Water and the Senses

As previously discussed on this blog the physical presence of water has a very immediate result upon its surrounding environment. Examining this further, the impact of introduction of water into a scheme can be explored through the evocation of the senses. The three senses that Moore identifies directly within Water and Architecture are sight, sound and touch.

On Reflection

It is perhaps more appropriate to consider sight under the heading of reflection and light, as these are the inherent qualities of water to which Moore is directly referring. As water naturally seeks an even surface, Moore suggests that capitalising on this very attribute can prove to be a very powerful device for designers. Bouncing light off of the surface Moore explains can allow designers to play with “the qualities of reflection, depth, or the seemingly infinite surface of large bodies of water to relive claustrophobia and expand personal space.” (Moore 1994:200)

OMGEVING’s Averbode Abbey Square in Belgium demonstrates the dynamism of such effect. The water placed within this design, although only a few centimetres deep, undoubtedly achieves the intended pensive qualities instilled by its simple composition. Throughout the day the ponds reflect the sky and visitors catch glimpses of the buildings on the surface. By night the space transforms, the buildings seem to float eerily in the middle of the courtyards; their moorings to the earth are blurred. Here the successful use of water as a reflective device is appropriate as it reminds the viewer of the duality of human existence.

On Noise

Of equal consideration to that of the visual aspects of water Moore suggests that sound has the potential to enhance a design through careful consideration:

“…the sounds of water are variable and can be manipulated to produce satisfying results. Water makes sounds as it splashes against things, moves over solid objects, or falls into itself. Attention to the audible aspects of water is important – too little sound can be annoying [like a dripping faucet], and too much sound in confined spaces can be overpowering…” (Moore 1994:202)

In a project where the intention is to heighten the occupant’s awareness of the presence of water, sound can become a powerful device - particularly within areas where the placement of water would be inappropriate. Sound in this project, although hypothetical, can provide clues to the relationship between certain spaces. The consideration deploying sound as a device to curate experience across the site therefore goes hand in hand with the introduction of silence. When considering the silence of water, Moore explains:

“Silence, too, is appreciated. Water often makes no sound at all, or very little, so people find emotional rescue in the rare commodity of silence. Just the right amount of water noise can take the edge off of silence, producing “white noise”. Drawing people to connect with their stillness allows people to commune with the “indwelling spirit.” (Moore 1994:202)

This is something Frank Lloyd Wright achieved at Fallingwater. The audible flow of water can be heard within the structure throughout the year. The sound of water triggers a connection for the occupants to nature, refer attached video. It is important to note that the water that will be integrated into this project will be nowhere near as close to the naturally occurring as presented here. The challenge will be drawing on the potency of this effect and considering how sound can be integrated will contribute to the designing of experience within the project.

On Touch

Or perhaps as Michael Cadwell explains when discussing Scarpa’s Querini Stampalia in his book 'Strange Details', the key for this project is to counter and challenge the preconceived. Cadwell investigates the odd nature of Scarpa’s work, analysing its ‘fluidity’ and highly organised spatial arrangement. Cadwell explains that water is used as a relief, but one that continues to detach the visitor from solid ground:

“We can breathe and there seems to be time…just to go for a swim. A strange buoyancy fills the space. The water that first terrified now gently lifts to the horizontal.” (Cadwell 2007:27)

Cadwell here and throughout his description of Scarpa’s work is commenting on the relationship water possess with the surrounding architecture and how it disorientates. This supports Moore’s discussion of touching water being the most personal interaction we can have with the substance. Moore explains touching water and the intimacy people experience can vary through the altering the degrees of contact (Moore 1994:202). Like the presence of sound and the introduction of silence, the idea of the untouchable can also heighten the emotional contact and overall experience (Moore 1994:204). What is therefore called into question, by this statement is the necessity to consider the edge of the water. The edge condition, can have significant impact on the visitor; if it is railed it feels safe, as there is a barrier between visitor and water. If there is no barrier, the water can evoke emotions and trigger very personal responses. Cadwell’s description of “the water that first terrified…” is testament to the careful relationship Scarpa arranges with visitor and architecture.

To be critical of the Moore’s discussion of water evoking the senses, he has omitted smell. And in relation to this project, smell is a significant omission. The scent of a wastewater treatment plant may possibly have a significant effect on a visitor. This provides the project with an avenue for exploration; how to mitigate the overpowering scent in certain places throughout the design. For this research to have greater yield for the project it is necessary to refine its foci. This is identified through Moore’s discussion of the ‘potential for wonder’ – where will water be introduced and in what manner? As this project is the celebration of treating wastewater. It becomes clear that the project must adopt the responsibility for revealing this manufactured process to educate the people of Adelaide. Additionally the investigation into water infrastructure will provide clues on how to approach the more intricate relationships that are emerging within the design. 

References

Cadwell, M. 2007, Strange Details, Writing Architecture, Cambridge, MA : MIT Press

Moore, C. 1994, Water and Architecture, Harry N. Abrams Inc., New York

Image References

1. Averbode Abbey Square by OMGEVING, 2012, Scherpenheuvel-Zichem, Belgium. Image found at http://www.landezine.com/index.php/2012/09/averbode-abbey-square-by-omgeving/, accessed 25.08.2013

2. The Kaufmann Residence known as “Fallingwater” by Frank Lloyd Wright, 1935, Pennsylvania, United States. Image found at http://www.wright-house.com/frank-lloyd-wright/fallingwater-pictures/fallingwater-2.jpg, accessed 27.08.2013

3. Querini Stampalia by Carlos Scarpa, 1959-63, Venice, Italy. Image found at http://www.mzetastudio.it/image/Fondazione%20Querini%20Stampalia%20072.jpg, accessed 27.08.2013

Video Reference

Fallingwater – A Frank Lloyd Wright House Video, found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcGnijrFrqU, accessed 27.08.2013