The True Mission is the Vision

A Midterm Paper on the Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the senses by Juhanni
Pallasmaa
Author/s: Architect Carl Ricafort
Mapua University School of Architecture, Industrial Design &
The Built Environment, Manila, Philippines
carl.ricafort070239@my.lsgh.edu.ph

Architect Christelle Unisa Laquian

Mapua University School of Architecture, Industrial Design &
The Built Environment, Manila, Philippines
unisachristelle@gmail.com

Architect Marc Justine Cayabyab

Mapua University School of Architecture, Industrial Design &
The Built Environment, Manila, Philippines
marcjustinecayabyab@gmail.com
Architect Jan Nicole Torres
Mapua University School of Architecture, Industrial Design &
The Built Environment, Manila, Philippines
janncltrrs@icloud.com
Abstract: The concept of Ocular centrism or superiority of vision evidently occurs in our day-to-day interactions with the
environment. In Juhani Pallasmaa’s book “The Eyes of the Skin”, he concluded that we are living in “an era of
vision and visual image” because of our modern advances. This paper addresses the role of each sense in
comparison to the aforementioned viewpoint of Pallasmaa and will explore various samples of sensory
deprivation. Furthermore, the evolving gap between design and authenticity of experience will be discoursed
through images to justify the vision of the paper and its authors. Relative combinations of sensation and
signification will be an essential and recurring subject solely because of its significance to the matter. Also
presented are how our modernity affects the usage of our senses in architectural design and how ocular
centrism is practiced globally taking into consideration the purpose or significance of the structures. The
researchers have applied a qualitative method of approach in hopes of answering their hypotheses. The latter
part of the paper shall give insights about haptics, auditory, olfactory and taste and how it surpasses the
preeminence of ocular centrism.
Keywords: Ocular centrism, senses, purpose, aesthetics

INTRODUCTION
Juhanni Pallasmaa‘s ―The Eyes of the Skin‖ published first in 1996 talks about the development of
history in the world of architecture using the ocular centric paradigm. This is more common in the Western
culture whereas the Greeks focus more on what pleasures the eyes. Furthermore, it elaborates how one
examines the role of the other senses in the architectural experiences. It reveals the usage of multi-sensory
realms when it comes to architecture.
At first Pallasmaa explains the dominance of the visual realm that has invaded through the
architectural practice and education. Ocular centrism takes place in Greek Architecture for it is more vision-
centred and generated. He also quotes the well-known philosophers such as Plato, Heraclitus, and Peter
Sloterdisk who aforementioned that the ―Vision is one of the humanities‘ greatest gift.‖, ―The eyes are more
exact witnesses than the ears.‖, and ―The eyes are the organic prototype of philosophy.‖ consequently.
Thus, much architecture is originated and formed under consideration of only one sense which is the sight.
In the contrary and as a result of the visual dominance, suppressing the other sensory realms has
led to annihilation of the environment which caused the feeling of alienation and detachment. If the
architecture inspires, engages, and enhances life; however, how can the architectural schemes look
magnificently pleasing on the drawing boards or computer screens but can be mediocre and unsatisfying
when it ‗comes to life‘ or be of a ‗flesh‘?
Ergo Pallasmaa in the latter part of his book contradicts and speaks about the significance and importance
of all the five senses in the art of shaping buildings and structures. He spoke about the suppression of the
utmost important – spatial experience because of the visual sense. As Sara Karlsson said, ―But just like
architecture provides a space. If it is important to think of architecture by sensing past the obvious exterior
– meaning taking the oblivious into account … to feel connected to far more than what we see-it is just as
important to contain what has been constructed by nature to make sure that beauty is still sensed in the
future.‖ It means that by watching something, we generate and build a distance between ourselves and the
object itself. However, by touching it, we create a connection and an attachment to it.
The message of this book relies more relevant today for we consider the sight as our domain sense.
Moreover, our eyes give us control. We can close our eyes from what we do not want to look at; as a result,
it creates a distance from an unpleasant sight, sound, and odour. With that said, touch connects us to the
world.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

All of our senses each serve its purpose individually and are all represented accordingly (Schmidt,
1986). Our standard has always been to look at these senses independently with no trace of interconnection
between the other senses. Although in quite a number of instances, our senses receive similar stimuli when
it comes in contact with external objects present in the environment and this can lead to multisensory
sensations. (MacDonald and Spencer, 2002)
A few years later, a study concluded that there is interconnectivity in between the senses vision
and touch which was based on Sir David Brewster‘s ―Natural Magic‖ back in 1832. In this book, Brewster
explained how adjusting and flipping one‘s orientation may reveal depressions and elevations that go
unnoticed. Our naked eye can limit the elements and different aspects of an object as opposed to exploring
the object in a haptic aspect as well. According to Howes (2005), studies should go beyond visualizing or
making use of our vision. Instead, they should further explore the importance of discovery though the
multiple sensory modalities. The term ―sensescapes‖ refers to the combination of senses and bridges the gap
when the other senses are not present. (Scott, 1998) Karlsson also added that the ―Scents, acoustics, tactile
materials, forms, light, shadow, the weight and proportion of things, as well as the overall spirit of the
space, overrules pure aesthetics.‖ That indicates the architectural space is a lived space rather than a
physical space which perpetually transcends any geometric figure and measures.
Ocular centrism
Hegemony of the eye has been dominating the Western cultures since the Renaissance period. It
has paved its way as the most prevalent influences upon landscape globally through time. Although the
earliest record of the dominance of sight tracks back to Ingold (2000) states the actuality of sight‘s ability to
increase intimacy and engagement. He further justifies this statement by saying that it is most likely that our
vision is not the one at fault but rather our way of seeing and interpreting images.
Auditory
Although Bull (2002) states that there has been no significant account for the usage of the sense of
hearing when it comes to everyday experiences and in urban and cultural studies; some authors state
otherwise. The perception of sound requires a medium (Helmholtz, 1894) meaning that there is something
that makes it up before waves and vibration. Humans, Nature, Materials are prompt of making such sounds.
Physiological acoustics exhibits sounds turning into images. In line with this, our mind transforms sound
into perception depending on the spatial composition of the setting. In Juhani Pallasmaa‘s Book; The Eyes
of the skin, Sound coming from natural utterance is being reflected and bounce back by the walls of a
structure which are echoes. (Pallasmaa, 1994) In some cases, sound exhibits the intensity of a subject.
Olfactory
The sense of smell in architecture indicates the experience of a person to a place. It also exhibits
the ambiance depending on the atmosphere in line with smell. This usually reminds us what the place
smells like. The places that have scent because of their products and materials are usually the cause of
attraction. Regarding of our homes, we are already familiar with its scent from the first place because this is
where we live that is why it easy for us to distinguish the difference from the outside. (V. Henshaw, 2014)
Taste
The sense of taste in architecture is not literally the use of the tongue but the reflection of colors in
line with the sense of sight. Our tongue unconsciously predicts the texture of a material seen by the eyes.
(J.Pallasmaa, 1994) Taste in architecture was referred to as reasoning, judgement, and appreciation.
(Frascari, 1986) Architecture in terms of the sense of taste is neither that much talked about nor giving
sense since it is hard to explain, but it connotates to bias in beauty and aesthetics in a non-corporeal manner.
(S. Giedion). The sense of taste in architecture was only brought about in the renaissance period where
Architecture in this era was not about the construction itself but the ―taste‖. Although it was not enough to
support architecture, taste has its limits due to lack of appreciation to aesthetics. (Scott, 1914) Taste also has
a relationship with a person‘s social environment.
Haptics
In the book ―The Eyes of the Skin‖, Juhani Pallasmaa stated that a doorknob is a sign of
hospitability. He stated that doorknobs have been touched by thousands of people from generations before
to future generations. It is like handshaking the building and other people who entered and touched the
doorknob before you did. Touch is not only using our hands play a great role in architecture. We can use
our feet, specifically our souls to trace down density and texture of a ground. The sense of touch has beyond
capabilities than the sense of sight on defining and reassuring texture and temperature of a structure.
(J.Pallasmaa, 1994) Witold Rybcxynksi (2001), also states that architecture goes beyond the physical
attributes and aesthetics of a structure. It is not defined merely by its appearance but also by its texture and
the materials. He furthermore expounded his statement by saying that the experience of architecture is
tangible for its surfaces could vary from the coldness of the marble, the rough feel of its bricks or and the
graininess of the wood. This offers a different perspective that one cannot get when using the other senses.
Rybcznski adds that the true essence of a building solely lies on the execution of the materials in the
environment it resides in and this is something no visual image can pass on.

METHODOLOGY
Research Design
This study used a qualitative method in gathering its data. It is a method of observation in order to
gather non-numerical data as well as the concepts, definitions, characteristics and descriptions of the
buildings and its structures. This study aimed to investigate the underlying concepts about Juhani
Pallasmaa’s “The Eyes of the Skin” in order to prove whether the visual, is the most dominant sense among
all our senses when it comes to architectural design or not.
Research Approach
The collected data will then undergo a documentary analysis method. It is a qualitative method that
can be done by reviewing the articles and documents gathered by the researchers. The data will be analyzed
thoroughly to answer the paper’s problem.
Data Collection Method
The collected data to be considered in this paper will be collected from several credible authors
and websites. These will be verified thoroughly before it is included.
Data Analysis Method
In analyzing the given data and information present within this paper, it will be through a
qualitative manner. The information will be undergoing a process called content analysis wherein the
researchers will familiarize themselves with the data and find patterns and make significant observations.
The information in this paper may come from international and local studies.

HYPOTHESIS
At the end of this study, the authors‘ aim to know and to prove if the visual sense is the most dominant
sense among the other senses in the architectural design.
DESCRIPTION OF EVIDENCES AND OBSERVATIONS
The five senses all work in unison when faced with different environments and stimuli. This
proves just how powerful the other senses are and how the sense of sight is just as significant as the others.
Malnar and Vodvarka (2005) states that the usage of our senses greatly involves combinations of sensation
and signification as well as the interdependence of stimulus and meaning; with that said, a building cannot
simply be judged by its aesthetics but by how it feels and how it serves its purpose.
Over the past centuries, architecture has been flexibly accepted by many people. Architects are to
design not only what is good for their eyes but to other viewers too. In line with the senses, structures that
have been built for a reason are not only for the pleasure of the eye, but all five senses are interconnected
for the people to get attracted or to be invited by the building. All people are unique and have different kind
of taste depending on what they think is sensational for their eyes. Modern trends are the reason for
architectural development thus making designs unique and new.
Although architects may have used creativity of their own too much, people tend to question “why
is the building built like that” because too much of creativity leads to awkward and controversial designs.
However, the only answer to the question is; People eventually explore more than what they see.

Figure 1.0 Aoyama Technical College Building found in Shibuya, Tokyo (Source: weburbanist.com)

The Aoyama Technical College Building found in Shibuya, Tokyo which was the first project of
Makoto Sei Watanabe, a Japanese Architect. Award-winning architect Watanabe then designed dozens of
more buildings but none of them compared to the “monstrosity” of this one. Although the aesthetics would
deem to be subpar for this infamous Japanese architect, its aesthetics, or lack thereof, makes sense. The
oddity of the building comes from the college being a technical school after all. Watanabe further explains
that “It is not my aim either to transplant to Japan the classic Western patterns of building cities or to put up
with the chaos of Tokyo as it is, but to grope for the way we want the new city to be.” which is when the
essence of a building surpasses its aesthetics.

Figure 2.0 Snail house located in Mexico City (Source: izismile.com)

 In this structure, it is evident that the design was taken from a seashell using an Ocular centric
point of view. Behind there are reasons for it to have further meaning. Take the sense of smell, the setting
of the structure shows clear skies, green lively trees and grass. This shows that the atmosphere or ambiance
of the structure may be chilly and windy connotating on when placing a shell near your ear to hear the
ocean. In line with the sense of hearing, shells are designed by nature to echo sounds coming from natural
sounds like wind. Judging by the structure’s design means the use of the sense of taste. Taste shows the
beauty of this design, adapting Mother Nature’s creation to architectural designs.

Figure 3.0 The Portland Building, Oregon in United States (Source: www.archdaily.com)

The Portland Municipal Services Building was structured by Michael Graves, an American
modeler and architect of shopper items. He likewise won the offer for the venture attributable to his low-
spending proposition. He planned to structure it for ordinary laborers of the regional government. At the
point when the postmodern square building was opened in 1982, the open didn't warmly get it. The
exorbitant redesigns are the explanation city authorities are at present thinking about the structure's future.
It was the first structure that acquires the postmodernist architecture. Other architects and engineers react
not the way Michael Graves expected it. Aesthetically, the exceptionally styled components, for example,
the strips and emblems, were scrutinized as coming up short on the respect of an official government
building. Others guaranteed the plan was over-burden with imagery and excessively engrossed with
references to the past.

Figure 4.0 New Frank Gehry Building in Australia (Source: weburbanist.com)

Another controversial building that was built was the New Building in Australia made possible by
Arch. Frank Gehry. It earned various types of loathing especially when the Gov. Gen. Peter Cosgrove of
Australia quoted and compared it to a brown paper bag when it was first launched in its own opening
ceremony.
 However, despite all the hatred it took from its personal appearance, Gehry explains that the
uniqueness of his building cannot and wouldn't be possible to be replicated. Its complex and chaotic usage
of shapes help the interior of its design.
The New Building of UTS Business School serves its purpose and function to educate and enhance
the students' and researchers' commitment to creativity, innovation, and connection. This building is such an
unconventional space but in the contrary, the physical layout changed the way the lecturer teaches and
practices because the rooms inside breaks away the traditionally-structured room so the students are more
engrossed.
According to Prof. Roy Green, Dean from UTS Business School, "it is Arch. Frank Gehry's dream
building for it fulfilled an unrealized philosophy of education — philosophy of a treehouse with a trunk of
social spaces and branching into areas of discipline, knowledge, and research." Testimonies from Melissa
Edwards, Senior Lecturer, UTS Business School also stated, "that the building says unusual, it is the place
where you can play ideas." Furthermore, "The concept of collaboration of working together and
understanding other peoples' ideas and issues has a great capacity to emerge in this type of environment."
added by The Hon. Patricia Forysthe, Executive Director, Sydney Business Chamber. This truly marks a as
marker of a digital hub that will help the "Collaborative education for its significance is incredibly
important because we all end up work in teams. The impact of the new building will be a potential for a
much greater collaboration between students and lecturers." from Prof. Simon Darcy, UTS Business
School.
Indeed, a work of art must envelope its function. All in all, this peculiar and prejudiced building of
Gehry goes beyond its walls— it reaches out to the world.

CONCLUSION
The authors conclude that although ocular centrism continues to be prevalent today, it should not
suppress the value and function of the other four senses. The eye can easily be manipulated through various
kinds of designs and imagery thus making the masses either appreciate the structure or despise it, further
proving that our vision is prone to error as well. The authors suggest that people should take into
consideration the fact that the other four senses receive different stimuli for our brain to react to varying
circumstances present in the environment. The senses must work in harmony for better development of
design and should fill the gap of sensory deprivation since the limitations and barriers caused by the
independence on this sense will only prolong because it can only analyse and see so much. The overall look
and aesthetic of a structure will always be subjective and so will the sense of sight. The other senses possess
the ability to see the beauty of it in ways our vision cannot.

REFERENCES
Bowring, J. (2007). Sensory Deprivation: Globalisation & the Phenomenology of Landscape
Architecture. New Zealand. Retrieved from http://researcharchive.lincoln.ac.nz/handle/10182/61
Gellen, Kata. "Hearing Spaces: Architecture and Acoustic Experience in Modernist German
Literature." Modernism/modernity 17, no. 4 (2010): 799-818. doi:10.1353/mod.2010.0033.)
Henshaw, V. (2014, August 3). Scents of Place: The Power of the Olfactory. Retrieved September
26, 2019, from https://www.architectural-review.com/essays/scents-of-place-the-power-of-the-
olfactory/8666675.article.
Karlsson, S. (2019, September 24). The Eyes of the Skin by Juhani Pallasmaa- Book Review - Fly
Fishing. Retrieved from https://thewadinglist.com/eyes-of-the-skin/.
Kumansi, Ghana. Theories of Taste and Beauty in Architecture with Some Examples from Asante,
Ghana. Vol. 4, 2014.
Macpherson, H. (n.d.). From Landscape Research to Landscape Planning. Retrieved from
https://books.google.com.ph/books?hl=en&lr=&id=sUyXOld1TpgC&oi=fnd&pg=PA95&dq=ocularcentris
m+architecture&ots=6ebWQxcQCs&sig=D2cR5HD-
tfrzicQJqw49fgNYBBA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=ocularcentrism&f=false.
Merin, G. (2013, July 28) AD Classics: The Portland Building / Michael Graves. Retrieved from
https://www.archdaily.com/407522/ad-classics-the-portland-building-michael-graves

Web Urbanist. (n.d.) New Frank Gehry Building So Ugly it Has to Wear a Paper Bag Retrieved
from https://weburbanist.com/2015/02/08/new-frank-gehry-building-so-ugly-it-has-to-wear-a-paper-
bag/?fbclid=IwAR1yqDF0sj8FZMGvRo8yP3TeXmenCwg-ATjG7HLk9cuUKoQ5R4TXGQDZwBo
https://youtu.be/G5Z-QjSo8Nc
Pallasmaa, J. (n.d.). Eyes of the Skin Architecture & the Senses by Juhani Pallasmaa. Retrieved
from https://www.powells.com/book/eyes-of-the-skin-architecture-the-senses-9780470015780.
Rogers, S. (2015, November 2). Ugly Architecture: 15 of the World's Most Hideous Buildings.
Retrieved from https://weburbanist.com/2015/11/02/ugly-architecture-15-of-the-worlds-most-hideous-
buildings/3/.
Spenser, C., & Bacci, F. (2009). Art and the Senses. Retrieved from
https://books.google.com.ph/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hiYeaF8bKzkC&oi=fnd&pg=PP2&dq=five senses in
art&ots=RnAXQQEIFh&sig=u5ZtzRHNR8Db--JqPznE7mJ-RFQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=five senses
in art&f=false
Tenduklar, S. (2009, September 23) Creative houses. Retrieved from
https://izismile.com/2009/09/23/creative_houses_24_pics.html?fbclid=IwAR0vSw4K-
y3a0xwG089dwM5BtfzR3Yf3cDW5-_uGY8U59A75Yp8TTP5E5Io

Zamora, A. R. (2017, July 19). Juhani Pallasmaa: "The Ocular-centric View Of The World Has
Been Historically Strengthened Especially By The Invention Of Writing And Printing". Retrieved from
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/juhani-pallasmaa-the-ocul_b_10968212.