Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation: Lee, K. The Interior
Experience of Architecture: An
Emotional Connection between Space
and the Body. Buildings 2022,12, 326.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
buildings12030326
Academic Editor: Adrian Pitts
Received: 31 January 2022
Accepted: 7 March 2022
Published: 9 March 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the author.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
buildings
Article
The Interior Experience of Architecture: An Emotional
Connection between Space and the Body
Keunhye Lee
Department of Interior Architecture, Gachon University, Seongnam-si 13120, Korea; narykh.lee@gmail.com;
Tel.: +82-(0)10-8769-9387
Abstract:
This paper provides a phenomenological understanding of interior space to explore the
emotional connection between space and experience. It focuses on the significant aspects of interior
space, considering how people experience interior space and which aspects improve the quality of
spatial and emotional experience. I have argued that the interior experience offers effective ways of
stimulating emotional experience to create spatial perception as a way of understanding architec-
ture. Interior experience can be developed through: (a) stimulating a lived body; (b) emphasizing
materiality; and (c) generating emotional connection. This allows people to develop an awareness
of the sensual aspects of the interior space and improve the quality of their emotional experiences.
I have drawn upon representative case studies about spatial experience to explore how they use
materiality to stimulate sensory effects and how the multi-sensory space connects with emotional
experience, which is one of the fundamental aspects of this paper. I found that an integrated body
and materiality are fundamental elements that are needed to enrich the spatial experience, even in
an abstract dimension of the work without architectural form. Thus, this paper contributes to the
understanding and knowledge of the relationship between interior space and experience with respect
to improving the quality of the emotional experience in order to develop spatial experience and
considering how experience intervenes in interior space to create a multi-sensory space.
Keywords:
interior experience; multi-sensory experience; movement; sensory body; emotion; materiality
1. Introduction
This paper provides a phenomenological understanding of interior space to explore
the emotional connection between space and experience. It emphasizes the importance
of interior experience as a way of understanding architecture. It considers how people
experience interior space, what elements, forms, and techniques can be used to improve the
quality of spatial experience in architecture, and which aspects of interior space stimulate
multiple senses, which help to create a better experience through emotional connection in
the realm of architecture.
Over the last century, the field of architecture has focused on the functional and
morphological aspects rather than on its relationship to people and its environment of
interior space [
1
–
4
]. In addition, the visual-oriented representation of architecture has led
to the predominance of the visual experience over other sensory effects [5].
In recent decades, however, there has been much discussion on the phenomenological
understanding of architectural space, as it has become more critical to focus on how peo-
ple experience the space rather than on the current visual-oriented architectural form; this
has been raised as a fundamental issue in both an academic and practical context [
4
,
6
–
10
].
Although there are already many studies on the phenomenological understanding of archi-
tecture, these rarely discuss the importance of the interior experience of architecture and
its connection to the emotional aspects that enrich the quality of architecture. An interior
experience that emphasizes the body and environmental stimuli represents an immersive
experience, affecting emotion [
11
]. The body here means bodily movements and senses
Buildings 2022,12, 326. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12030326 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings
Buildings 2022,12, 326 2 of 16
as a subject to interact with interior space, while environmental stimuli are understood as
interior environments that directly respond to the body. In this sense, this paper argues that
the interactive connections between the body and environmental stimuli are substantial
elements for generating the emotional experience that improves the quality of interior
experience, understood as “the origins of architecture” [
12
]. Thus, it is worth looking at
the interior experience of architecture for an emotional connection between space and
experience, engaging the body and various aspects of interior environments.
An architectural experience cannot be perceived merely through the visual sense.
Instead, as has been emphasized by many theorists and architects, such as Juhani Pallasmaa,
Peter Zumthor, Kengo Kuma, and Yi-Fu Tuan, it is understood through the eyes and
experienced through the entire range of bodily senses and the physical movements of the
body “as one moves through it and actively interacts with it” [
13
] (p. 168). This idea was
initially developed by philosophers such as Kant and Hegel and later by Martin Heidegger,
Gaston Bachelard, and Maurice Merleau-Ponty. These phenomena and how we experience
space through our body are emphasized [
14
] (p. 6). In this sense, Finnish architect Juhani
Pallasmaa (2005) states that “[e]xperiencing architecture is multi-sensory; qualities of space,
matter and scale are measured together by the eye, ear, nose, skin, tongue, skeleton and muscle.
Architecture strengthens one’s sense of being in the world, and this is basically an enforced
experience of self. Instead of mere vision, or the five classical senses, architecture involves
several realms of sensory experience which interact and fuse into each other” [10] (p. 41).
In this respect, some contemporary architects, designers, and artists highlight the
importance of spatial experience in their projects by engaging with several issues, such as
materiality, the body, senses, emotion, and environments. Their projects are presented using
various methods, including architectural space, pavilion, and installation. For example,
Peter Zumthor’s Thermal Vals provides a phenomenological experience in which various
sensory elements are transmitted to the body; it allows people to touch water and stones,
see the light and darkness, hear the sounds of flowing water, and smell the mist of the
water [
7
,
15
]. The Blur Building by Diller + Scofidio concentrated on the awareness of bodily
experiences and sensations to generate an emotional connection. This pavilion provided
an immersive experience that stimulated all of the senses due to the sight being blocked
by mist [
16
] (pp. 48–49). Responding to Peter Zumthor’s architecture, Olafur Eliasson’s
the Mediated Motion provided sequential spaces filled with natural materials, including
water, steam, fog, earth, wood, fungus, and duckweed [
17
]. Eliasson allowed visitors to
be a part of the exhibition, engaging “their senses, memory, and reflections to make his
projects more profound” [
18
]. Some works create a physical architectural space, stimulating
spatial experience through bodily movements and senses, while some other projects present
abstract space using ephemeral yet experiential material, engaging emotional experience or
feelings. They have the power to provide a spatial experience through bodily engagement
and to stimulate users’ emotions. While visual-oriented spatial experience focuses on the
physical forms of architecture, interior experiences that are felt through engaging the body
and environmental stimuli provide multi-sensory space and generate various types of
emotional experience [
13
] (p. 169). These projects trigger me to consider: (a) the meaning
of experience in the realm of architecture; (b) how people can obtain a sensory experience
from interior space; and (c) which aspects of interior space can improve the quality of
spatial and emotional experiences. This paper investigates various elements to find a
way of improving the emotional experience and therefore developing the interior space,
rather than measuring the emotional levels numerically. Thus, the hypothesis of this paper
relies on the qualitative-analytical and bibliographical research methods. To explore these
research questions, I formulated two hypotheses.
1.
An interactive connection between the body and various elements of interior
space improves the interior experience, providing a personal connection to culture
and emotion.
Buildings 2022,12, 326 3 of 16
2.
Sensory effects that enhance the emotional connection with the interior space can
potentially enrich the spatial experience and improve its quality to greater effect than
functional or form-oriented factors.
This is an opportunity to develop the idea of the body and interior space, which may
lead to theoretical and practical aspects with contemporary significance. Methodologically,
this paper demonstrates the value of the phenomenological understanding of the interior
experience for emotional connection. For this, I investigate:
1. The meaning and essential aspects of interior space;
2. The meaning of the body and experience in architectural space;
3. Case studies, through analyzing the selected architectural space; and
4.
Various effective ways of improving the qualities of interior experience and its emo-
tional connection, which I then go on to discuss.
Thus, this paper attempts to analyze various characteristics of the environmental
stimuli of interior space as a way of showing how experiencing space can create a connection
with personal emotion. This is done through the use of selected case studies of architectural
representation that are presented in various ways. This paper presents ways in which the
interior experience can contribute to a phenomenological understanding of the architectural
realm, engaging several key issues, such as the body, senses, emotional experience, and
culture, which solidify spatial perception.
2. Interior Experience as the Origin of Architecture
2.1. Interior Space
This section investigates the meanings and essential aspects of interior space in un-
derstanding architecture. It focuses on the body and materiality, understood as a subject
and object, respectively, considering how interior space engages the body and provides a
sensual experience.
Many architects and researchers focus on the primacy of interior space in architectural
experience because “the inside is always more important than the outside” [
19
] (p. 274).
This is because most people spend more than 90 percent of their lives indoors [
20
] (p. 4). In
this sense, Bart Verschaffel states that the significant aspect of architecture is “the creation
of an interior, [which] separates a circumscribed space from its environment and turns it
into an inside” [
21
]. In addition, interior space can impact the people who occupy and
use those spaces; it is strongly related to our body and is understood as a communicative
form. In this sense, Frank Lloyd Wright states, “[t]he space within becomes the reality of
the building” [
22
] (p. 217), because interior space allows people to dwell, live, move, and
enact the rituals of their everyday life. It demonstrates that the “reality of the building does
not consist in the four walls and the roof but in the space within to be lived in” [
22
] (p. 80).
Concerning this, John Dewey defines architecture as “the formation of interior space”,
as it provides “opportunity for movement and action” [
23
]. These ideas emphasize the
important connection between interior space and the body. The interior space, engaging
the body, provides spatial experience, which generates an emotional connection. Many
architects, such as Louis Kahn, Wright, and Zumthor, agree that the most important
function of architecture is “to enrich experience and enhance the life that takes place within
it” [12] (p. 9).
Paul Goldberger also highlights the importance of interior experience, “by
staying in one place and taking it all in” [
24
], in order to feel the space. This emphasizes
that interior experience is emotional and communicative because it engages the body.
People continuously interact with various elements of interior space. The environment
of interior space provides material worlds. Material worlds here not only means physical
aspects, such as wood, brick, and concrete, but also substances, including proportion,
form, texture, light, shapes, color, temperature, smell, and even sound. This is understood
as environmental stimuli. It can be divided into two aspects: the morphological factor,
which is a visual composition of architectural space, and the sensual factor, which relates to
arousal of people’s sensory perceptions [
25
]. For example, people primarily experience the
Buildings 2022,12, 326 4 of 16
various features of environmental materials within an interior space. Beyond the immediate
visual qualities of a space, the sensual factor can be felt through our body; for example,
people can smell various odors, touch the texture of surfaces, and reflect sound while
walking inside. This means that interior space can be “defined not only by occupation
but also by materiality” [
26
] (p. 1). The materiality of the interior space can reflect the
spatial usages, revealing traces made by our body, as Walter Benjamin states [
27
]. This
shows that materiality, as an environmental stimulus, can enhance the spatial experience
by engaging the body. In relation to this, Peter Zumthor states that “[t]he material presence
of things in a piece of architecture, its frame. That kind of things has a sensual effect on
me” [
28
] (p. 23). This shows that materials provide interior environments and directly
stimulate sensory experience. In other words, materiality can be understood as a medium
to connect with the body and the interior space. It shows how people relate to the interior
space and engage with materiality; a method of communication between the body and the
space. The environmental stimuli can also evoke our memory and cause us to “feel” [
14
].
Moreover, social and cultural environments are also a substantial factor affecting what
people experience, because the built environment is an integral part of the social and
cultural order [
29
] (p. 457). In relation to this, Kahn refers to the interior space as “a society
of space”, which generates social and cultural relations [12].
The interior space becomes the manifestation of what people perceive, experience,
and feel. It also reflects how people use, occupy, transform, and adapt to space. This
spatial experience can transform the space into place, emphasizing the sense of insideness
within the dwelling [
30
] (p. 20). It shows that the interior space is strongly related to
a lived body [
31
] within the material world, reflecting spatial identity and culture. The
interior space contains various elements, comprising physical factors, space, and the body.
In other words, the interior space can be defined by the body and becomes the reflection
of the identity, subjective experience, and personal responses [
26
] (p. 2). Thus, interior
spaces can be understood and explained not only by architectural forms, but also by their
relation to the body, environmental stimuli, and culture, which forms the meaning of space
through experience. This idea provides a framework for exploring how the multi-sensory
atmosphere of interior space can be formed and how this stimulates spatial experience and
emotional connection. Table 1shows the key aspects of interior space.
Table 1. Characteristics of interior space. Source: author ’s drawing.
Contents
Environmental Stimuli
Morphological Factor
(Form and pattern) volume, scale, rhythm, order, proportion, contrast
Sensual Factor
(Material connection) texture, light, shadow, color, temperature, sound, smell
Influential Factor cultural symbolism, local/social issue
Container
•Interior space is a container where various elements, such as the body, objects, and materials,
are involved.
•Interior space engages the body as a form to interact with.
•Interior space can be transformed into a place through bodily experience.
2.2. The Body and Experience
The body is significant in the understanding of architecture and its history. Historically,
architecture has mainly been experienced through the visual sense. The body can be
understood as an element of nature and ingredient of form, and in the past it was described
as the most fundamental measurement of self [
16
]. It has long been the medium through
which Western culture and society has represented the architectural environment [
7
].
Although the body was a fundamental representation of architecture and has been used
as a system of proportion throughout history, the experiential and emotional roles played
Buildings 2022,12, 326 5 of 16
by the body in the subject’s thinking were ignored entirely, a situation that lasted until the
20th century [
6
,
16
]. This shows that the physical representation of the body emphasizes
the visual aspects rather than the spatial experiences. However, contemporary theorists
and architects, such as Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Juhani Pallasmaa, and Peter Zumthor,
highlight the significant aspects of the bodily experience for emotional connection within
the interior space of architecture. They consider how a lived body can “effectively create a
more emotionally charged space and consequently [cause] an emotional connection within
architecture” [
16
] (p. 12). The physical body and its emotional connection can stimulate the
sensory experience of architecture.
The body can be a form that is used to interact with space, allowing us to experience the
interior environment that generates spatial perception. The bodily experience in architectural
space can be interpreted through phenomenological understanding. Phenomenology is the
most effective and applicable approach to architecture in response to the body, emphasizing
experience through continuous interaction with various elements [
32
] (p. 565). For example,
people experience space through the body as soon as they enter an inside area. In this sense,
Merleau-Ponty concentrates on perception, body, and the sensible dimension of human
experience, providing “an important perspective on more practical, applied architectural
issues” [
5
] (p. 13). Pallasmaa is indebted to Merleau-Ponty, particularly to themes such as
the lived body, perception, and mobility. In this regard, Steen Eiler Rasmussen underlines
the experience of architectural space, stating that “it is not enough to see architecture; you
must experience it” [
33
]. In this sense, Zumthor uses emotion as a measuring tool for expe-
rience [
28
]. This means that architecture is not just experienced visually, but through the
entire body, such as through movements and the senses, stimulating spatial experience [
34
].
In other words, the phenomenological approach is used to explore the relationship between
space and the body through experiences. This idea can be seen as parallel to the Asian phi-
losophy of traditional architecture, which emphasizes the interrelationships between body,
mind, environment, and cultural identity in order to understand architectural space [
35
–
39
].
However, these ideas have rarely been discussed in the realm of architecture, either in
Asia or in the West [
38
,
40
]. Furthermore, bodily movement is also an important method of
experiencing space. Bodily movement can be divided into two aspects: physical movement
and visual movement. It provides dynamic experiences through changes that occur due
to spatial sequences [41,42]. It shows that bodily senses and movements provide constant
dialogue with interior space due to spatial experience.
Spatial experience can be physical, sensory, and mental. The term “experience” itself
emphasizes the body as a medium for interacting with objects and space, generating emo-
tional aspects. According to the Cambridge Dictionary (2022), experience means “something
that happens to you that affects how you feel” [
43
]. This shows that the word includes
both physical and emotional qualities through doing and feeling. In this sense, to expe-
rience space is to interact with space through the body and mind; people can recognize,
act on, and perceive the space through their entire body. This means that the physical,
sensory, and emotional aspects of the body cannot be separated. For example, people can
perceive the surface of the concrete with their eyes, feel the surface by touching it with
their skin, smell the air of an interior space, and listen to the sound of footsteps while
walking inside. Therefore, an entire body can be viewed as a sensing apparatus that gauges
a space, other people, and surrounding objects in order to produce a spatial experience [
44
].
This method of sensory experience can generate an emotional experience; it is specific
to place, time, and materials. In this respect, Yi-Fu Tuan states that “place is a center of
meaning constructed by experience [
. . .
] through not only the eyes and mind but also
through the more passive and direct modes of experience” [
45
], which evokes feelings.
This shows that place can be understood as a space where a particular spatial experience
and its emotional connection are embedded. John Dewey defines experience as the whole
process of human adaptation to the environment through interaction with the environment.
He also emphasizes that human activities are incorporated from rational and emotional
thoughts and acts [46] (p. 41).
Buildings 2022,12, 326 6 of 16
People perceive the world through a lens generated by the emotions they experi-
ence [
12
,
47
]. Emotions are an expression of our feelings that appear according to certain
situations and experiences. Emotions are related to both personal experiences of interior
space and social experiences, affecting spatial perception and definition. This can be embed-
ded within the body as memories, which form a spatial identity. For example, each person
has different spatial memories, as they have experienced space differently [
48
]. This shows
that interior space can evoke a socially memorized spatial experience that affects one’s
emotions. In other words, we can all experience space differently, even if we are in the same
space. In this sense, Pallasmaa states that “all experience implies the acts of recollecting,
remembering and comparing” [
10
] (p. 72). This allows us to experience interior space
in various ways, stimulated by overlapping our present experiences and the memories
formed by past experiences [46] (p. 38) within the culture.
Thus, to experience space is to understand space phenomenologically, engaging the
body, environmental stimuli, and culture to provide an emotional connection (see Figure 1).
This provides some of the varying approaches for understanding the distinct ways of
conceptualizing how interior space is experienced through the meanings of the body,
which could provide theoretical and practical approaches to exploring the cultural context.
Experiencing space in this way has been described in phenomenology as “multi-sensory”,
a way of interacting with space through a sensing apparatus of the body. In relation to this,
Tuan (1977) explores the relationship between people and space, examining the sensory and
affective experience. Tuan writes, “[t]he given cannot be known in itself, what can be known
is a reality that is a construct of experience, a creation of feeling and
thought” [49] (p. 9).
Tuan’s idea addresses how people feel and think about space and how they form a sense of
attachment to space, based upon memories or intimate experiences.
Buildings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 16
can be understood as a space where a particular spatial experience and its emotional con-
nection are embedded. John Dewey defines experience as the whole process of human
adaptation to the environment through interaction with the environment. He also empha-
sizes that human activities are incorporated from rational and emotional thoughts and
acts [46] (p. 41).
People perceive the world through a lens generated by the emotions they experience
[12,47]. Emotions are an expression of our feelings that appear according to certain situa-
tions and experiences. Emotions are related to both personal experiences of interior space
and social experiences, affecting spatial perception and definition. This can be embedded
within the body as memories, which form a spatial identity. For example, each person has
different spatial memories, as they have experienced space differently [48]. This shows
that interior space can evoke a socially memorized spatial experience that affects one’s
emotions. In other words, we can all experience space differently, even if we are in the
same space. In this sense, Pallasmaa states that “all experience implies the acts of recol-
lecting, remembering and comparing” [10] (p. 72). This allows us to experience interior
space in various ways, stimulated by overlapping our present experiences and the mem-
ories formed by past experiences [46] (p. 38) within the culture.
Thus, to experience space is to understand space phenomenologically, engaging the
body, environmental stimuli, and culture to provide an emotional connection (see Figure
1). This provides some of the varying approaches for understanding the distinct ways of
conceptualizing how interior space is experienced through the meanings of the body,
which could provide theoretical and practical approaches to exploring the cultural context.
Experiencing space in this way has been described in phenomenology as “multi-sensory”,
a way of interacting with space through a sensing apparatus of the body. In relation to
this, Tuan (1977) explores the relationship between people and space, examining the sen-
sory and affective experience. Tuan writes, “[t]he given cannot be known in itself, what
can be known is a reality that is a construct of experience, a creation of feeling and thought”
[49] (p. 9). Tuan’s idea addresses how people feel and think about space and how they
form a sense of attachment to space, based upon memories or intimate experiences.
Figure 1. Phenomenological understanding of the body. Source: author’s drawing.
3. Multi-Sensory Experience and Emotional Connection: A Review
The interior experience is likely to be significant in the phenomenological under-
standing of architecture, but discussions regarding the issues concerning the emotional
connection are still at an early stage. Therefore, due to the limited amount of research
regarding the connection between interior experience and emotion, it is worth looking at
several architectural projects. The review of these projects not only covers existing archi-
tecture, but also pavilions and conceptual installations. This is because such projects pro-
vide both the symbolic meaning of architectural space and various ways of understanding
spatial experience. For the case study, I have therefore selected two prominent phenome-
nological architects, Peter Zumthor and Kengo Kuma, and analyzed how they created
Figure 1. Phenomenological understanding of the body. Source: author’s drawing.
3. Multi-Sensory Experience and Emotional Connection: A Review
The interior experience is likely to be significant in the phenomenological under-
standing of architecture, but discussions regarding the issues concerning the emotional
connection are still at an early stage. Therefore, due to the limited amount of research
regarding the connection between interior experience and emotion, it is worth looking
at several architectural projects. The review of these projects not only covers existing
architecture, but also pavilions and conceptual installations. This is because such projects
provide both the symbolic meaning of architectural space and various ways of under-
standing spatial experience. For the case study, I have therefore selected two prominent
phenomenological architects, Peter Zumthor and Kengo Kuma, and analyzed how they
created architectural space in order to improve the quality of interior experiences and
emotional connections.
Buildings 2022,12, 326 7 of 16
3.1. Bruder Klaus Field Chapel, Peter Zumthor
In 2007, the Bruder Klaus Field Chapel was built by Peter Zumthor in Mechernich
in Germany (see Figure 2). The most significant aspects of the Chapel are found in the
construction methods [
50
,
51
]. Twenty-four layers of concrete were poured into a wooden
frame surrounding the tree trunks, which were stacked in a curved conical form. Once
the concrete had set, the wooden frame was set on fire. When the blaze subsided, only
the concrete was left, containing a blackened void where the logs’ shape and bark were
imprinted, and emitting a particular smell. After removing the frame, many small holes
were left behind in the walls and crystal shafts were inserted into the holes, which created
an effect reminiscent of the night sky [
50
–
53
]. These refracted lights from the crystal shafts
contrasted to the rough, blackened concrete surfaces surrounding them [
51
,
52
]. These
elements were used to create a structure, but the effects are far more evident in the interior
space; “the process of construction is integrated with the experience of space” [
53
] (p. 290).
Buildings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 16
architectural space in order to improve the quality of interior experiences and emotional
connections.
3.1. Bruder Klaus Field Chapel, Peter Zumthor
In 2007, the Bruder Klaus Field Chapel was built by Peter Zumthor in Mechernich in
Germany (see Figure 2). The most significant aspects of the Chapel are found in the con-
struction methods [50,51]. Twenty-four layers of concrete were poured into a wooden
frame surrounding the tree trunks, which were stacked in a curved conical form. Once the
concrete had set, the wooden frame was set on fire. When the blaze subsided, only the
concrete was left, containing a blackened void where the logs’ shape and bark were im-
printed, and emitting a particular smell. After removing the frame, many small holes were
left behind in the walls and crystal shafts were inserted into the holes, which created an
effect reminiscent of the night sky [50–53]. These refracted lights from the crystal shafts
contrasted to the rough, blackened concrete surfaces surrounding them [51,52]. These el-
ements were used to create a structure, but the effects are far more evident in the interior
space; “the process of construction is integrated with the experience of space” [53] (p. 290).
(a) (b)
Figure 2. Peter Zumthor, Bruder Klaus Field Chapel, 2007. (a) entrance area (b) interior space
(Photos: August Fischer).
The environments of the interior space are a stark contrast to the smooth, angular
façade. During the short journey from entering the structure to the inner space, “the hor-
izontal movement through space is slowly shifted to a vertical movement with the eyes”
[53] (p. 290). “[The] gaze is pulled up by obvious directionality to the point where the roof
is open to the sky and the night stars” [50]. Sunlight, air, and rain all penetrate the opening
and create a particular environment and experience based on the time of day and the sea-
son.
3.2. Serpentine Pavilion, Peter Zumthor
The Serpentine Pavilion 2011 was created by Peter Zumthor for meditation that
evoked a spiritual experience (see Figure 3). At the center of the pavilion was an inner
garden, which was conceived by Dutch designer Piet Oudolf [54]. Zumthor highlighted
the role of the senses and emotions in our architectural experience. The pavilion provided
a hallway with multiple paths and staggered doorways for visitors, which gently guided
them to a central, hidden inner garden. The covered pathways and seating areas sur-
rounding the central space created a calm and meditative environment from which visi-
tors looked out onto the richly planted sunlit garden, which was the center of the pavilion
[55].
While traveling through a dark hallway with intermittent natural light streams, visi-
tors were directed “away from the bustling city and toward the secluded, intimate interior”
[56]. Through blackness and shadow, “visitors entered the pavilion from the lawn and
began the transition into the central garden, a place abstracted from the world of noise,
Figure 2.
Peter Zumthor, Bruder Klaus Field Chapel, 2007. (
a
) entrance area (
b
) interior space (Photos:
August Fischer).
The environments of the interior space are a stark contrast to the smooth, angular
façade. During the short journey from entering the structure to the inner space, “the
horizontal movement through space is slowly shifted to a vertical movement with the
eyes” [
53
] (p. 290). “[The] gaze is pulled up by obvious directionality to the point where
the roof is open to the sky and the night stars” [
50
]. Sunlight, air, and rain all penetrate the
opening and create a particular environment and experience based on the time of day and
the season.
3.2. Serpentine Pavilion, Peter Zumthor
The Serpentine Pavilion 2011 was created by Peter Zumthor for meditation that evoked
a spiritual experience (see Figure 3). At the center of the pavilion was an inner garden,
which was conceived by Dutch designer Piet Oudolf [
54
]. Zumthor highlighted the role of
the senses and emotions in our architectural experience. The pavilion provided a hallway
with multiple paths and staggered doorways for visitors, which gently guided them to a
central, hidden inner garden. The covered pathways and seating areas surrounding the
central space created a calm and meditative environment from which visitors looked out
onto the richly planted sunlit garden, which was the center of the pavilion [55].
While traveling through a dark hallway with intermittent natural light streams, visitors
were directed “away from the bustling city and toward the secluded, intimate interior” [
56
].
Through blackness and shadow, “visitors entered the pavilion from the lawn and began
the transition into the central garden, a place abstracted from the world of noise, traffic,
and the smells of London—an interior space that allowed people to sit, to walk, and to
observe the flowers” [
54
] for meditation. The carefully chosen flora produced various
colors, fragrances, and textures that stimulated the individuals’ bodily senses [56].
Buildings 2022,12, 326 8 of 16
Buildings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 16
traffic, and the smells of London—an interior space that allowed people to sit, to walk,
and to observe the flowers” [54] for meditation. The carefully chosen flora produced var-
ious colors, fragrances, and textures that stimulated the individuals’ bodily senses [56].
(a) Sitting areas (b) A floral garden (c) Corridor
Figure 3. Peter Zumthor, Serpentine Pavilion, 2011. (Photos (a,b): author. Photo (c): John Offenbach).
3.3. Sensing Space, Kengo Kuma (2014)
The Sensing Space was a new type of architecture exhibition presented at the Royal
Academy in 2014, emphasizing the experiential aspects rather than the functional aspects
of architecture. Seven prominent architects were invited to focus on the sensory qualities
of architecture [57]. The exhibition encouraged visitors to consider how architecture
makes people feel. As a part of the Sensing Space exhibition, Kuma introduced certain
scents into two darkened rooms to provoke memories of a particular space: the smell as-
sociated with architectural aspects of Japanese culture (see Figure 4). He interpreted the
aroma of architecture as a full bodily sensation “inspired by a Ko-Do, Japanese smell cer-
emony, which has similarities to a chado, the traditional Japanese tea ceremony” [58].
(a) (b)
Figure 4. Kengo Kuma, Sensing Space, 2014. (a) Kuma’s installation (b) Kuma’s installation (Pho-
tos: James Harris).
In these darkened rooms, he created the woven bamboo structures as a traditional
Japanese architectural material, with spotlights infused with the aroma of tatami mats and
hinoki. Kuma referred to darkness as being “very important in traditional Japanese archi-
tecture [...] Darkness also emphasizes the distinctive scent in each installation” [59]. A re-
view in the New Statesman stated that this particular scent evoked the childhood home
that comforted him and sent him “to the sleep of the innocents” [59]. This is a personal
experience shared not only with visitors who have similar memories, but also those who
are not familiar with the smell.
Figure 3.
Peter Zumthor, Serpentine Pavilion, 2011. (Photos (
a
,
b
): author. Photo (
c
): John Offenbach).
3.3. Sensing Space, Kengo Kuma (2014)
The Sensing Space was a new type of architecture exhibition presented at the Royal
Academy in 2014, emphasizing the experiential aspects rather than the functional aspects
of architecture. Seven prominent architects were invited to focus on the sensory qualities of
architecture [
57
]. The exhibition encouraged visitors to consider how architecture makes
people feel. As a part of the Sensing Space exhibition, Kuma introduced certain scents
into two darkened rooms to provoke memories of a particular space: the smell associated
with architectural aspects of Japanese culture (see Figure 4). He interpreted the aroma
of architecture as a full bodily sensation “inspired by a Ko-Do, Japanese smell ceremony,
which has similarities to a chado, the traditional Japanese tea ceremony” [58].
Buildings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 16
traffic, and the smells of London—an interior space that allowed people to sit, to walk,
and to observe the flowers” [54] for meditation. The carefully chosen flora produced var-
ious colors, fragrances, and textures that stimulated the individuals’ bodily senses [56].
(a) Sitting areas (b) A floral garden (c) Corridor
Figure 3. Peter Zumthor, Serpentine Pavilion, 2011. (Photos (a,b): author. Photo (c): John Offenbach).
3.3. Sensing Space, Kengo Kuma (2014)
The Sensing Space was a new type of architecture exhibition presented at the Royal
Academy in 2014, emphasizing the experiential aspects rather than the functional aspects
of architecture. Seven prominent architects were invited to focus on the sensory qualities
of architecture [57]. The exhibition encouraged visitors to consider how architecture
makes people feel. As a part of the Sensing Space exhibition, Kuma introduced certain
scents into two darkened rooms to provoke memories of a particular space: the smell as-
sociated with architectural aspects of Japanese culture (see Figure 4). He interpreted the
aroma of architecture as a full bodily sensation “inspired by a Ko-Do, Japanese smell cer-
emony, which has similarities to a chado, the traditional Japanese tea ceremony” [58].
(a) (b)
Figure 4. Kengo Kuma, Sensing Space, 2014. (a) Kuma’s installation (b) Kuma’s installation (Pho-
tos: James Harris).
In these darkened rooms, he created the woven bamboo structures as a traditional
Japanese architectural material, with spotlights infused with the aroma of tatami mats and
hinoki. Kuma referred to darkness as being “very important in traditional Japanese archi-
tecture [...] Darkness also emphasizes the distinctive scent in each installation” [59]. A re-
view in the New Statesman stated that this particular scent evoked the childhood home
that comforted him and sent him “to the sleep of the innocents” [59]. This is a personal
experience shared not only with visitors who have similar memories, but also those who
are not familiar with the smell.
Figure 4.
Kengo Kuma, Sensing Space, 2014. (
a
) Kuma’s installation (
b
) Kuma’s installation (Photos:
James Harris).
In these darkened rooms, he created the woven bamboo structures as a traditional
Japanese architectural material, with spotlights infused with the aroma of tatami mats
and hinoki. Kuma referred to darkness as being “very important in traditional Japanese
architecture [...] Darkness also emphasizes the distinctive scent in each installation” [
59
]. A
review in the New Statesman stated that this particular scent evoked the childhood home
that comforted him and sent him “to the sleep of the innocents” [
59
]. This is a personal
experience shared not only with visitors who have similar memories, but also those who
are not familiar with the smell.
3.4. GC Prostho Museum Research Center, Kengo Kuma (2010)
Designed by Kengo Kuma, the wooden structure of the GC Prostho Museum Research
Center was built in Aichi Prefecture, Japan, in 2010 (see Figure 5). The GC Prostho was
inspired by a traditional Japanese toy called a Chidori. Chidori is a three-dimensional
puzzle composed of interlocking timber sticks that feature joints that can be assembled by
twisting the sticks without the aid of fittings, such as nails [
60
–
62
]. The Chidori system
Buildings 2022,12, 326 9 of 16
provides a flexible structure and anti-object where space is delineated by light, structure,
and materiality. People first encounter the wooden structure and experience glimpses
of the interior space according to light conditions [
60
]. When entering inside, people
experience “a cave-like space carved out of the lattice that is concurrently experienced as
connected to the exterior while distanced from it due to the viewing angle densities of the
Chidori system” [
60
]. The quality of spatial experience is provided by integrating light
and shadow from the east-facing structure; “sunlight filters through the lattice structure,
creating an ever-changing pattern of shadows” [
53
]. Kuma refers to these patterns created
by light and shadow as “a forest of deciduous trees, where you can enjoy sunshine filtering
through” [
62
]. This filtering of light through lattice provides constantly changing patterns
and volumes throughout the day and allows people to experience the spiritual nature of
the space in various ways.
Buildings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 16
3.4. GC Prostho Museum Research Center, Kengo Kuma (2010)
Designed by Kengo Kuma, the wooden structure of the GC Prostho Museum Re-
search Center was built in Aichi Prefecture, Japan, in 2010 (see Figure 5). The GC Prostho
was inspired by a traditional Japanese toy called a Chidori. Chidori is a three-dimensional
puzzle composed of interlocking timber sticks that feature joints that can be assembled by
twisting the sticks without the aid of fittings, such as nails [60–62]. The Chidori system
provides a flexible structure and anti-object where space is delineated by light, structure,
and materiality. People first encounter the wooden structure and experience glimpses of
the interior space according to light conditions [60]. When entering inside, people experi-
ence “a cave-like space carved out of the lattice that is concurrently experienced as con-
nected to the exterior while distanced from it due to the viewing angle densities of the
Chidori system” [60]. The quality of spatial experience is provided by integrating light
and shadow from the east-facing structure; “sunlight filters through the lattice structure,
creating an ever-changing pattern of shadows” [53]. Kuma refers to these patterns created
by light and shadow as “a forest of deciduous trees, where you can enjoy sunshine filter-
ing through” [62]. This filtering of light through lattice provides constantly changing pat-
terns and volumes throughout the day and allows people to experience the spiritual na-
ture of the space in various ways.
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 5. Kengo Kuma, GC Prostho Museum Research Center, 2010. (a) Façade (b) The lattice
structure (c) Interior space (Photos: Daici Ano).
4. Analysis and Discussion
The case studies discussed above present the important connection between the sen-
sory body and materiality (environmental stimuli) and show that the interior experience
affects the emotional experience. Three key aspects have been raised as significant in order
to improve the qualities of interior experiences, which are: (a) the stimulation of the body
through movements and senses; (b) the use of materiality, which allows people to develop
an awareness of the sensual aspects of interior space; and (c) emotional connection, which
can be shaped both individually and socially. However, throughout the research, I found
that: (a) these three aspects cannot be separated, but rather an integrated understanding
is required, providing multi-sensory experience; (b) a particular factor provides cultural
experience by stimulating socially shared memory; and (c) an abstract dimension of a
work without architectural form also provides spatial experience through stimulating
bodily senses and evoking personal memory. It allows people to smell, hear, and touch
the materials of the interior space while walking inside, which evokes a particular
memory of one’s past experiences through emotional connection. This means that interior
experience is physical, sensory, cultural, and mental. The characteristics of the architec-
tural projects found through analyzing the case studies are as follows (see Tables 2 and 3).
Figure 5.
Kengo Kuma, GC Prostho Museum Research Center, 2010. (
a
) Façade (
b
) The lattice
structure (c) Interior space (Photos: Daici Ano).
4. Analysis and Discussion
The case studies discussed above present the important connection between the
sensory body and materiality (environmental stimuli) and show that the interior experience
affects the emotional experience. Three key aspects have been raised as significant in order
to improve the qualities of interior experiences, which are: (a) the stimulation of the body
through movements and senses; (b) the use of materiality, which allows people to develop
an awareness of the sensual aspects of interior space; and (c) emotional connection, which
can be shaped both individually and socially. However, throughout the research, I found
that: (a) these three aspects cannot be separated, but rather an integrated understanding
is required, providing multi-sensory experience; (b) a particular factor provides cultural
experience by stimulating socially shared memory; and (c) an abstract dimension of a
work without architectural form also provides spatial experience through stimulating
bodily senses and evoking personal memory. It allows people to smell, hear, and touch the
materials of the interior space while walking inside, which evokes a particular memory of
one’s past experiences through emotional connection. This means that interior experience
is physical, sensory, cultural, and mental. The characteristics of the architectural projects
found through analyzing the case studies are as follows (see Tables 2and 3).
As shown above, the case studies concentrate on particular environmental materials
and stimulate bodily senses in order to provide a spatial experience and its emotional
connection. For example, Bruder Klaus Field Chapel and Serpentine Pavilion focus on the
integrated ways of using various environmental elements, providing a multi-sensory space.
On the other hand, Kuma’s Sensing Space and Prostho Museum concentrate on a particular
element, stimulating a socially shared memory. The materials help people to experience,
feel, and perceive the space in a particular way. In this sense, Zumthor states that “materials
react with one another and have their radiance, so that the material composition gives rise
to something unique” [
28
] (p. 24). The materiality stimulates bodily senses, which are not
Buildings 2022,12, 326 10 of 16
independent, but interactive with each other, to provide a multi-sensory experience of a
place in time.
Table 2. Characteristics of architectural projects. Source: author’s drawing.
Peter Zumthor’s
Bruder Klaus Chapel
Peter Zumthor’s
Serpentine Pavilion
Kengo Kuma’s
Sensing Space
Kengo Kuma’s
GC Prostho Museum
Type Chapel Pavilion Installation Museum
Location Mechernich, Germany Hyde Park, UK Royal Academy, UK Aichi, Japan
The Body •Movements
•Senses: smell, tactility
•Movements
•Senses: smell,
hearing, tactility
•Senses: smell •Movements
•Senses: tactility
Materiality Light, water, concrete, woods,
and fire.
Plants, flowers, black
wall, light Aromas, wood strips Light, shadow, woods, glass
Emotion •Spiritual inspiration
•Meditation
•Meditation
•Relaxation
•Socially shared
memory
•Sense of space
•Cultural connection
Spatial
Experience
To emphasize material
experience, particularly smell
and tactility, through
multi-sensory space for
spiritual experience.
To use native materials for a
strong connection to a
particular place in Germany.
To emphasize visitors’ sensory
experiences and provide space
for meditation.
To provide various emotional
experiences through the
interaction of gardens, light,
and darkness.
To provide a culturally
specific spatial experience,
providing a socially shared
smell of a Japanese home.
To emphasize materiality
and senses rather than
architectural form.
To provide a sense of space
with formlessness,
providing a cultural idea of
a lattice structure.
To use light and shadow for
various spatial experiences
in changing spatial
atmospheres.
↓
Various aspects, such as the physical and sensory body, materiality, and emotional connection, were combined
to improve the quality of the interior experience.
Table 3.
Analysis of various aspects of spatial experience for emotional connection. Source: au-
thor’s drawing.
Morphological Factor Sensual Factor Influential
Factor The Body
Volume
Scale
Rhythm
Order
Proportion
Contrast
Texture
Light
Shadow
Color
Temperature
Sound
Smell
Culture
Local
Senses
Movements
BKC
## #### ### ###
SP ## ## ##### ##
SS # # # # # # #
PM # # # # # # # # #
BKC: Bruder Klaus Chapel, SP: Serpentine Pavilion, SS: Sensing Space, PM: Prostho Museum.
An integrated understanding of environmental stimuli and the body can improve
the multi-sensory experience. Thus, experiencing architecture provides a multi-sensory
space; “qualities of space, matter and scale are measured together by the eye, ear, nose,
skin, tongue, skeleton and muscle” [
10
] (p. 41) within the material worlds. This means that
interior space provides a sensory experience that combines all of the senses. The interior
space reinforces one’s sense of identity and enriches the experience. For example, when
visiting an architectural space, what most strikes people is not the physical function for
which it was created, but the feelings it transmits through materials, stimulating their
bodily senses. In this sense, the case studies demonstrate that the stimulation of bodily
senses and their connection to environmental stimuli can improve the quality of spatial
experiences, generating emotion.
Buildings 2022,12, 326 11 of 16
Peter Zumthor focused on the tactile sense in order to provide spatial experiences
when engaging with materiality in the Chapel. In particular, he focused on the sense
of touch, which is directly related to the use of materials, and deals with several key
issues, such as the body, surroundings, and spatial continuity in time [
63
]; it connects with
particular aspects, such as environments and the culture of a specific place. In relation to
this, many architects and theorists concentrate on significant aspects of tactility as a source
of a visual sense that exceeds “two-dimensional surface texture” [
64
]. This introduces a
sense of how “touch performances propose qualities of feeling that impact powerfully
and ideologically” [
65
] (p. 167). This means that differentiated sensory organs in the
skin can understand space by “touching”, which is related to the sense of touch. Jennifer
Fisher, Assistant Professor of Contemporary Art and Curatorial Studies at York University,
highlights that “tactilism is strikingly performative” [
65
] (p. 166). It means that tactilism
stimulates one’s entire body, engaging various elements within space. The tactile experience
that integrates space and one’s own experience is perceived through the skin. The skin is a
sensory organ and acts as a canvas for tactile sensation within the cultural context. In this
regard, the tactile sense provides two key attributes: texture and temperature [
20
,
66
,
67
].
For example, our skin can measure the temperature of the surroundings in an interior space
and can experience the texture of an interior space through the tactile experience of stroking
the surface. Moreover, the sense of touch can be considered the visual unconscious. In
relation to this, Merleau-Ponty focuses on the significance of “visual tactilism”. He argues
that people can see the depth, smoothness, softness, and hardness of matter with their
eyes [
68
]. This shows that the visual-tactile sense observes both materials that are far away
and things that are close with the same intensity, combining them into a coherent and
intimate experience. Zumthor also writes about material, stating that “people interact with
objects. As an architect, that is what I deal with all the time” [
28
] (p. 17). He argues that
touch is a synergetic sensory link that amplifies our bodily experience of the architectural
form [
69
]. For this, he concentrates on the interrelationship between space, time, sounds,
smell, light, and shadow, emphasizing the importance of materiality. Sense of smell is also
an important idea that enables both the Chapel (smoke smell) and Serpentine Pavilion
(floral scent) to improve the quality of the interior experience in relation to materiality.
For example, a particular smell, which was left behind in Bruder Klaus Field Chapel, can
directly link that place with something that was burned in the past. Moreover, the sense
of sound is also a significant aspect of environmental stimuli in the Chapel; it is never
absent, and relates strongly to materials in the interior space. According to Pallasmaa, the
sense of sound creates an experience of interiority, compared to the sense of sight, which
implies exteriority [
10
]. Hearing allows one to perceive the environment in cooperation
with sight and imagination. Sound measures space and its scale. The sound is provided
depending on the pattern and scale of the space and materials [
10
] (p. 75). These sensory
experiences are again integrated through the body and constantly interact with materials
and the surrounding environment. Spatial experience through the sensory body resonates
in our consciousness and highlights material experience in interior architecture.
Culture is also a significant aspect of interior experience. A particular environmental
element evokes personal memory, which then connects to spatial experience within a
culture. In particular, the sense of smell is strongly linked to cultural aspects, evoking
a particular memory. In this respect, it is worth looking at Kuma’s Sensing Space, as it
underlines materiality rather than architectural form. Kuma’s abstract wooden structure
containing a particular smell evoked a socially shared memory of a Japanese home for
those visitors who had experience of living there and gave information about the cultural
smell of the architecture to others who do not have this shared memory. These culturally
specific sensory experiences and memories stimulate our emotions and feelings in particular
situations related to the cultural space. Kuma’s installation also highlighted the experiential
rather than the functional aspects of architecture. It simply provided a sense of smell in a
dark room without an architectural form, but stimulated spatial experiences and emotional
connections. It demonstrated a significant aspect, which is that spatial experience can be
Buildings 2022,12, 326 12 of 16
developed not only in an architectural form, but also in material worlds with regard to the
cultural context. Thus, the spatial experience can be developed not through the reality of
architectural representation, but rather through “the awakening of the imagination” [
17
],
based on the predominant experience. Kuma’s Sensing Space also emphasized darkness
in order to provide the aesthetic value of Japanese architecture. Shadow and darkness
are considered to be a silent space in Japanese culture. The Japanese are familiar with
living in darkness and discover beauty in shadows. According to Jun’ichir ¯
o Tanizaki, this
is because the Japanese spend much of their daily lives in the heavy darkness that hangs
beneath the eaves [
70
]. Thus, the darkened room in Sensing Space provided a familiar
sensation of Japanese home culture. In relation to this, light and shadow, as environmental
elements, provide various ways of experiencing space. Light and shadow are significant
and enable us to experience and feel a particular spatial environment [
14
,
71
]. Together,
they enrich the quality of materiality, providing volume, smoothness, temperature, and
patterns; they provide a particular atmosphere of interior space [
14
,
71
]. This can also be
found in other case studies. The Prostho Museum, for example, emphasized the integration
of light and shadow, engaging the wooden lattice structure. It provided various ways
of experiencing space through observing the changes in spatial volume and atmosphere
created by the changing levels of light and shadow throughout the day. This aspect can
also be linked to the Japanese cultural context by engaging particular elements, such as
shadow, lattice structure, and timber. In the Chapel, however, light and shadow were used
for spirituality as they have a mystifying quality. In ancient Greece, the light was respected
for its spirituality and was considered to create a sacred place for holding ceremonies,
creating an ecstatic mood and an atmosphere of divinity [
14
,
72
]. Light also provides a
comfortable environment. As I mentioned in the previous section, the Serpentine Pavilion
provided both dark corridors and a garden filled with light, allowing people to experience
different ways of meditation, both through walking and through remaining separated from
the world of noise and the smells of London. This shows that an interior experience of
architecture can be transformed into an emotional level of experience of architecture.
Through this interior experience combining the body and materiality, a particular
emotion, such as spiritual, meditative, cultural, or enjoyable, can be evoked. This means
that the body, materiality, and emotional connection offer a fundamental idea for enriching
the interior experience. Emotions generated through sensory experience within space also
recall memories of past space, which embodies interior experiences. Thus, people can
experience, perceive, and feel the space, which creates spatial imagination; this can be
developed both individually and socially. Thus, interior experience represents several key
issues, such as the body, materiality, culture, emotion, and memory (see Figure 6).
Buildings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 16
Figure 6. Embodiment of spatial experience for emotional connection. Source: author’s drawing.
5. Conclusions
This paper provides a phenomenological understanding of interior space in order to
explore the emotional connection between space and experience. This paper incorporates
a literature review and gathers together theoretical research based on issues of interior
space, experience, and emotion. I have explored the important role of the interior experi-
ence within the field of architecture, engaging the bodily sense, materials, culture, and
identity. The interior space here refers not only to physical aspects, such as materiality,
but also to a container where bodily activity and movements are embedded within the
culture. In this paper, I have argued that interior space offers effective ways of developing
spatial and emotional experiences. Throughout this research paper, I found that the body
and materiality are essential in order to improve the quality of experiences in the realm of
interior space, which is understood as the origins of architecture. The spatial experience
of architecture is developed by: (a) the body, which includes bodily movements and
senses; (b) materiality, which represents the interior environment, stimulating the body;
and (c) emotional connection, which evokes both individual and socially shared memories.
Although a phenomenological understanding of architecture is becoming a more im-
portant social issue in contemporary society, it seldom considers interior experience but
instead focuses on a visual sense of architectural representation. In this paper, I try to trace
what effect the spatial experience has on improving the quality of interior design through
examining the body and materiality in a contemporary architectural context, considering
the roles of interior space and the effects of experience. This paper also concentrates on
phenomenological and emotional experience in understanding architecture, which affects
the users’ perceptions and experiences through phenomenological engagement. Interior
space provides a personal connection to communication to offer an individual experience
and social engagement through predominant memories. The important aspects of interior
space are to provide bodily participation and emotional experience in engaging the body,
and allowing them to interact, communicate with, and recognize previous experience to
embody spatial perception. Thus, interior space can be transformed into a place where the
body is involved, allowing people to discover the interior environment that stimulates
users’ emotions and improves interior design to give users a better experience. In this
paper, I have drawn upon the representative case studies regarding the interior experi-
ence to explore how they provide sensory effects and materials and engage people,
providing an emotional experience to improve the quality of the interior space, which is
one of the fundamental aspects of this paper. I found three significant aspects: (a) an inte-
grated understanding of the body, materiality (environmental stimuli), and how emotion
plays a substantial role in improving the quality of the interior experience; (b) a particular
factor provides cultural experience by stimulating socially shared memory; and (c) mate-
rial worlds that engage the body can enrich both spatial and emotional experience, even
in an abstract structure. This highlights the idea that spatial experience is not only a
Figure 6. Embodiment of spatial experience for emotional connection. Source: author ’s drawing.
Buildings 2022,12, 326 13 of 16
5. Conclusions
This paper provides a phenomenological understanding of interior space in order to
explore the emotional connection between space and experience. This paper incorporates a
literature review and gathers together theoretical research based on issues of interior space,
experience, and emotion. I have explored the important role of the interior experience
within the field of architecture, engaging the bodily sense, materials, culture, and identity.
The interior space here refers not only to physical aspects, such as materiality, but also to
a container where bodily activity and movements are embedded within the culture. In
this paper, I have argued that interior space offers effective ways of developing spatial
and emotional experiences. Throughout this research paper, I found that the body and
materiality are essential in order to improve the quality of experiences in the realm of
interior space, which is understood as the origins of architecture. The spatial experience
of architecture is developed by: (a) the body, which includes bodily movements and
senses; (b) materiality, which represents the interior environment, stimulating the body;
and (c) emotional connection, which evokes both individual and socially shared memories.
Although a phenomenological understanding of architecture is becoming a more
important social issue in contemporary society, it seldom considers interior experience but
instead focuses on a visual sense of architectural representation. In this paper, I try to trace
what effect the spatial experience has on improving the quality of interior design through
examining the body and materiality in a contemporary architectural context, considering
the roles of interior space and the effects of experience. This paper also concentrates on
phenomenological and emotional experience in understanding architecture, which affects
the users’ perceptions and experiences through phenomenological engagement. Interior
space provides a personal connection to communication to offer an individual experience
and social engagement through predominant memories. The important aspects of interior
space are to provide bodily participation and emotional experience in engaging the body,
and allowing them to interact, communicate with, and recognize previous experience to
embody spatial perception. Thus, interior space can be transformed into a place where
the body is involved, allowing people to discover the interior environment that stimulates
users’ emotions and improves interior design to give users a better experience. In this
paper, I have drawn upon the representative case studies regarding the interior experience
to explore how they provide sensory effects and materials and engage people, providing
an emotional experience to improve the quality of the interior space, which is one of the
fundamental aspects of this paper. I found three significant aspects: (a) an integrated
understanding of the body, materiality (environmental stimuli), and how emotion plays a
substantial role in improving the quality of the interior experience; (b) a particular factor
provides cultural experience by stimulating socially shared memory; and (c) material
worlds that engage the body can enrich both spatial and emotional experience, even in an
abstract structure. This highlights the idea that spatial experience is not only a functional
but also a sensory and material experience. From this perspective, the emotional experience
can substantially improve the quality of interior space to enable a better understanding
of architecture. It is difficult to generalize the findings of this paper with regard to the
architectural environments as only four case studies were explored. Moreover, the data were
interpreted and analyzed by reflecting the researcher’s perspectives, which could provide a
subjective view in some respects. Nevertheless, this approach is still substantial and widely
used in the qualitative analysis of spatial experience. More discussions will be necessary to
develop ideas on how sensory stimulation and materiality affect emotional experience and
to look at what qualities need to be developed to allow the interior experience to become
more powerful, which could be examined in future studies.
A phenomenological understanding of interior space can bring about the stimulation
of emotional feelings and memories, leading to new ways of thinking about architecture,
which helps us to develop interior or architectural design. Therefore, I expect that this
paper will contribute to the understanding and knowledge of the relationship between
Buildings 2022,12, 326 14 of 16
interior space, the body, environmental stimuli, and materiality, considering how experience
interacts with architecture to create a multi-sensory space.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
1.
Choi, S. A Theoretical Consideration on the Example of Phenomenological Perception Spatial Experience in James Turrell’s Work.
Korea Des. Knowl. J. 2012,22, 236.
2.
Lyu, H.; Kim, S. Emotional Characteristics of Materiality Expressed on Peter Zumthor’s Projects. J. Korea Contents Assoc.
2017
,17,
157–165. [CrossRef]
3. Tweed, A. A Phenomenological Framework for Describing Architectural Experience. Multimodal Technol. Interact. 2018,2, 80.
4. Imrie, R. Architects’ Conceptions of the Human Body. Environ. Plan. D Soc. Space 2003,21, 47–65. [CrossRef]
5.
Shirazi, M.R. On Phenomenological Discourse in Architecture. 2012. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/301698613_On_Phenomenological_Discourse_in_Architecture (accessed on 10 October 2021).
6. Li, L.; Zhang, Q.; He, M. Research on Body and Architecture. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2017,690, 5. [CrossRef]
7.
Lee, M. Study on Characteristics of Body Sense in Contemporary Architectural Design: Focused on Works of Herzog & de
Meuron, Steven Holl, Peter Zumthor, Kuma Kengo. J. Korea Inst. Inter. Des. 2015,24, 82–92.
8. Dal Co, F. Tadao Ando: Complete Works (1969–1994); Phaidon Press: New York, NY, USA, 1997.
9. Merleau-Ponty, M. Sense and Nonsense; Northwestern University Press: Evanston, IL, USA, 1964.
10. Pallasmaa, J. The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses; Wiley: London, UK, 2005; p. 41.
11.
Reddy, S.M.; Chakrabarti, D.; Karmakar, S. Emotion and Interior Space Design: An Ergonomic Perspective. Work
2012
,41,
1072–1078. [CrossRef]
12. McCarter, R. The Space Within: Interior Experience as the Origin of Architecture; Reaktion Books: London, UK, 2016.
13.
Basyazici-Kulac, B.; Ito-Alpturer, M. A phenomenological study of spatial experiences without sight and critique of visual
dominance in architecture. In Proceedings of the EAEA-11 Conference 2013, (Track 2) Experiential Simulation: The Sensory
Perception 168 of the Built Environment, Milano, Italy, 25–28 September 2013.
14.
Agapiou, N. Architectural dip. In Sensing Architecture; University of Nicosia: Athens, Greece, 2018. Available online: https:
//www.academia.edu/35983737/Sensing_Architecture (accessed on 7 January 2022).
15.
Soltani, S.; Kirci, N. Phenomenology and Space in Architecture: Experience, Sensation and Meaning. Int. J. Archit. Eng. Technol.
2019,6, 3. [CrossRef]
16.
Fortkamp, S. Body, Emotion, Architecture: A Phenomenological Reinterpretation. Master’s Thesis, University of Cincinnati,
Cincinnati, OH, USA, 2002.
17.
Zaxarov, A. The Meditated Motion by Olafur Eliasson. Thisispaper
2020
. Available online: https://www.thisispaper.com/mag/
the-meditated-motion-olafur-eliasson (accessed on 5 January 2022).
18.
Public Delivery, Olafur Eliasson & a pond in a museum—The Meditated Motion. Public Delivery
2021
. Available online:
https://publicdelivery.org/olafur-eliasson-meditated- motion/ (accessed on 5 January 2022).
19. Holl, S. Steven Holl: Architecture Spoken; Rizzoli: New York, NY, USA, 2007.
20. Spence, C. Senses of Place: Architectural Design for the Multisensory Mind. Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic. 2020,5, 46. [CrossRef]
21. Verschaffel, B. The interior as architectural principle. Palgrave Commun. 2017,3, 2. [CrossRef]
22. Wright, F.L. An American Architecture; Horizon Press: New York, NY, USA, 1955; p. 217.
23. Dewey, J. Art as Experience; Perigee Books: New York, NY, USA, 2005; p. 209.
24.
Guggenheim. The Guggenheim Museum on the Inside. Available online: https://www.guggenheim.org/teaching-materials/
the-architecture-of- the-solomon-r-guggenheim-museum/the-guggenheim-museum-on-the-inside#_edn1 (accessed on
28 December 2021).
25.
Cho, M.; Kim, M. Measurement of User Emotion and Experience in Interaction with Space. J. Asian Archit. Build. Eng.
2017
,16,
99–106. [CrossRef]
26.
Atmodiwirjo, P.; Yatmo, Y.A. Interiority in Everyday Space: A Dialogue between Materiality and Occupation. Interiority
2019
,2,
1–4. [CrossRef]
27. Benjamin, W. Arcade Project; Belknap Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1999; p. 9.
28. Zumthor, P. Atmospheres: Architectural Environments, Surrounding Objects; Birkhäuser: Basel, Switzerland, 2006.
29. Lawrence, D.L.; Low, S.M. The Built Environment and Spatial Form. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1990,19, 453–505. [CrossRef]
30. Caan, S. Rethinking Design and Interiors: Human Beings in the Built Environment; Laurence King: London, UK, 2011; p. 40.
31. Gallagher, S. Lived Body and Environment. Res. Phenomenol. 1986,16, 139–170. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2022,12, 326 15 of 16
32.
De Paiva, A.; Jedon, R. Short- and long-term effects of architecture on the brain: Toward theoretical formalization. Front. Archit.
Res. 2019,8, 564–571. [CrossRef]
33. Rasmussen, S.E. Experiencing Architecture; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1959; p. 33.
34.
Jencks, C. Dimensions. Space, Shape and Scale in Architecture by Charles Moore, Gerald Allen; Body, Memory, and Architecture
by Kent, C. Bloomer, Charles, W. Moore, Robert, J. Yudell. J. Soc. Archit. Hist. 1979,38, 50–52. [CrossRef]
35.
Mallgrave, H.F. Architecture and Embodiment: The Implications of the New Sciences and Humanities for Design; Routledge: London,
UK, 2013.
36.
Prigogine, I.; Stengers, I.; Toffler, A. Order Out of Chaos: Man’s New Dialogue with Nature; Bantam New Age Books: New York, NY,
USA, 1984.
37.
Robinson, S.; Pallasmaa, J. Mind in Architecture: Neuroscience, Embodiment, and the Future of Design; The MIT Press: Cambridge,
MA, USA, 2015.
38. Westermann, C. An Eco-Poetic Approach to Architecture Across Boundaries. KnE Soc. Sci. 2019,3, 281–291.
39.
Yook, O. Study on the Characteristic of Partiality in Korean Traditional Residential Architecture in View of the Phenomenology.
J. Korean Hous. Assoc. 2016,27, 73–81. [CrossRef]
40. Pallasmaa, J.; Mallgrave, H.F.; Robinson, S.; Galles, V. Architecture and Empathy; TWRB Foundarion: Espoo, Finland, 2015.
41. Ching, F.D.K. Architecture, Form Space and Order; John Wiley and Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2014.
42.
Ahmadi, M. The experience of Movement in the Built Form and Space: A Framework for Movement Evaluation in Architecture.
Cogent Arts Humanit. 2019,6, 1588090. [CrossRef]
43.
Cambridge Dictionary. Experience from Cambridge Dictionary. 2022. Available online: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/
dictionary/english-korean/experience (accessed on 12 December 2021).
44.
Lee, K. Trace of Everyday Performance: A Contemporary Reinterpretation of the ‘Ondol’ and ‘Dot-Jari’. Ph.D. Thesis, University
of the Arts London, London, UK, 2017.
45. Tuan, Y. Place: An Experiential Perspective. Geogr. Rev. 1975,65, 151–165. [CrossRef]
46. Kim, H.; Lee, J. A Study on the Structure of Haptic Experiential Space. J. Korean Inst. Spat. Des. 2015,10, 35–48. [CrossRef]
47. Damasio, A. Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain; Harvest House: Eugene, OR, USA, 2003.
48.
Kim, S. Vision and Responsiveness: The Problem of Experience in the Architectures of the East and the West. J. Archit. Hist.
2004
,
13, 35–54.
49. Tuan, Y. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience; University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis, MI, USA, 1977.
50.
Sveiven, M. Bruder Klaus Field Chapel/Peter Zumthor. 2011. Available online: https://www.archdaily.com/106352/bruder-
klaus-field-chapel-peter-zumthor (accessed on 27 November 2021).
51.
Zilliacus, A. Peter Zumthor’s Bruder Klaus Field Chapel Through the Lens of Aldo Amoretti. Arch. Daily
2016
. Available online:
https://www.archdaily.com/798340/peter-zumthors-bruder-klaus-field-chapel-through-the- lens-of-aldo- amoretti (accessed on
27 November 2021).
52. Armitage, J. (Ed.) Virilio Now: Current Perspectives in Virilio Studies; Polity Press: Cambridge, UK, 2011.
53.
Schwartz, C. Introducing Architectural Tectonics: Exploring the Intersection of Design and Construction; Routledge: New York, NY,
USA, 2017.
54.
Serpentine Gallery Website. Available online: https://www.serpentinegalleries.org/whats-on/serpentine-gallery-pavilion-2011
-peter-zumthor/ (accessed on 17 December 2021).
55.
Studio International Website. Peter Zumthor: Summerworks. 2006. Available online: https://www.studiointernational.com/
index.php/peter-zumthor-summerworks (accessed on 17 December 2021).
56.
Designboom, Peter Zumthor’s Serpentine Pavilion Is Now Complete. Available online: https://www.designboom.com/
architecture/peter-zumthor-serpentine-pavilion-now-complete/ (accessed on 17 December 2021).
57.
Murry, G. A new type of architecture exhibition: Empathies between Mackintosh and Holl in Glasgow. Letters
2014
,18, 101–105.
58.
Solá, M.N. Sensing Spaces: Architecture Reimagined Main Galleries at the Royal Academy of Arts, London/ 25 January–
6 April 2014
. Available online: https://www.archisearch.gr/calendar-of-events/sensing-spaces-architecture-reimagined-main-
galleries-at-the-royal-academy-of-arts-london-25- january-6-april- 2014/ (accessed on 19 December 2021).
59.
Mara, F. Kengo Kuma: ‘Gothic architecture wasn’t a conscious influence. But I love Gothic’. Archit. J.
2014
. Available
online: https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/practice/culture/kengo-kuma-gothic-architecture-wasnt-a-conscious-influence-
but-i-love-gothic (accessed on 19 December 2021).
60. Michael, U.H.; Turko, J.P. Grounds and Envelopes: Reshaping Architecture and the Built Environment; Routledge: London, UK, 2015.
61. Ji, J. Material and Work. Master ’s Dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA, 2019.
62. Nuijsink, C. Forest Fantasy. Frame 2011,78, 156.
63. Sánchez, M.J.M. Dynamic Cartography: Body, Architecture, and Performative Space; Routledge: London, UK, 2022.
64.
Marinetti, F.T. Tactilism. In Marinetti: Selected Writings; Flint, R.W., Ed.; Farrar, Straus and Giroux: New York, NY, USA, 1971;
p. 112.
65.
Fisher, J. Tangible Acts: Touch Performance. In The Senses in Performance; Banes, S., Lepecki, A., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY,
USA, 2007.
66. Classen, C. The Color of Angels: Cosmology, Gender and the Aesthetic Imagination; Routledge: London, UK, 1998.
67. Vorreiter, G. Theatre of Touch. Archit. Rev. 1989,149, 66–69.
Buildings 2022,12, 326 16 of 16
68.
Merleau-Ponty, M. The Merleau-Ponty Aesthetics Reader: Philosophy and Painting; Northwestern University Press: Evanston, IL,
USA, 1996; p. 65.
69. Crisman, P. The Magic of the Real: Material and tactility in the work of Peter Zumthor. Mater. Matters 2008,3, 3.
70. Tanizaki, J. Praise of Shadows; Vintage: New York, NY, USA, 2001.
71. Lobell, J.; Kahn, L.I. Between Silence and Light: Spirit in the Architecture of Louis I. Kahn; Shambhala: Boulder, CO, USA, 2008.
72. Vassella, A. Louis I. Kahn—Silence and Light: The Lecture at ETH Zurich; Park Books: Zurich, Switzerland, 2013.
