Mitchell W.

Schwarzer
The Emergence of
Architectural Space:
August Schmarsow's
Theory of Raumgestaltung
 '

eit .

I-

'^SSSSI
II
I
I I I I

dV, '- 4-
, : *
I ?

/,/

r'.
-1

'1

22 - -

1. Peter Behrens, Exhibition
Rooms, InternationalArt
Exhibition,Mannheim, 1907
During the latter part of the nineteenth century, the study
of history in Germany was confrontedwith various metho-
dologies drawn from the naturalsciences. Empirical
observationof nature, positivistrule of facts, mistrustfor
metaphysicschallenged both the traditionalconcern for
rhetoric and the idealist school of descriptivehistorythat
had been in place since the eighteenth century. As the
historianJohann Gustav Droysen wrote, "Natureand His-
tory are the widest conceptions under which the human
mind apprehendsthe world of phenomena."' Nature and
human history, however, were not easily brought together.
By the 1890s a major controversyon this point erupted
within German historiography.Citing the factual consis-
tency of the naturalsciences, Karl Lamprechtarguedfor
replacingwhat he referredto as the descriptivestudy of
ideas with empirical methods.2 In his book German His-
tory of 1894 and in a series of earlier articles, Lamprecht
called into question Leopold von Ranke'snotion of tran-
scendental forces not subject to causalityand stipulated,
rather,psychological forces as those basic to history.3
This epistemological tension within general historicalstud-
ies was also present in the history of art and architecture,
which was in certain circles reconstitutedunder the
imprint of the naturalsciences. The study of the sense
organs, in particularsight, proved especially influential for
the visual arts. In light of great advances in theories of
optical perception, worksof art were positioned at the cru-
cial intersection of the perceptivelaws of mind and nature.
Paintings, sculptures, and buildings were evaluatedaccord-
ing to psychological and physiological criteria. Such inves-
tigations promised an independent methodologicalbasis for
art history. Against aesthetic paradigms,based on a priori
notions of cognition and reason or a Hegelian teleology of
the spirit, the movement of perceptualempiricism within
art historical studies shifted inquiry from "the domain of
values, the world of ideas"to "the realm of reality,the
world of facts."4
As perceptualempiricism took hold within art history, its
application to architecturetook the form of a new concept
of space based on perceptualdynamics. Like other percep-
tual notions, the idea of dynamic space was transcribed
from nineteenth-centuryscientific theories of vision con-
assemblage 15
cerned with how the mind and senses graspthree-dimen-
sional forms and space. But while optical theoristshinted
indirectlyat the implications for a spatial conception of
architecture,art historiansbegan to look at space as essen-
tial to architecturalcreation. Among art historians,the
writingsof August Schmarsowplayed a compelling role in
the overall formation of a spatial paradigm.In this essay
I intend to investigatethe intellectual backgroundof
Schmarsow'swritingson architecture,to describe the
salient featuresof his theory of Raumgestaltung, or spatial
forming, and to evaluate its influence on subsequentthink-
ing on architectureand space.5
Schmarsow'swritingson space and architectureare princi-
pally contained in the short book Das Wesen von architek-
tonischenSchopfungof 1893, the essay "Uberden Wert
der Dimensionen im Menschlichen Raumgebilde"of
1896, and the methodological treatiseGrundbegriffeder
Kunstwissenschaftof 1905. Having spent most of his career
as a professorof art history at the Universityof Leipzig,
Schmarsowbelonged to a generation of art historians,
including Heinrich Wolfflin and Alois Riegl, who
attemptedto formulate a new disciplinaryfooting for the
study of the visual arts. Far less known to Anglo-American
readersthan those of his contemporaries,Schmarsow's
writingson architecturejoined theories of visibility (Sicht-
barkeit)and empathy (Einfiihlung)to an awarenessof the
relativityof architecturalexpressionsin history.6In 1941
BernardBerenson wrote that, before Schmarsow,space had
been conceived as a negligible void and creditedhim with
developing a theory of form in which "objects,no matter
how large or how small, exist only to make us realize mere
extension, and exist for that alone."7
Schmarsowwas the first to formulate a comprehensivethe-
ory of architectureas a spatial creation at the frontiersof
the paradigmof perceptualempiricism. He differedmost
from other theoristsin his insistence that bodily movement
through space ratherthan stationaryperception of form
was the essence of architecture.Certainly, he wanted to
rebut Wolfflin's theory of the essential role of bodily
masses.8Schmarsow'stheories, then, posed a challenge to
the hitherto dominant notion of form in architecture;yet
his spatial focus possesseda critical blindspot to the possi-
50

bility that vision is not merely a scientific issue, but also
culturally determined.
Theoretical Precursors
Schmarsow'sarticulationof spatial creation in architecture,
like other late-nineteenth-centuryattemptsto expressa
knowledge of art in the terminology of science, depended
conceptually on earlier theories of psychologicaland physi-
ological optics.9 George Berkeley'sessay on optics of 1709
establisheda paradigmof experientialor associationalper-
ception that would exercise a profound influence on all
subsequent theorists. 0 His argument hinged on the prob-
lem that we observe three-dimensionalobjects with a pair
of eyes that can only record vague two-dimensionalpat-
terns of light and color. He assertedthat distance and form
cannot be apprehendedwith the eyes alone; to form men-
tal images of distance and magnitude requiresthe faculty
of touch. Perception of visual space, then, resultsfrom the
combination of memories of touch (tactile ideas) with
immediate visual sensations.
Berkeley'sconjecture engrossedoptical theoristswell into
the nineteenth century. If our mental images of spatial
objects are an empirical combination of differentvisual
and tactile sensations, how do these images relate to what
we conceive as the real world?Likewise, how do we form
the mental images that serve as representationsof real
objects?Approximatelya hundred years after Berkeley,
Johann Friedrich Herbart'stheory of apperceptionpostu-
lated a set of mental processesin which concepts (Vorstel-
lungen) are received through the senses, preservedby the
memory, reproducedby the imagination, and combined
anew.11Herbartposed a strong challenge to the Berkeleyan
paradigmof tactile-basedspatial perceptionfor he claimed
that by eye movement alone "thereis a constant blending
of concepts gained, an incitation of those which are
strengthenedby perceptionsof what lies outside the middle
of the field of vision, and an innumerable multitude of
reproductionsinterlacing one another."12The conflict of
Vorstellungenin the mind, the ceaseless arrestor blending
of new sensations with those previouslyassembled, proved
especially provocativeto the new branch of philosophical
studies known as psychology and set the tone for subse-
quent theorists.13
Schwarzer
Influenced by Herbart, Hermann Lotze furthermodified
the Berkeleyanparadigmof tactile spatial perception
through a doctrine of eye and body movement. Lotze's
theory of "local signs"stated that, first, all spatialdiffer-
ences and relations among the impressionson the retina
must be compensated by correspondingnonspatialand
merely intensive relations among the impressionsthat exist
without spatial form in the soul, and, second, from these,
there must arise in reverseorder, not a new actual arrange-
ment of such impressionsin extension, but only the men-
tal presentationof such an arrangementin us.14 Local
signs are memories of muscular feelings derived from the
motions of the eye requiredto encompass the form of a
visual object. For example, when we notice an object with
our peripheralvision and then rotateour eyes to locate this
object in the center of our vision, we are both creating
new local signs (through the muscular action) and acting
under the guidance of existing local signs. Our experience
of qualities of the third dimension consists in our memory
of the magnitude of the movement it took to bring the
object into the line of clearest vision.15Lotze describedthe
perception of three dimensions as follows:
Fromthe manifoldof displacements
whichthe particular
visual
images experience . . . we gain the impressionthat each line in
an imageoriginallyseen is the beginningof new surfaceswhich
do not coincidewiththatpreviouslyseen, but whichleadout
into this space,now extendedon all sides,to greateror lesser
distancesfromthe line.16
William Wundt likewise extended the discussion of how
muscular movement contributesto ideas about spatial
form, describing its influence on our judgment of distance,
magnitude, and depth.17 His insight developed from the
correlationbetween the expenditureof bodily energy and
the perception of distance: Increasein motor sensation (or
eye movement) leads to a rise in exertion that then induces
a mental judgment of great distance. Distance is thus
appraisedby the effort it takes the body (and particularly
the eyes) to scan the full extent of an object.18 Wundt
assertedthat vertical muscular movement is more difficult
than horizontal because the former requiresthe use of aux-
iliary and complementary muscles.19Distances perceived
by vertical movement thereforeappeargreater.Similarly,
upwardeye movements involve a more intense sensation
51

than downwardmovements and "forcedor interrupted
movements require more exertion than free and continu-
ous ones."20Since the energy of startingeye movement is a
greaterpercentageof the total eye energy, an acute angle,
for example, appearsrelativelylargerthan an obtuse angle.
In the same way, we overestimatethe length of a straight
line fixed by boundariesin comparisonwith a line whose
limits are boundless. These observationsled Wundt to
affirmwith Lotze that retinal (like tactile) impressions
acquire spatial qualities through the coloring of related
local signs. The formation of visual space is "a combina-
tion of this system of local signs arrangedin two dimen-
sions, with a system of intensive sensationsof
movements."21
As describedso far, spatial ideas were seen as compounds
of sensations.22Despite substantialdifferences, the empiri-
cist theories outlined here all sharedthe belief that spatial
ideas are not a priori intuitions but the fusion of the
impressionsof bodily movements in the mind. Schmar-
sow's indebtednessto nineteenth-centurytheories of optical
perception lay in his acceptance of this associationisttheo-
rizing. Departingfrom Kantianaesthetics, Schmarsow
detranscendentalizedthe concept of architecturalspace
into a cognitive process by which spatial images are built
up over time. This understandingallowed him to create an
architecturalhistoriographybased on spatial expression.
Schmarsow'sapproachwas unorthodoxfor its time, and it
is worthwhile to inquire into its motivations. In Das Wesen
der architektonischenSchopfung, his proposalof spatial
creation as the essence of architecturedescended from
interpretivedebates in architecture,philosophical aesthet-
ics, and art history. Renato de Fusco has commented that
Schmarsow'sRaumgestaltungwas an attemptto persuade
critics and architectsof the problem of space, in a period
increasinglydominated by the stylistic eclecticism of art
nouveau and an architecturecharacterizedmore by surface
design than by essential structure.23
The idea of space in architecturewas earlier on embodied
in the Greek notion of Taxis, the division of a building
into parts.24 Subsequently, the classical traditionof writing
on architecturetook up the notion of space in regardto
proportionand, with it, the idea of beauty. But the origins
assemblage 15
of Schmarsow'sidea of space can be found more immedi-
ately in eighteenth-centuryEngland and nineteenth-
century Germany. In England, the neo-Palladianmove-
ment placed great importanceon architecturalcirculation,
the series of experiences a person undergoesmoving
through a building.25At the same time, the articulationof
the picturesqueand the sublime dramaticizedthe mental
experience of worksof art. The link between space and
architecturalobservationbecame overt. In Germany, by
contrast, spatial concerns were interposedbetween those of
function and construction. Half a century before Schmar-
sow, German architecturaltheoristsengaged the question
of the functional (and spatial)interplaybetween material
forces and architecturalforms. In the writingsof KarlBot-
ticher, the tectonics of construction proceed from funda-
mental spatial requirements:for example, the space
enclosed by a building determines its particulartechnology
of roofing;the roof mandatesconstructiverequirements
from which a structuralskeleton then emerges;finally, the
entire system of constructivemembers forms the basis for
artisticenterprise.The tension between spatialdemands
and constructiveforms establishesan etiology for the archi-
tectural art.
GottfriedSemper'sappraisalof the productionof architec-
tural space followed Botticher'sexample. Unlike Botticher's
tectonic preoccupation, however, Semper imagined archi-
tectural space as a nexus of social activity.27Continuing a
traditiondating back to Vitruvius, Semper consideredthe
built enclosure and the separationof interiorfrom exterior
space to be the essential aspect of architecture.28The issue
for Semper, then, extended to the forming of space by
the various material industries(foremost, the textile arts).
Social and ideological considerationsshape the building, as
industrialforces create the formal contours of the spatial
program.In 1870, promptedby Semper'sinvestigations,
RichardLucae wrote of the importanceof the Raumbild,
the spatial image arising in the imaginativemind of the
architect and consisting of the effects of its dimensions,
form, light, and colors.29Thirteen years later, Hans Auer
situated the development of space in architecturebetween
the poles of practicalneeds (including climate) and the
urge towardspiritualmonumentality.30By 1900 spatial
concerns were assimilatedinto discussions of the principles
52

of architecture, and it became routine for architectsto
reflect on the fundamental oppositions between different
spatial plans and circulatorypatterns.31
Schmarsow'sfocus on perceptualempiricism may, in a dif-
ferent light, be read against the legacy of the position of
philosophical aesthetics towardarchitecture.Beginning
with Immanuel Kant, philosophershad degradedarchitec-
ture as a stepchild of the fine arts because of its emphasis
on the practical.32Convinced that the ideas inherent to it
- gravity,cohesion, rigidity,hardness- were low grades
of the will's objectivity, Arthur Schopenhauer could dis-
miss architectureas a fine art.33Schmarsow,then, perhaps
directed his writingstowardauthenticatingan integralbasis
for architecturewithin the other visual arts, grounding its
functional and technological operationswithin a unique
doctrine of spatial ideas.
If Schmarsow'sgeneral interest in space can be accounted
for by developments in architecturaltheory and philoso-
phy, his particularnotion of dynamic spatial perception
cannot. For us to understandthe direct influences for his
theory, we must turn to the late-nineteenth-centuryart his-
torical culture. Art historiansof the period were increas-
ingly attentive to the physical factorswithin artistic
enjoyment and understanding,increasinglyconcerned with
a visually founded correlationbetween internal states, per-
ceptual faculties, and material forms. A conspicuous influ-
ence on art historical studies was RobertVischer's Uber
das Optische Formgefihl of 1873, in which he adapted
optical speculations on visual muscular activity (and their
bearing on distance and depth perception)to the workings
of artisticvision. Vischer was one of the first aesthetic
theoriststo stressthat the eye in observingdoes not repli-
cate a real object but, rather,manufacturesa "formed
image"through effort and emphasis. Moreover, Vischer
agreed with optical psychologiststhat the mechanism of
producing an optical image yields the precise characterof
the image produced. Schmarsow'snotion of the subject-
centered creative act drew heavily on Vischer's considera-
tion of the similarityor dissimilarityof the object in
comparison with, first, the arrangementof the eyes and,
then, the construction of the entire body.34
Another importantpsychological inflection within art his-
Schwarzer
torical studies was the theory of empathy. Introducedby
Theodor Lipps in his essay "Raumasthetikund geometrisch
optische Tauschungen" of 1897, empathy came to be
defined as a state of pleasure enduced by a feeling of
Zusammengehorigkeit,the consciousness of mutual belong-
ing between the soul and the thing perceived.35In empa-
thy theory, the source of pleasure resides neither in the
object nor in the subject, but in the relationshipof the
consolidating perception between object and subject. Lipps
believed that we find ourselves literally in the other (a
mitmacheneines inneren Verhaltensof another)because
in the act of perception we experience their form as if we
were one with them. Thus a fundamental rule of empathy
is the subject'sabsolute observationin the object.36And so
the more pleasurablethe expressivemovement (Ausdrucks-
bewegung)of the eyes in relation to an object, the more
we consider that object beautiful.37Generally, beauty
resultsfrom our ability to perceive an object freely and
unhindered. Lipps describedthis contrastbetween beauty
and ugliness in spatial forms:
The beautyof spatialformsis my abilityto live out an idealsense
of freemovementin it. Opposedto this is the uglyform,whereI
am not ableto do this, wheremy underlyingcompulsionto
freelymovewithinand observethe formis hinderedand not
possible.38
Other contemporarytheories underscoredthe perceptual
bond between the art work and its creatoror observer.The
form of the architecturalwork was, in the words of Konrad
Fiedler, the "complete intellectualizationof all material
elements."39For Fiedler, the mental life of the artistcon-
stituted the constant production of artisticconsciousness,
artisticform being the immediate and sole expressionof
the consciousness, which was, in turn, a Herbartianpro-
cess of sensory awarenessand cognitive acts of appercep-
tion.40 Form and consciousness, in this view, are equally
important, since undue emphasis on form results in mate-
rial determinism, while preoccupationwith consciousness
leads back to the idealism of the aesthetic tradition.
Schmarsowadaptedlarge partsof both Vischer's and Fied-
ler's conjectures on pure visibility as well as aspectsof
Lipp's empathy theory. Nevertheless, his theory may be
distinguishedby its explicit understandingof the signifi-
53

cance of kinetic perception. Both Vischer and Fiedler
stressedthe sedentaryartisticperception, privilegingthe
work of art over the viewer. Lipps developed only a rudi-
mentary idea of the potential of space, seeing spatial intui-
tion as a way to visualize the inner soul life of matter
through the physiognomy of the outer mass.41Schmarsow's
realizationthat the perception of architectureoccurs dur-
ing the movement of the body through determinedspaces
was a clear advance. His notion of Korperempfindung,or
bodily sensation, differsradicallyfrom the subjectiveNach-
erleben, or "afterexperience"of the senses describedby
Lipps and even Wolfflin. Korperempfindung is a vital pro-
in
cess which spatial form takes shape through the inter-
action of human stature, nature, and movement.42
Architectureas Spatial Intuition
An exposition of Schmarsow'stheory of architectureas
Raumgestalterinwill make evident his concept of spatial
intuition.43Echoing empirical psychologists,Schmarsow
reiteratedthat spatial intuitions have their own evolution-
ary history, developing from simple and unconscious
impulses in primitive societies to sophisticatedmathemati-
cal calculations that accommodate the most complex needs
of the modern age. A crucial tenant of this process is the
maturationand differentiationof spatial ideas through
something akin to a Herbartiansynthesis of associativeper-
ceptions. Spatial thinking thereforearisesas a branch of
consciousness and develops in complexity as new percep-
tions are gained and associated. Indeed, an understanding
of architectureas Raumgestaltungcan explain how our
sensation of the chaotic world is transformedinto what we
term rational knowledge.
Schmarsowattemptedto base all artisticcreation on the
feelings of the body (Korpergefiihlen). Accordingly,each of
the principal visual arts is to be understoodas a means of
depicting corporealintuitions. Both painting (Flachenge-
fiihl) and sculpture (Korpergefiihl)are concerned with rep-
resentingthe body. Space, however, while it can be
representedin painting and in relief, can only be created
and experienced in architecture.Architecturerepresentsin
tangible form the results of the body's interactionswith the
world.
assemblage 15
Described psychologicallyratherthan historically,Schmar-
sow situated the dependence of spatial consciousness on
human physiognomy. In 1903 he wrote that "the germ and
central point of all art . . . remains man, and the human
body."44As a rule, all spatial intuition arises from the
interactionof the body's sense organswith the body itself
and with aspects of the materialworld - the two essential
spheres of sensation. Generally speaking, the inner realm,
or touch region (Tastregion),constitutesthe site of bodily
values (Korperwerte),while the outer realm, or sight region
(Sehregion),widens our perceptivesphere into a series of
initially flat visual impressions.45
Schmarsowmaintained that a rudimentarylevel of spatial
consciousness begins in the inner realm. For example,
from the tactile sensation of internal bodily combinations
(head, joints, torso) and external bodily surfaces, a special
inclination arises to a cubic conception and the visual and
tactile handling of all tangible things.46The firststep
towardspatial consciousness thus leads from bodily sensa-
tions to an awarenessof the space and form of our own
body as circumscribedby the space around it. The primor-
dial position of the body in regardto external space is a
standing figure whose arms are held down. This erect
stance (aufrechteHaltung) is the essential axis of human
relationshipsto the outside world and leads to the idea of
height as our firstdimension.47Likewise, our own physiog-
nomy, the symmetricalpairing of our two hands or eyes,
forms the principle of the dimension of length. Like Lipps,
Schmarsowaccepted the importanceof this schema for the
judgment of art objects. Elementaryaesthetic feelings of
harmony, rhythm, and proportionsupposedlyall spring
from the "familylaw" (Hausgesetz)of human nature.49
The dimension of depth, however, is unaccounted for by
autonomous human traits;instead, finding expressionin
the body's movement through the world. Sense of depth,
therefore, unlike that of height or length, is developed only
through the locomotive rhythms in particularizedspace.
It is here that the spatial consciousness truly emerges. In
accordancewith optical theories that emphasized the
dependence of spatial understandingon movement,
Schmarsowwrote, "The movement from place to place in
the third dimension first brings us the experience of our
54

immediate extension."50Like Lotze, Schmarsowconceived
of space as the kinetic extension of bodily impulses into
the world during movement. For example, as we move
through a building, a continual stream of visual images
combine in the mind to yield an ever-changingconcept of
spatial relations. The spatial perceptionscreated through
movement are furtherdeveloped in the mind in a process
of associativeenlargement of sensationalknowledge.
The mature spatial consciousness associatedwith architec-
ture is clearly dynamic.51 For Schmarsow, since all spatial
awarenessmust originate within an apparentlyoverriding
concept of self-awareness,it follows that all architectural
forms depend on bodily structure, sensation, and move-
ment. The spatial form of a building can likewise be
viewed as the result of a repertoryof gesturesand motions,
a projection of desires and needs from the subject to the
world. An enumeration of Schmarsow'soverall engage-
ment with architecturewas renderedby Hermann Sorgel:
Man manifestsin his activitiesfromtheirfirstbud [Keim]a
reflexivemovementto the outerworld.This can be dividedinto
threeways:immediatespontaneity,work,or play.Eachmove-
ment has its expressionwhichis at the sametime alreadyan
unconsciousgesture,and thereinlies the artisticpowerof
creation.52
Schmarsow, in fact, wrote of architectureas the enlarge-
ment of bodily feelings into spatial feelings (Raumkorper
von aussen).53These principles were one of the earliest
attemptsto redirectthe conception of architecturefrom
formal to spatial essence, a condition wherein "the entire
Raumgebildeappearsto [its creator]as the exteriorbody of
himself in general space, and along with that notion is
displaced all the foundations for the exteriorbuilding."54
Schmarsow also pointed out that "each figurationof space
is first of all a surroundingof the subject, and because of
this end, differsessentially from all effortsof kunsthand-
werk."55Accordingly, the spatial form of architectureis the
figurationof human activities that necessitate some type of
boundary:architectureis a functional art, the building of
enclosed spaces within which people enjoy free and willful
movement.56Considerationsof the facade, of ornament, of
individual supportingmembers are subordinatedto the
overall urge for space. Architectureas spatial forming, in
Schwarzer
other words, is conceived not as an opaque and timeless
entity, but as a living amalgamationof human impulses,
created perceptuallyby its creatorand its users.
Armed with his concept of the development of spatialcon-
sciousness in an individual'slife, Schmarsowextended his
theory to the emergence of differentspatial forms in his-
tory. From his interest in origins, he proposeda spatial
Urformarising out of his definition of Raumgestalterin.In
Grundbegriffeder KunstwissenschaftSchmarsowrelated
how the art of architecturebegan with the fencing in of a
space by four walls upon which a roof was added for pro-
tection from the elements: the paradigmof Laugier'sprimi-
tive hut transformedinto an elemental walled enclosure.
Furthermore,he envisaged that buildings that accentuate
their correlationto human activity (such as the nomadic
tent or the bamboo hut) would providebetter starting
points for the historian than closed forms (such as the
obelisk). Schmarsow'spreferencefor activities understood
in the observableterms of perceptionand movement
57
clearly emerges here. Throughout his writings, we detect
a predilection for the vital space over the silent form, the
space whose contours are shaped by the demands of
human life. 58
In applying his theory to historical periods, Schmarsow
refrainedfrom either speculative or materialistexplana-
tions, always basing his conclusions on perception. His
historiographywas greatly influenced by Alois Riegl's Stil-
fragen of 1893 and his SpdtromischeKunstindustrieof
1901. Riegl underscoredthe historyof architectureas an
evolutionaryprogressionfrom haptic modes of perception
to optical modes. In SpdtromischeKunstindustrie,Riegl
stressedthat ancient art (exemplifiedby the tactile percep-
tion of Egypt) searched for a comprehension of material
essence, avoiding the representationof space and sacrific-
ing the dimension of depth. Ancient art intended "repre-
sentation of objects as individual materialphenomena not
in space but on the plane."59An awarenessof depth, Riegl
believed, first appearedin the foreshorteningand shadow-
ing of the art of fifth-centuryGreece, but only reached full
expressionin the optically oriented art of Rome, exempli-
fied by the Pantheon.
While adhering to Riegl's interest in tactile and optical
55

perception as well as to his advocacyof forgotteneras,
Schmarsow'squarrelbegan with his repudiationof Riegl's
haptic ideal of Egyptianart, which separatedthe percep-
tion of built forms from the visual capabilitiesof the
viewer. Schmarsowargued, instead, that the subjective
optical viewer is present in all eras of architecture.His real
interestlay in the interiorsof pilgrimagetemples and he
describeda series of courtyardswithin the enclosed con-
fines of the Egyptian temple complexes. The choreography
of movement through these courtyards,commanded by
societal needs, generatedspecific spatial ideas. In turning
his scrutinyto the internal patternsof use of the temple,
Schmarsowdemolished Riegl's theory of the evolutionary
path of the Kunstwollenfrom Egyptianto Greek
architecture.
The wholeof the Egyptiantempleis a spatialcompositionfora
long temporalsequenceof impressions, whichcan onlybe com-
paredwith musicor epic and dramaticcompositions.Perception
of the templeis a seriesof acts,especiallyif the performance of
the experiencehereproceedsfromno otherviewingplacethan
thatof the humanbreast.Completelydifferentis the Greek
templewith its columnrowsaroundthe oblongbuiltformof the
cella. Herethe exterioris the mainpoint. It is as thougha court-
yardof the Egyptiantemple,withits columnson the innerside
of the wall enclosure,wasturnedfrominsideto outside.Here(in
the Greektemple)is trulya buildingof surveyable bodilyvol-
umes, but likewisedeterminedthroughthe preponderance of the
lengthoverthe depthdimension.60
Schmarsowfaulted Riegl for judging the fundamentalgoal
of ancient architectureto be the creation of clear bound-
aries, of strong centralized entities. Accordingly,he wrote
that "one wins a completely false impression, if the superi-
ority of the inside as the only means of measure is not
recognized or also only veiled."61Since internal spaces are
the "testingstone" of the artisticimpulse (Priifsteindes
Kunstwollens),the Greek temple is actually an isolated
form. For Schmarsow, the essence of architectureresides
in the generation of culturally stimulated rhythmic patterns
of movement through enclosed inner rooms, passages,and
courtyards.Transitionalareas between spaces are of excep-
tional importance for his theory. Spatial openings, to one
or more sides, markedby walls or by columns, increase
spatial relations by linking and combining inner spaces.62
assemblage 15
By applying this principle of descriptionto buildings from
ancient Egypt to Byzantium, Schmarsowabandoned
Riegl's strictlylinear historiography,likening, for instance,
the trafficof people along the nave in early Christianbasil-
icas to the promenadesof Mesopotamianand Egyptian
temple complexes.
Culture and Spatial Architecture
By giving epistemological preeminence to the relationship
between the stature, movement, and perceptionof the
human body and the spatial attributesof buildings and
urban forms, August Schmarsowhelped to formulatea
new conception of architecturalessence. His historical
examination of spatial creation in architecturerevealed
aspects of human activity obscured by a preoccupation
with studies of form. Schmarsow recuperatedspatialthink-
ing - originally the province of geometry and physics and
later taken up by psychology and physiology- for an
inquiry into man's kinetic relation to the built environ-
ment. Transformingan idea that dated back to Renais-
sance proportionstudies, his spatialdoctrinesdisplaced the
proportionsof a static figure with the charged musculature
of human movement.
In the twentieth century the persistenceof spatialthinking
in both design and architecturalhistory underscoresthe
importanceof Schmarsow'stheories of space. In modern
architecture,his idealization of spatial perceptionmay
have contributed, in part, to liberatingarchitecturalunder-
standingfrom traditionalstrictures.In architecturalwrit-
ing, the resonance of his thinking was directly reflectedin
a series of amendments to his fundamentalcharacterization
of the spatial consciousness. The voice given to space was
first echoed in Paul Frankl'sstudy Die Entwicklungsphasen
der neuerenBaukunst of 1914.63In this work, Frankl
pointed to spatial composition as the leitmotiv of the Flor-
entine and Roman Renaissance. IntegratingSchmarsow's
Raumgestaltungwith Wolfflin's stylistic polarities, he con-
structeda morphology of forms for ecclesiasticalarchitec-
ture based on spatial addition and division.
A few years later in 1918, in Theorieder Baukunst, Her-
mann Sorgel set forth a notion of "effectivespace"(Wir-
kungsraum)as a third phase in the delineation of spatial
56

consciousness. Enhancing what he saw as the earlierforms
of spatial thinking (Renaissanceone-point perspectival
space and dynamic perceptualspace), Sorgel proposedan
underlying architecturalspatial consciousness as the "self-
evident connection of the spatial essence of architecture
with the sober and fundamental demands of function
inherent in the essence of building and living."64Schmar-
sow's spatial theories were also influential for Paul Zucker.
In an article written at the end of World War II, "The
Aesthetics of Space in Architecture, Sculpture, and City
Planning," Zucker emphasized the spatialdivisions that
Schmarsowhad previouslygiven to the three visual arts.65
Alongside architecture(shaped space and formed mass),
Zucker rehabilitatedsculpture as a spatial art (formed
masses and spaces shaped by them) and added the new
categoryof urbanism (shaped space and organized
directions).66
In architecturalhistory and criticism of the 1920s and
1930s spatial concerns again came to the forefront.67In
1930 Gustav Platz insisted in his history of modern archi-
tecture that "the abstractspace without any decoration . . .
representsthe highest cultivated form of our time."68The
architect R. M. Schindler wrote in "Space Architecture"of
1934 that modern architecturelies "in the minds of the
artistswho can grasp'space' and 'space forms' as a new
medium for human expression."69Finally, we have only to
look to Siegfried Giedion's immensely influential Space,
Time and Architectureof 1940 as an exemplar of the
accentuation of space as the basis for a modern syntax of
architecture.70This preoccupationwith space developed
alongside a metaphysicsof modern design whose telos was
understoodas an outgrowthof human activities. Although
Schmarsow'sdirect influence on architectsmay have been
negligible, his theory could be seen to have impacted
(through intermediarycritics) the development of modern
architecture.71
In modern design the free plan and the unornamented
shell are central to the legacy of Schmarsow'sspatialthink-
ing. Schmarsow'schampioning of human spatial move-
ment was consonant with later demands by architectsfor
the adaptationof building plans to contemporaryliving
conditions. The modernist preoccupationwith shaping
Schwarzer
internal space to addressfunctional needs is, in part, an
outgrowthof perceptualideas that stressspatialform as the
extension of human life. Emphasizing interiorspace freed
architectsfrom the bonds of the formal block plan and
allowed them to redirecttheir effortstowardthose locomo-
tive patternsderived from use. Modern architecturehas
also been characterizedby an avoidance of historicalor-
nament. In concentratingon the perceptionof spaces,
Schmarsow relegatedthe historical vocabularyof forms to
an afterthought.Such focused awarenessof space provided
a source of new imagery and expressiveconcerns, empha-
sizing abstractgeometries and smooth surfaces.
August Schmarsow'ssensibility, however, showed itself not
only in the study of architecturalcreation and perception
through the lens of scientific theories of the senses, but
also in the study of architectureviewed through cultural
acts and values. He wrote that "the history of architecture
is a history of spatial feelings, and with that, consciously or
unconsciously, a foundational component of the historyof
Weltanschauungen."72 At first glance, Schmarsow'stheory
of Raumgestaltungappearsmore integratedwith general
cultural studies than those of Fiedler, Hildebrand,or
Wolfflin. Hoping to find a perceptualexplanationfor the
relationshipbetween human essence and artisticproduc-
tion, Schmarsowwent so far as to call for a collaborative
effort among art historians, ethnologists, and anthropolo-
gists.73Writing in commemoration of his eightieth birth-
day, Oscar Wulff remarkedon Schmarsow'sdesire both for
an autonomy in the inquiry after architecturalhistory and
for the relevance of art historical studies within the
humanities:
He demandsindeedthe establishment of the intuitivefactsof the
casewiththe severityof the procedureof observation in the natu-
ralsciences.He held, however,at the sametime, thatarthistory
shouldbe pursuedin close connectionto otherculturaland his-
torical studies, since it has equal rightswith these other branches
and is not merelya historicalstepchild.74
(e.g., literature)
These remarksseem to make sense in light of Schmarsow's
own formulation of buildings as "the fossilized shells of
long-destroyedcultural organisms."75
Yet is Schmarsow'stheory of architectureanalogous to cul-
tural history?Regardlessof its pretensionsand despite the
57
 assemblage 15

integrativepossibilitiesin a spatial approachto the history buildings subordinatedworldly manifestationsto a norma-

of architectureseen as a sequence of psychologically
derived expressions, Schmarsowexpressedno real interest
in knowing how differentcultures perceivedthe spaces
they created and used. Cultural values regardingbuilding
were secondaryto impulses of the spatialconsciousness.
His concessions to the historical relativityof spatialappear-
ances never extended into an analysis of the interaction
between these appearancesand unpredictablehuman fac-
tors. Likewise, he never engaged considerationsof the
impact of religious, social, and economic conditions on
architecturalspace or the position of spatialperception
within a greatersocial process of signification. Schmarsow's
typology of spaces, while admittedlybased neither on a
progressiveKunstwollennor on other teleological agents of
history, conforms to objective standards.In the end, he
understoodspaces in buildings accordingto a set of norma-
tive perceptivefaculties. Were Schmarsow'snotion of
Raumbildung the sole considerationof architecturalstyle,
for instance, the domed spaces of the most disparateperi-
ods of human history could be seen to possessessentially
the same inspiration.76
tive manifold of the consciousness. Although architectural
diversitycould be accounted for by the differentstages of a
spatial consciousness, the universalnotion of this con-
sciousness denied the possibilityof diverse cultural mani-
festationsof similar spatial impulses. Ultimately, then,
Schmarsowstandardizedhuman culture to the inclinations
of the spatial consciousness. He turned to historyto pro-
vide an explanation of the nature of spatialthinking. Like
other art historiansworkingwithin methodologies drawn
from the natural sciences, he preferredto reconcile human
creationswith natural processes;yet in his elaborationof
architectureas a grand historical narrativeof the spatial
consciousness, Schmarsowfailed to recognize that the vari-
eties of human spatial consciousness belong to complex
sets of cultural ideas irreducibleto any scientific model.

Obviously inspiredby Fiedler'sdescriptionof intellectual

form making, Schmarsowconceived of architectureas the
pure creation of spatial forms through the intellectual and
perceptualdevelopment of the spatial consciousness. Con-
sequently, the only reliable way to discern the manifesta-
tions of the architecturalconsciousness was through the
unhindered interpretationof the built phenomena them-
selves. Restrictedto the realm of art historical investigation
possible under the paradigmof perceptualempiricism,
Schmarsow'stheory was centered on an all-knowingsub-
ject. His idea of the history of architecturalspaces rested
on the ability of the art historianto recreatethe realityof
the building through deduction. Insofaras the building
was a structureof hollows sculpted by human impulse, it
became the art historical task to fuse this appearanceof
materialitywith the motivationsand spiritof its creator. MitchellW. Schwarzerreceivedhis
Ph.D. in History,Theory,andCriticism
Schmarsowgeneratedthe descriptivepropositionsnecessary fromthe Massachusetts Instituteof
for this endeavor from a set of spatialaxioms. Since these Technology. He is Assistant of
Professor
axioms (Raumgefiihl, for example) were derivedfrom a sci- ArchitecturalHistoryat the Universityof
entific study of the senses, the unfolding of spatial ideas in Illinois,Chicago.

58

Notes
1. Johann Gustav Droysen, Outline
of the Principlesof History, trans.
E. Benjamin Andrews(Boston,
1893), 9.
2. Georg G. Iggers, The German
Conception of History:The
National Tradition of Historical
Thought from Herderto the Present
(Middletown:Wesleyan, 1983),
199.
3. See Ernst Breisach, Historiogra-
phy: Ancient, Medieval and Modern
(Chicago: University of Chicago,
1983), 279.
4. Walter Passarge,Die Philosophie
der Kunstgeschichtein der Gegen-
wart (Berlin:Junkerand Dunn-
haupt, 1930), 1.
5. The German Raumgestaltung
translatesliterally as "interiordeco-
ration." Schmarsow'suse of the
word, however, is more expansive
and includes a conception of spatial
information and spatial creation.
6. To this date, none of Schmar-
sow's writingshave been translated
into English.
7. BernardBerenson, Aesthetics
and History in the Visual Arts
(New York:Pantheon, 1948), 88.
8. See Heinrich Wolfflin, Prole-
gommena zu einer Psychologieder
Architektur(Munich, 1886), and
idem, Renaissanceand Baroque,
trans. Kathrin Simon (Ithaca:Cor-
nell University Press, 1966).
9. For a discussion of contempo-
raryperception theories as they
relate to architecture, see Julian
Hochberg, "Visual Perception in
Architecture,"Via 6 (1983): 27-45.
10. George Berkeley,An Essay
Towardsa New Theoryof Vision
(London: J. M. Dent, 1910).
11. Johann Friedrich Herbart,A
Textbookin Psychology,trans. Mar-
garet K. Smith (New York:D.
Appleton, 1891), 1-9.
12. Ibid., 132.
13. In Der Symbolbegriffin der
neuesten Aesthetik(Jena: Hermann
Dufft, 1876), Johannes Volkelt
traces the development of this con-
cept from Herder'sstudent Robert
Zimmermann to Robert Vischer
and Conrad Fiedler.
14. Hermann Lotze, Outlines of
Psychology,ed. and trans. George
T. Ladd (Boston:Ginn and Co.,
1886), 53.
15. The physicist Hermann Helm-
holtz furtherdeveloped the dynam-
ics of the formation of mental
images with reference to Lotze's
theory of local signs. See Hermann
Helmholtz, "The Recent Progressof
the Theory of Vision," trans. Philip
H. Pye-Smith, in Popular Scientific
Lectures, ed. Morris Kline (New
York:Dover Publications, 1962),
175. In accordance with his
"empiricaltheory of vision," Helm-
holtz suggestedthat we can create
ideas of three-dimensional space
because the sensations we receive
from each eye are not exactly alike,
while our mental images of spatial
form are created from the synthesis
of several visually derived images.
Hence eye movement confers a
present transmissionof spatial form
that is subsequentlycombined in a
mental operation with previous
images drawn from the cognitive
faculties of imagination, associa-
tion, and selection.
16. Lotze, Outlines of Psychology,
59.
17. Wilhelm Wundt, Outlines of
Psychology,trans. Charles Hubbard
Judd (London: Williams and Nor-
gate, 1897).
18. Wundt claimed that for any
two local signs, a and b, there will
be a correspondingsensation of
Schwarzer
movement arising from the move-
ment through the distance a-b and
serving as a measure of that
distance.
19. Wundt, Outlines of Psychology, Semper'sdirection. Van
123.
20. Ibid., 125.
21. Ibid., 127-28.
22. William James distinguished
between sensations and perceptions:
pure sensations are abstractionsof
objects or their attributes,while
perceptionsencompass the con-
sciousness of further information
associatedwith the object of the
sensation. Accordingly, "sensations
and reproductivebrain-processes
combined . . . are what give us the
content of our perceptions."See
William James, The Principlesof
Psychology(New York: Dover,
1986), 2:2-82.
23. Renato de Fusco, Segni, storia
e progettodell'architettura(Rome:
Laterza, 1973), 93.
24. For a discussion of this founda- tained, "arecomplete and special
tional concept, see Alexander
Tzonis and Liane Lefaivre, Classi-
cal Architecture:The Poetics of
Order(Cambridge, Mass.: MIT
Press, 1986), 9-34.
25. See Rudolf Wittkower,Palladio
and English Palladianism (New
York:Thames and Hudson, 1974),
esp. chap. 13, "Classical Theory
and Eighteenth-CenturySensibil-
ity," 193-204.
26. KarlBotticher wrote of the
determinateinfluence of the Raum- August Schmarsow, Das Wesen der
einrichtung, or spatial organization, architektonischenSchopfung
on the logical shaping of the plan
and structureof a building in Die
Tektonikder Hellenen (Berlin,
1838), 14.
27. As De Fusco writes, Schmar-
sow was indebted to Semper for his
interest in the genesis and evolution bedeutender Spannweite,"Deutsche
of artisticforms (Segni, storia e
59
progetto, 10). Cornelius van de Ven
also claims that Schmarsowbor-
rowed Semper's notion of "three
moments," substitutingrhythm for
de Ven
writes that "Schmarsow was the first
to define the Semperian purpose as
being identical to the creation of
limited space, in which man could
move around freely. . . . Space
meant not merely sheltering man's
labor, but also his Play Room"
(Cornelius van de Ven, Space in
Architecture:The Evolution of a
New Idea in the Theoryof the Mod-
ern Movements [Assen/Maastricht:
Van Gorcum, 1987], 90).
28. Nonetheless, Schmarsowwas
critical of Semper'stheory, charac-
terizing it as a mistaken attempt to
combine the technical and decora-
tive arts. He felt that Semper'ssys-
tem of continual reinterpretationof
certain formal motifs made archi-
tecture too dependent upon non-
human factors. All the forms of
architecture, Schmarsow main-
spatial works"that are indifferentto
material use and construction tech-
nique. Whatever material unfolding
of architecturalform takes place,
whether in the act of creation or
that of observation, is actually an
unfolding of intuition through the
mechanisms of sight. The essence
of architecturalform is infected
with movement, for "throughthe
experiences of our visual sense . . .
come to rest the intuition forms of
the three-dimensionalspaces"
[Leipzig:G. B. Teubner, 1893],
10).
29. Richard Lucae, "Uber die
asthetische Ausbildung der Eisen-
Konstruktionen,besonders in ihrer
Anwendung bei Raumen von
Bauzeitung 4 (1870): 9-12. See also

idem, "Uber die Macht des Raumes
in der Baukunst,"Zeitschriftfir
Bauwesen 19 (1869): 293-306.
30. Hans Auer, "Die Entwicklung
des Raumes in der Baukunst,"All-
gemeine Baukunst 48 (1883): 65-
67, 73-74.
31. The literatureon space after
1900 is large, and attemptswere
made to found a journal concerning
the spatial theme. See Hendrik Ber-
lage, "Raumkunstund Architektur,"
SchweizerischeBauzeitung 49
(1907); Hans Cornelius, "Elemen-
targesetzder kiinstlerischenRaum-
gestaltung,"Die Raumkunst 1
(1908); Josef Scherer, "Gedanken
iiber Raumasthetik,"Neudeutsche
Bauzeitung 9 (1913); Bruno Specht,
"Raumkunst,"Deutsche Bauzeitung
29 (1895); and Hans Streit, "Uber
Raumkunstund Raumstudium,"
ArchitektonischeRundschau 23
(1907).
32. Belief in the inability of spiri-
tual meaning to reside in a building
caused Hegel to characterizearchi-
tecture as best exemplified by the
naturalaspects of symbolic art and
not the higher romantic art of the
spirit'ssubjectivity.See G. W. F.
Hegel, Aesthetics:Lectureson Fine
Art, trans. T. M. Knox (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1975).
33. Arthur Schopenhauer, The
Worldas Will and Representation,
trans. E. F. J. Payne (New York:
Dover, 1969), 212-14.
34. RobertVischer, Uber das
OptischeFormgefihl: Ein Beitrag
zur Aesthetik(Leipzig:Hermann
Credner, 1873). Altering the prem-
ises of Wundt, Vischer wrote:"Die
horizontale Linie is befriedigend,
weil unser Augenpaareine horizon-
tale Lage hat, sie streiftaber ohne
einen anderen Formgesetz an den
Eindruckder Indifferenz. Die verti-
kale Linie dagegen kann bei isolirter
Wahrenhmung storend wirken, weil
sie den Bau des aufnehmenden
Augenpaaresin gewissen Sinne
widerspricht,indem sie sehen eine
compliezierte Funktion deselben
nothwendig macht" (p. 8).
35. Theodor Lipps, Aesthetik
(Leipzig:Leopold Voss, 1923), 21.
36. Lipps wrote that "ich bin nur
dies ideelle, dies betrachtendeIch"
(Aesthetik,247).
37. Ibid., 141.
38. Ibid., 247.
39. KonradFiedler, Essay on
Architecture,trans. Carolyn Read-
ing (Indianapolis, 1948), 23. Fied-
ler wrote that "the genuine artistic
spirit rules only where there is an
obvious attempt to redeem the ele-
ments of architectonic form from
an existence determined by and
limited by materialityto the free-
dom of a purely intellectual expres-
sion" (p. 26).
40. See KonradFiedler, On Judg-
ing Worksof Visual Art, trans.
Henry Schaefer-Simmernand Ful-
mer Moon (Berkeley:Universityof
California Press, 1949), 21-25.
41. Van de Ven, Space in Architec-
ture, 83.
42. Hermann Sorgel, Architektur
= Aesthetik, vol. 1 of Theorieder
Baukunst (Munich: Pilothy and
Loehle, 1918), 46.
43. Schmarsow, Das Wesen, 22.
44. August Schmarsow, Unser Ver-
hiltnis zu den Bildenden Kunsten:
Sechs Vortrdgeiiber Kunst und
Erziehung (Leipzig:B. G. Teubner,
1903), 79.
45. Ibid., 103.
46. August Schmarsow,Grundbe-
griffe der Kunstwissenschaft
(Leipzig:B. G. Teubner, 1905), 12.
47. Ibid., 34.
48. Ibid., 41.
assemblage 15
49. Oscar Wulff, "AugustSchmar-
sow zum 80. Geburtstag,"Zeit-
schriftfir Kunstgeschichte2 (1936):
208.
50. Ibid., 104.
51. Schmarsowwas influenced by
his contemporaryAdolf von Hilde-
brand, whose book The Problemof
Form in Painting and Sculpture
(New York:G. E. Stechert, 1907)
exercised a decisive impact on art
historicalstudies of the period. Hil-
debrand'sconcept of spatial percep-
tion through motion - kinesthetic
ideas - became a basis for reading
the creative potential of artworks:
"Our relation to the world of vision
consists chiefly in our perception of
its spatial attributes"(p. 17).
52. Sorgel, Architektur= Aesthe-
tik, 47. See also Oscar Wulff's
essay "Zu August Schmarsow's
Riicktritt,"Kunstchronik31 (1919-
20), for a discussion of Schmarsow's
attachmentto the formativelaws of
body rhythms as a substitutefor
extra-aestheticfeatures.
53. Schmarsow, Unser Verhdltnis,
107.
54. Schmarsow, Das Wesen, 19.
55. Ibid., 14.
56. Schmarsow,Grundbegriffe,
183.
57. Roberto Salvini, La critica
d'arte modera (Florence: L'Arco,
1949), wrote:"Specialmentenella
critica dell'architetturaegli ha
saputo porre l'acento su valori ine-
diti di ritmo e di movimento che
non potevano trovarposto negli
schemi del Riegl e che pure for-
mano tanta parte- se non cosi
esclusiva come appareall'autore
- del linguaggio architettonico"
(p. 27).
58. Schmarsowwas not overly con-
cerned with boundariesbetween
venacular and high architecture,
60
and his definition of architecture
lay not in the typological opposi-
tions of sacred and profane or mon-
umental and merely useful but in
historical realizationsof spatial cre-
ation. All spatial enclosures -
whether palaces, warehouses, or
city squares- are instances of
Raumbildung:"the nature of the
Wohnbau, in contrastwith the
Monumentbau, is always concerned
with growth, it remains entwick-
lungsfdhigto a certain degree like a
Lebewesenor even a collectivity of
such, seen in the family and the
essence of home that it develops
and shelters"(Schmarsow, Grund-
begriffe, 184, 190).
59. Alois Riegl, Spdtromische
Kunstindustrie(Darmstadt:Wissen-
schaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1973),
24.
60. Schmarsow, Grundbegriffe,
192.
61. Ibid., 184.
62. Ibid., 188.
63. Paul Frankl, Principlesof
ArchitecturalHistory, ed. and trans.
James F. O'Gorman (Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press, 1968). In his
introductionto Principles, James
Ackermanechoed the popular belief
that "Brinckmann,Riegl, and,
especially, Schmarsow established
the foundations for which Frankl's
analysis is based"(p. vii).
64. Sorgel, Architektur= Aesthe-
tik, 164.
65. Paul Zucker, "The Aesthetics
of Space in Architecture, Sculpture,
and City Planning," Journalof Aes-
thetics and Art Criticism 4, no. 1
(September 1945): 12-19.
66. I omit reference to Camillo
Sitte because the ideological devel-
opment of Sitte's thinking does not
stem from the optical sources com-
mon to Schmarsow'sperceptually
based spatial understanding.
 Schwarzer

67. For an overview of this unfold-
ing, see Giulio Roisecco, Spazio:
Evoluzione del concetto in architet-
tura (Rome: M. Bulzoni, 1970).
68. Gustav Platz, Die Baukunst der
neuesten Zeit (Berlin: Propylan,
1930), 80.
space for this reason:"In the great
majorityof cases Raumbildung
alone is not enough to arriveat a
characterizationof artistic inspira-
tion, that which can be describedas
the style of an epoch" (p. 117).

69. Rudolph M. Schindler, "Space

Figure Credits
1. Courtesy of StanfordAnderson.
Architecture,"Dune Forum (Febru-
ary 1934): 44-46; cited in Tim and 2. Le Corbusier and Pierre Jean- 2. Le Corbusier, sketch from
Charlotte Benton with Dennis neret, Oeuvre complete 1910-1929 "The Five Points of a New
Sharp, eds., Form and Function: (Zurich: Editions Girsberger,1964). Architecture," 1929
A Source Book for the History of
Architectureand Design, 1890-
1939 (London: Open University
Press, 1975), 185.
70. SokratisGeorgiadiswrites that
Giedion took the development of
space as "die Verwandlungder
Erkenntnistheoriedes sichtbar
Raumes um ein Ontologie des
gemachtbarRaumes durch August
Schmarsow"(SokratisGeorgiadis,
SiegfriedGiedion: Ein Intellektuelle
Biographie[Zurich: Institut fur Ge-
schichte und Theorie der Architek-
tur, 1989], 209).
71. StanfordAnderson writes:"The
shift in theoretical dominance from
the tectonic conception of architec-
ture to a spatial conception was 9
fixed with August Schmarsow's
inaugural lecture at Leipzig in 1896
in which he characterizedarchitec-
ture as, essentially, the forming of
space (Raumgestalterin)"(Stanford
Anderson, "PeterBehrens and the
AEG," Oppositions 23 [Winter VNW
1981]: 56).
72. Schmarsow, Das Wesen, 29.
73. Ibid., 5-6.
74. Wulff, "AugustSchmarsow
zum 80. Geburtstag,"208.
75. Ibid., 28.
76. See Richard Streiter,Ausge-
---

9
I 9
wdhlte Schriften(Munich: Delphin,
1913). Streiterrejected the preemi-
nent role that Schmarsow gave to

61