A Theoretical Base for Interior
Design: A review of four
Jennifer Loustau
Drexel University
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
@Copyright. 1988. Interior Design Educators
Ccwncil . Journul .f Interior Dwign Educccrion
trnd Riwwrcli 14(2):3-8.
approaches fkom related fields
Abstract
There is presently no hdv cf literu-
ture compr&ing the theow oj‘ interior
design. There ure. however. munv theo-
rctic.crl upprouches .from reluted ,fields
that huve upplicution to the field of
interior de.sign. In response to the need
stutcd by others j 3 r u bo& of interior
design theqv, this puper reviews j i w
ihcoreticul upprcxrches und Awes ‘ er-
umples of existing literuture within
ewh upprcxlch. This puper jbcuses on
theow us un orgunizutionul tool und is
limited to theories thut ure relevunt to
“coitcept” und ‘:f.rm”. Exumples of
emh 1heot-y point towurd u potentiul
urcu of explorution in the development
of interior dcsigii t h m y with the inten-
tion thut suc-hu bin& of literuture would
hold meuning .fbr both students und
pructitionersof interior design.
Introduction
In the field of interior design, no
theory has been developed uniquely for
interior design. It is only a matter of
time before theory generated directly
from interior design experienceswill be
developed. But. in the meantime. an
overwhelming body of theory from
related fields is available for application
to interior design. Existing theories can
be adapted from other disciplines. par-
ticularly architecture and the fine arts,
and. to a lesser degree, environmental
psychology, other areas of psychology,
and philosophy. This paper reviews
four such theories developed in related
fields: gestalt. semiotic, phenomeno-
logical. and
Theory - “the body of generaliza-
tions and principles developed in asso-
ciation with practice” (Wbster’s Dic-
riotitin! 198 I ) -should be studied and
evaluated so that those theories most
pertinent to the given situation may be
used as guidelines and organizing prin-
ciples. In reference to design. Eidson
( 1986) states that “design theory pro-
vides the language and the connections
necessary to link knowledge and ideas
about design concepts with the practice
ofdesigning.” (p. 19)
In drawing attention to the function
of theory as a tool of criticism in
evaluating studio and oflice projects,
Eidson sees criticism as the arbiter
between theory and practice. She notes
that value of a structure for thinking
critically about design is important in
lifting the design act above accident or
intuition to a conscious act of doing
design. (Eidson. 1986, p. 19) In this
discussion. she breaks the design PIX&
cess into four parts: Concept. Form,
Task. and Technology.
While Eidson’s four-part structure is
helpful for identifying the relationships
of design concerns, it is vague on just
exactly where theory fits into the struc-
ture. To clarify this. a diagram can be
constructed showing Eidson’s four-part
structure within the theory-practice re-
lationship. (Figure I ) The broken line
represents the criticism that mediates
between theory and practice. Concept
and Form fall on the Theory side of the
diagram. and Task and Technology on
the Practice side. When accepting the
term “theory” as limited to the Con-
cepVForm side of the Eidson mcdel. it
can be seen that Concept and Form are
closely linked, for the second manifests
the first. I
This paper will limit discussion to
theory that addresses concept and form
in Eidson’s structure and addresses the-
3
 THEORY
n ( 1974). as the conceptual structure for
Concept
Technology
PRACTICE
Figure 1
Diagram developed from Eidson’sfour-
part structure within theory-practice
relationship.
oretical approaches as organizational
tools. Specifically. four conceptual ap-
proaches are outlined with suggestions
of their relevance to the teaching of
formal principles to interior design. The
four approaches outlined here are the
following:
- Gestalt
- Semiotic
- Phenomenological
- Rational
While these four approaches are not
all-inclusive. they do identify four
schools of thought. At times they over-
lap; often they draw inspiration or
methodology from one another. They
correspond loosely with Broadbent’s
( 1980) four “modes of designing” for
architecture: the Pragmatic, the Iconic,
the Analogical. and the Canonic. He
claims that these four modes are the
basis for the major forms of architecture
developed throughout history. Broad-
bent’s terms are generic and are applied
with a historical perspective; this paper
employs the more current terminology
with the intention of charting some path
through the maze of contemporary
thought.
Gestalt
The Gestalt approach to design be-
gins with the assertion that the whole is
greater than the sum of its parts. Analy-
sis of the parts of a whole cannot
provide an understanding of the whole;
rather. it is the configuration of the parts
within the whole that reveals meaning.
“Gestalt” means “put together” and
was an important concept in the field of
psychology in the early twentieth cen-
tury until it became absorbed into the
mainstream of psychology in the
1950’s. (Gombrich, 1979. Bullock and
Woodings. 1983.) It is also basic in the
4
field of design, according to Lang
many of the Basic Design curricula in
American schools since the dissemina-
tion of Bauhaus principles following
World War 11. In Lang’s discussion of
the strengths and weaknesses of Basic
Design founded on Gestalt, he states,
“Central to Gestalt theory in the 1930’s
and its congruence, if not impact, on
architectural concepts of formal aes-
thetics was its focus on perception
theory.” (p. 49)
In terms of the visual arts, Gestalt
provided “elements” of form and
“laws” for putting the elements te
gether. or a system of visual organiza-
tion. Gombrich (1979) has applied this
theory to a study of the decorative arts.
stating, ‘There is an observable bias in
our perception for simple configura-
tions. straight lines. circles and other
simple orders and we will tend to see
such regularities rather than random
shapes in our encounter with the chaotic
world outside. By analyzing the frame
”
of a picture rather than the picture itself,
he looks at the designed.world for its
inherent perceptual order-as-meaning.
Gestalt theory is currently employed
as a concept of abstract organization as
well as a concept of visual perception.
Identifying patterns of behavior and
studying these patterns can give an
understanding of how space is used -
with or without an object pattern. For
example. if we all have carpet in our
bedrooms, it does not necessarily mean
that we all like the look of carpet, but
rather that we all want to keep our bare
feet warm.
This is the theoretical approach of the
architect Alexander ( 1977). He looks at
object patterns as indicators of con-
scious and subconscious behavioral
patterns through time. Alexander has
codified patterns of behavior, breaking
them down into 253 distinct patterns
that range in scope from “The Distribu-
tion of Towns” (pattern #2) to “Things
From Your Life” (pattern #253). By
codifying these patterns, he is inviting
the designer to pick patterns appropriate
to a given situation, superimpose the
patterns, and allow the design parame-
ters to emerge. Based as they are on
behavior tested over time, he contends
that the end result will be “the most
beautiful place that you have ever seen
or dreamt of.” kactically speaking, the
“pattern language” does contain a
method for identifyingfunctional needs
and preferenceson a conscious and sub-
conscious level.
Semiology
Semiology is the study of signs. The
foundations of the theory rest in the
field of linguistic analysis, originating
with the theories of Saussure in the mid-
nineteenth century. Semiology runs
parallel with the critical school of Struc-
turalism which was very prolific in
France in the mid-twentiethcentury and
which has spread its scientific method-
ology, through criticism, to all the arts.
(Blonsky. 1985. Scholes. 1974.) Basi-
cally. semiology consists of analysis of
symbols (such as a chair) in the context
of their use (it sits in a room) wherein
the meaning of the symbol depends
upon three simultaneousconceptualiza-
tions: the signifier (a Hitchcock chair),
the signified (a particular type of imple-
ment for sitting on), and the intention of
the emitter (the designer of the chair,
Mr. Hitchcock) as to whether or not the
emitter is evident or not (Is the fact that
this chair was designed by Mr. Hitch-
cock important or not?). The meaning
of any given symbol changes according
to changes in or omissions of any of
these determinants. Inherent to this
study is the hypothesis that cultures
determine such contextual codes of
meaning.
An example of a semiological ap-
proach to an interior space is a study by
anthropologist Bourdieu of “The Ber-
ber House” (197I ) . His footnote gives
a concise rationale for this type of
analysis:
All the descriptions of the Ber-
ber house, even the most exact
and methodical ones ..., or
those that are most rich in detail
concerning the interior organi-
zation of space.. .contain, in
their extreme meticulousness,
regular omissions, particularly
when it is a question of precise-
ly situating things and activi-
ties. The reason for this is that
these descriptions never con-
sider objects and actions as part
of a symbolic system. The pos-
tulate that each of the observed
phenomena derives its necessi-
ty and its meaning from its
relation with all the others was
the only way of proceeding to a
systematic observation and ex-
amination capable of bringing
out facts which escape any un-
systematic observation and
which the observers are incap-
able of yielding since they
appear self-evident to them.
(p. 98)
This semiological approach has pro-
duced insightful analyses in art (Berger,
1972). in literature and film (Scholes.
1982). and in architecture (Broadbent.
1980). Kron (1983)discusses the sym-
bol system of residential interiors:
The furnishings of a home, the
style of a house, and its land-
scape are all part of a system
- a system of symbols. And
every item in the system has
meaning. Some objects have
personal meanings, some have
social meanings which change
over time. People understand
this instinctively and they de-
sire things. not from some
mindless greed, but because
things are necessary to com-
municate with. They are the
vocabulary of a sign lan-
guage ...And what is truly re-
markable is that we are able to
comprehend and manipulate
all the elements in this rich
symbol system as well as we
do. (p. 19,20)
Kron’s book is written for the layman
as homeownerkonsumer. As such, it
heightens awareness of the secondary
-and often contradictory-meanings
of everyday symbols to which Bour-
dieu refers, those that “appear self-
evident” and are thus never considered.
More extensive semiotic analysis of
interiors has yet to be done. In a field in
which the practitioners are in thc busi-
ness of determining who gets what,
sensitivity to cultural symbols is a
necessity.
Phenomenology
Phenomenology is the direct investi-
gation and description of phenomena
as consciously experienced without
preconceptions and assumptions. It
evolved as a philosophical movement
around the turn of the century in
Europe. Phenomenology shares with
semiology a respect for the distinctions
in shades of meaning of symbolic sys-
tems, such as language. but holds that
such systems are not sufficient in them-
selves to reveal the complexity of the
phenomena. Intuition is also a source of
data for the experience of phenomena;
it is not restricted to sense experience.
For example. data concerning relation-
ships and values, which are derived
intuitively. are acceptable and. in fact.
can be a rich source of information.
(Bullock and Wooding, 1983. Douglas.
1977.)
Rasmussen ( 1959)gives an example
that serves a s an analogy for
phenomenology:
The enormous church of S.
Maria Maggiore stands on one
of Rome’s seven famous hills
...The many tourists who are
brought to the church on sight-
seeing tours hardly notice the
unique character of the sur-
roundings. They simply check
off one of the starred numbers
in their guidebooks and hasten
o n to the next one. But they do
not experience the place in the
way some boys I saw there a
few years ago did.. ..They had a
recess at eleven o’clock and
employed the time playing a
very special kind of ball game
on the broad terrace at the top of
the stairs. It was apparently a
kind of football but they also
utilized the wall in the game, as
in squash - a curved wall.
which they played against with
great virtuosity. When the ball
was out, it was most decidedly
out. bounding down all the
steps and rolling several hun-
dred feet further on with an
eager boy rushing after it.. . .
I do not claim that these
Italian youngsters learned more
about architecturethan the tour-
ists did. But quite unconscious-
ly they experienced certain ba-
sic elements of architecture:the
horizontal planes and the verti-
cal walls above the slopes.. .As
I sat in the shade watching
them. I sensed the whole three-
dimensional composition as
neverbefore. (p. 16. 17)
5
 An example of phenomenological
analysis of interiors is Lears’ ( 1987)
examination of domestic interiors dur-
ing the period 1850-1950. Referring to
both literature and psychology for
analogies, Lears finds in domestic in-
teriors content that reflects the social
concerns of the day. “Modernist cultur-
al forms.. .expressed the proliferating
tensions in the bourgeois imagination:
between male and female, nature and
artifice. memory and desire, an increas-
ingly evanescent interior self and a too.
too solid external world.” (p. 4) Lean’
thesis is that the awareness of con-
sciousness fostered a self-conscious-
ness in design, and interiors became an
expression of the “fears and yearnings”
of our modem society.
The philosopher Bachelard (1958)
discusses phenomenology in terms of
the analogy of the house with the self.
Bachelard moves from the image of
house as analogy to the actual house as
space. and then relates them both to
poetry. Based on the psychoanalytic
imagery of Jung. Bachelard puts forth
the argument that the archetypal house
is the site of our creativity, and that
actual houses, or any inhabitable
spaces, appeal to us for their primal
associations with basic values.
If I were asked to name the
chief benefit of the house, I
should say: the house shelters
daydreaming. the house pro-
tects the dreamer, the house
allows one to dream in peace.
Thought and experience are not
the only things that sanction
human values. The values that
belong to daydreaming mark
humanity in its depths. (p. 6)
Two other applications of Jung’s ar-
chetypes to the design process suggest
possibilities for the study of interior
design. Cooper, an environmental be-
haviorist, has discussed the use of Jun-
gian archetypes in “The House as Sym-
bol of the Self.” (1974) Koh (1984), an
environmental designer. makes a case
for drawing on the subconscious and
the unconscious layers of the brain in
the design process. Stressing the limita-
tions of restricting design to Western
cultural symbols, he suggests that for
design to be appropriate in today’s
world community, it must be more
imaginative. He writes:
6
This approach may prove to be
far more fruitful than can the
semiotic approach and some of
the so-called “Post-Modern”
designs that employ “historic
allusion,” and cultural motifs
fk-om Judeo-Christian culture
and the Classic Age.. .It would,
creatively employed, have a far
more universal and enduring
effect.” (p. 38)
Macrae-Gibson ( 1985) employs a
phenomenological point of view in his
study of contemporary architecture. As
a practicing Post-Modern architect, he
analyzes his peers Gehry, Eisenman.
Pelli. Graves. Stem, Greenberg, and
Vnturi. Contrasting Modernism with
what he calls “Lyric Modernism” (or
“the period we have reached”), he sets
up a model of three components: mem-
ory, expression, and morality. It is out-
side the scope of this paper to go into
the definitions of his terms, but the use
of these terms for an architectural anal-
ysis is indicative of his approach. It is
also telling that each of the analyses
begins with a detailed discussion of the
urban context, the immediate neighbor-
hood. the site, even the cartographic
symbolism of the roads around the site:
In formal terms this structure
telescopes inward from the city
and landscape to the building
and its details; but in terms of
meaning it expands outward
from the urban and architectur-
al facts to the specific imagery
of the building and then to the
mythical expresssion which is
the content of its secret life.
(p. xvii)
Rationalism
The fourth approach to design theory
to be discussed here is the Rationalist
approach. As a philosophy, rationalism
originated with Descartes and the hy-
pothetico-deductive model. Rational-
ism in architecturalterms has its roots in
classicism and is based on the symme-
try and proportion of geometry. As
Vitruvius described it in the first cen-
tury, “Theory...is the ability to demon-
strate and explain the productions of
dexterity on the principles of propor-
tion.” In its contemporary architectural
 usage. rationalism -or "neo-rational-
ism" to distinguish it from the Intema-
tional Style from which it grew -sees
itself as grounded in historic precedent:
ancient Greek and Roman. Gothic, Re-
naissance, and the neoclassic of the
Enlightenment. Historicism in this light
refers to the awareness of history in an
intellectual sense. not the use of historic
styles for omamentation. Presently it
can best be seen in the work of certain
European architects: Rossi. Botta. the
Krier brothers, and Stirling. (Wemane.
1984. Kostof. 1985.)
A rationalist approach to theory is
one that is also grounded in history. As
Macrae-Gibson writes:
It is the view that the principal
aim of the social sciences
should be historical prediction.
along the lines developed so
successfully by the physical
sciences, achieved by discover-
ing the trends that underlie the
evolution of history. by laying
bare the "spirit of the times"
...As a result, architectural his-
tory was Seen as consisting of
discrete ages, each charac-
terized by a different spirit that
invalidated all previous tradi-
tions and cultural patterns. Ar-
chitects were thus committed to
the revelation of the essential
spirit unique to their time. mor-
ally superior to all others, and
tending toward ever more ad-
vanced development. (p. xii)
One such rationalist approach to in-
terior design history has been made by
Tate ( 1986). He traces the development
of perception through history beginning
with the single reference point. such as
the temple that marked the sacred spot.
As the understanding of perception be-
came more sophisticatedand the princi-
ples of perspective were developed in
the Renaissance. a new sense of space
developed along with it. By the Ba-
roque period architects such as Bemini
and Bommini were designing with a
volumetric sense of space; the third
dimension had been understood and
incorporated into design.
Although Tate ends his history with
three dimensions, other writers indicate
that the 20th century absorbed the con-
cept of the fourth dimension in such
temporal arts as kinetic art and film.
Time as a building dimension is still
understood only as a limitation (such as
obsolescence). It might well be that
designing with CAD. with the capabili-
ty of "walking through" the space
while still in the conceptual stages, may
actually change the designer's percep-
tion of space again. It cannot come too
soon; scientists are already discussing
the possibility of as many as ten dimen-
sions.' a concept that is beyond the
descriptive powers of this writer.
Conclusion
Like dimensions. theories may be
endless. There is no lack of theoretical
material applicable to interior design.
One theoretical approach may be more
appropriate in a given situation than
another. Several theories may mesh.
The theoretical approaches employed
by related fields can offer a framework
as a starting point for interior design to
generate its own body of theory.
Theory must be made manifest; it is
an important working tool for both the
academic and the professional commu-
nity. Without theory, the field of interior
design is vulnerable to criticism for
lacking organizing principles. With
theory, the enormous store of data inhe-
rent in the interior design field will be
revealed; it is this data that will in turn
be the source of a wealth of new
theoretical insight.
References
Alexander. C. ( 1977). A Pcrricwr Lrnr,qicer,qc*. New
Mrk: D Oxlod University Press.
Bachelad. G. ( IY69). T/w Ptwiic:~o/ Sprw.
Boston: Beacon h s s .
Berger. J. ( 19XS). H4ty.s o/ Swinig. London:
British Broadcasting Corporation.
Blonsky. M. (19x5). 01,Signs. Oxford: B u i l
Blackwell.
Boudieu. P. (1977). The Berber House. In M.
D O U ~ I(Ed.
~ S ). RII/~.s ~ i / t ~ / M < ~ / /(pp.
~ i / tYX-
g.~
110). New York: Penguin Btxiks.
Bnudbent. G. ( 19x0). The Deep Structures ol'
Architecture. In G. Bnmdbent. R. Bunt & C .
Jencks (Eds. 1. Si,qrt.s. Syirthols cure/ Arc.hirc.c,-
iriw (pp. 119-16X). New York: John Wiley
& Sons.
Bullcxk. A. and Wcxxiings. R. (IYX~.)T~~c,rriic,r/i-
Cc.rrtrqCitltitri,. New York: Harper & Row,
Publishers.
Ctx)per. C. ( IY74). The House as Symbol ofthe
Self. In J. b n g (Ed.).De,.r.i~rtirt~/i,rHriincrri
Rchrvior. Stmudsburg: Dowden, Hutchinson
& Ross.
7
 Eidson. F? L. ( 1986). Critical Thinking: Elements
ol’ Interior Design Theory.Journcrl c!f’lntrrior
Di.sigrr Eclucwtioii cine1 Rcwcirch. 12(2).
19-24.
Gonibrich. E. H. ( 1979). The, Sc.n.se of’0rClc.r: A
Stiulv in tho P.s\r.hol~igyof Decoreitive Art.
Ithxa: Cornell University Press.
Koh. J . (1983). Design for Fantasy and Fantasy
for Design: Using Fantasy and Dream for
Creativity and Symbolism in Environmental
Design. In D. Amedeo. J. B. Griffin. & J. J.
Potter (MS. 1, EDRA I983 Prowc.rli,igs i!fthe,
Forrrtcwith lnte~rncitioncilConJ?rc.ncr of thr
Eiri~ir~~irinc~irtcilDe4gii R e w m h Asscnicrtiim
(pp. 36-47).University of Nebrdska-Lincoln.
Ktstof. S . (1985.) A Histcq of Architrc.ture:
Scwin,ys cind Ritucrl.s. New brk: Oxford Uni-
versity Press.
Kron. J. ( 1983). Homc-P.s\.c.li: Thi, Sfnieil P.sy
c ~ l i o d o ofHoinr
~y~ erirciDc.torcitif~ir.New Y o k
Polles.
brig. J. (1983). PerceptionTheory. Formal Aes-
thetics and the Basic Design Course. In D.
Amedeo. J . B. Grillin. & J . J . Potter (Eds.).
EDRA 198.3 Prcnwclings .f‘the) Fourtrrnth
lnte~rncitiimilConfrriwi, ofthe, Environmcw-
(pp. 48-55 ).
tcrl De*.sigrr Rcwerri.li A.s.~~~icitii~ii
University of Nebrwka-Lincoln.
Lean. T. J. J . (1987). Infinite Riches in a Little
Room: The Interior Scenes of Modernist
CUIlUre. M d U I U S . 18. 2-27.
Macrae-Gibson, G . ( 1985). Thc Sc.cn,t Lit? of
RviIc1ing.s. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Rasmussen. S . E. (1959). E.rpevic.ncing Ar-
c~lrite~imri~. Cambridge: M I T Press.
Scholes. R. ( 1982). Si~iniiitic.serriclIiitc~rprc~tcrti~~ir.
New Haven: Yale University Press.
Scholes. R. ( 1974.1 Structureilisin in Litcmturc,.
New Haven: Yale University Press.
Tate. A. andSmith.C. R. ( 1986).lntc~riorDe~sign
in the, 20th Ccvtitn. New brk: Harper &
Row.
Vitruvius. ( IW).The Err Bcwks ofAre.hitrcturc.
(M. H. Morgan, Trins.). New Nrk: Dover.
M*b.sti,r’s Third New Intc.r,reiticmrl Dictionerr?:
( 198 I). Springfield: Merriam-Webster.
Werhane. F? ( 1984.) Phi/osophii.eil l.s.suc~.vin Art.
EnglewcnxlCliffs: Prentice-Hall. Inc.