituality; 46 a ‘Naturalized’ Conception . Spirituality Naturalized 46 g. Spirituality; 51 a Social/Self Conception . Social Conception 51 . Self Conception 54 h. Spirituality; 57 Varied Ideological Conceptions . Theological Conception 58 . Religious Conception 58 . Sacred Conception 60 i. Spirituality; 65 a Deweyan Conception . Spirituality Deweyized 65 Section IV The Dwelling: 71 j. Architecture & Spirituality; 72 a Phenomenological Foundation . The Plight of Dwelling 72 . The Genius Loci 76 Space & Character Meaning & Essence Temporality & Movement . Socio-Conditions 85 . Dwelling & Spirituality 90 k. An Architecture-Centered Aesthetic 94 Experience . An Experience 94 Section V The Study: 97 l. Introduction 98 . Case Studies at Glance 101 m. Philosophical Foundations 103 . Le Corbusier 103 Purism .