Allowing more time and thought to exploiting the term interiority – the venture ended up being a treasure hunt. One article (a clue) leading one theory into another. A different example, perhaps; but the underlying notion seemingly identical to the one before.
Below are a few note worthy article citations. I encourage you to do your own study, to fully understand the complexity of the topic at hand. The hierarchy in which they are presented, have no particular significance – however, keep an open mind, and do your own cross referencing. You’ll start to see the pattern and underlaying rhythm.
A sense of interiority is achieved through the reassuring known in opposition to the unknown – threatening reality that seems to surround them.
Its to help people find a sense of security through the creation of a miniaturised place, which is associated with the feeling of belonging.
Considering it in abstraction, it appears as an ideal that finds a possible concreteness when individuality expresses, through furnishings, its desire to barricade or nestle itself in a refuge, an enclosed space suitable for “joys of envelopment”.
‘…establishings links between interior design and the development of commodification, consumption and subjectivity to show how the ‘interior’ is both material and psycho-social and to consider ‘ interior’ as both a spatial and mental state (of mind).
This paper combines two approaches : (1) discussion of contemporary, more progressive thinking on interiority; and (2) an historical perspective on interior design in terms of the development of taste and class privilege.
THE EFFECT of bringing these two approaches together is to indicate the failure of interior design to understand or interrogate its role in designing for the inner life of people who occupy the spaces it creates or the material imperatives of the world in which it operates. In the domestic sphere, because interior design does not arrive until there is a certain level of affluence, it fails on both counts – psychologically and environmentally.
A dissertation consisting of 12 separated thesis’, analysing the perception about interiority through honest observation, brave statements, and texts from different backgrounds. What a lovely find – different perspectives, same topic, similar conclusions.
“.As the social responsibility of Interior Architecture … people matter more than forms.
” Current thoughts on interiority as the core of interior architecture has not been fully addresses in practice and pedagogy”
They refer the study to that of the study of anatomy :
offers the acquisition and development of knowledge of bodies by understanding their internal structure. In this way, anatomical study of space should be able to depict the ‘interiority’ of a spacial setting.
“What is inside is not visible or possibly not yet visible, it requires discovering.’
In this way, the physiological as well as psychological needs of human body should be balanced with the technical and functional system requirements in the building as well as its relation to environmental contexts.
This approach may support the role of interior architecture as the supporting agent for human well-being by defining the ways interior elements could together form the functionality of the spatial system to support the well-being of its users.
“Current discourse on interiority and interior architecture has called for a comprehensive investigation on interrelationship between local values, identity and how interior architecture posseses responsibilities to address those issues within society. Such discourse is necessary to ensure knowledge sharing and to bring together creative ideas and future visions of interiority.
“we view interiority as in no way substantive, self – evident, or settled. Rather we seek to catalogue its deep implication in experiences, categories and designations indicative of the outside, of publicness, and of collective forces. Equally we attend to the condensing and intensifying capacities of interiority, finding in containing space – with its appeals to, and effecting of, refuge, shelter, and limitation – a political consecration, even when the communing may be as modest as a solitary confining in place.
We do not only inhabit interiors – but they also inhabit, habituate and orient us.
“class self- identification”
“…an umbrella that shelters them and on the underside of which they draw a firmament and write their conventions and opinions.But poets, artists, make a slit in the umbrella, they tear open the firmament itself, to let in a bit of free and windy chaos and to frame in a sudden light a vision that appears through the rent”
When we create interiors we express a collection of desires and reflections that live within us, and we express them in a material sense.
For the profession to develop beyond service provision – designers need to develop an understanding of the multi-layered complexity of interiority and its relation to lived space
Interiority is an intangible concept, seemingly inaccessible and abstract, yet its essence makes our experience of a place something familiar and meaningful. It is the binary of the intangible image we carry in our minds and the experience of a physical place that contributes to the sense of place of an interior. In Interior Design, interiority is somethings referred to as giving a space personality or its own identity.
Today, architects and interior designers would say that economic factors prevent them from engaging in such detailed spatial engagement.
Interiority will always have a personal meaning and will be subject to transformation. We each experience events differently and assemble them in a meaningful way for ourselves. We will always engage with our own interior dimensions privately and formulate a way of making sense of them. This forms part of our individual identities.
” The idea of interiority was challenged in terms of the extent by which the cutting of buildings might alter and intervene with the form, experience and perception…”
Recurring themes, and duplication of information – dimmed the new found enthusiasm just a little bit. None of the theory touched on how to apply all of this knowledge – into actual practice of design, and its interaction with users, and our own individual daily lifestyle rituals. What made matters more frustrating, was the fact that within each article – the author reaches a level of philosophical speech, allowing instant confusion, misunderstanding, misinterpretation and further delay to a true indepth understanding.
When doing your reading, you will feel like you had lost your marbles, or at least believe that the authors did. And who knows, maybe they did? But keep an open mind – do your best to understand the necesary complexities. This will challenge the way you think about [a lot of] things, because somewhere along the line in history – philosophy was deemed inferior. The YOU in you, was deemed inferior.
So, the interior space becomes you – and you apparently live on in memory within this particular space, adding to its character through time. Allowing for the creation of meaning, within different individuals – within the same space. DIVERSIFIED CULTURE !
space – place – time – identity – memory
Articles, similar to the above mentioned, lay plenty of emphasis on the important relationship between the meaning of self [you], and that of the [interior] space, and the combined functionality of the two. Including mental as well as psyhcological factors. However, they come to the same conclusion we all are already too well aware of – Practice neglects to address these factors, either due to economical or client ‘circumstances’.
Excuses? Or shackled, by those with monopoly [within the industry]?
I came across something nail bitingly frustrating, yet obviously true, that changed my perspective on Life, our communities and our systematical societal rhythm, as a whole. It starts with a question, and develops into something more. Much more than expected.
Have you ever wondered who YOU are? Without your job description, qualifications, and without your finances, your friends and family. Do you truly know who you are, what you like and dislike, and what your truest of passions and dreams within life actually are? How frequently do you befall inward thinking and contemplation? How much of it, allows for progression and development? How much of it, has you more deep in the dump than where you want to be? And at last, what do you stand for?
Reconsidered the term interiority within the context of mindfulness. Bluntly said – who YOU are as a person and all the fluff,(and not so fluff) all jumbled up to become your true self. All it takes is a different perspective – to inspire something further within.
Refer to your own mind.
Your inner self.
The true you – and what he/she believes in.
” My identity is defined by the commitments and identifications which provide the frame or horizon within which I can try to determine from case to case what is good, or valuable, or what ought to be done, or what I endorse or oppose.
In other words, it is the horizon within which I am capable of taking a stand.”
Within this particular article, the author achieved to develop a strong argument : that lifts up the extent to which human experience is inevitably coloured by our capacity to engage in qualitative judgements. But on which principles are these judgements made, and how are they influenced throughout each new day?
Appetition is at the heart of what we mean by life, and the desire to be rightly related to what we take to be good is among these core cravings that constitute life as human.
This constant shifting and measuring is a component of every action, and supplies the rationale behind almost every decision.
We have to recast our description of matter so that value is restored to it. This leads us to redescribe knowledge in a way that removes any trace of Platonic and Cartesian notion that knowing is a state of mind. [ I think therefor I am.] In its place, we need to begin imagining knowledge as a way of relating to something as a kind of action”
Allowing value to be perceived within ‘meaning.’
“inwardness” – I feel it in my heart inner self ==> inner experience ==> interior space ===> is often perceived as the only place where our true identity can be found.
INTERIORITY this notion of, has rendered confusing how we relate to the so-called external world.
The author continues, rather in detail, the difference in thinking and change in philosophies; specifically to Homer, Plato, Augistine, Docrates and Locke. And how they have affected societies as we know them today:
H : Poetry exhibits little sense of interior self, relying instead on the assumption that selves grow large through brave deeds and sumptuous living.
P : by contrast, shifts attention away from action towards the ideas that he says ought to be directed actions.
H + P : traditions, the emphasis is on the actual living of life, rather than on the self that lives it.
A : shifts focus to purification of the will and away from the acquisition of knowledge. He moves away from transcendent ideas to a new level of reflexive awareness. His fascination with the motivations that lay behind his actions required that he posit within each of us a realm where such motives could be observed and a capacity to stand apart from those motives to that one is capable of modifying them : transforming everything about human experience and human values.
D : “the tooth ache is no longer in the tooth, but in one’s mind”
Pain is not a part of objective reality but rather is the mind’s way of translating a specific organic state into an experiential one. He suggested to gain control of our lives, we need to adopt a ‘disengaged’ perspective, one that enables us to separate ourselves from the immediacies of everyday experience so as to be capable of thinking critically about the ideas and sensations that occupy our minds.
L : he was impervious to assertions that natural objects and human beings have a natural tendency towards either the true – or the good.
In short, the author Taylor sees in history of the West’s understanding of the self a progressive disengagement from the immediacy of lived experience. And goes into great length explaining why the urgency to exploit this mindset. And a bit of self study for understanding the true nature of this dissertation.
What I am willing to talk about and share, is not going to be easy concepts to follow – but trust that I will do my utmost best to break them all down into understandable terms. DO NOT mislead yourself – there will be reading involved, and some harrowing self reading practice is always suggested.
Rewrite it, research it, re-enterpret it, and retell the story with new insight from lessons learnt; and re-invent the life you want to live.
It became evident, interiority has different meanings depending on which context you use it in. At this point in time, it is evident that It can either refer to the interior inhabitable space (usually within an enclosure;) or it can refer to your inner most precious being (some refer to as soul) which indirectly influences your experiences, and way of meaning-making without consciously considering anything.
Would you consider the hypothesis, that depending on your (past) experiences, social connotations, morals, standards, and emotional sensitivity , your observation within a space will be influenced by them? And in turn, influence how you react within a space, and how you’ll feel spending time there?
As to ensure quality content is shared – you need to know this will take time.
Please see Library for further enrichment.
May I leave you with this:
(1)Would you consider, that the inside of your home or work, could influence how:
productive / happy/ serious/ at ease etc. you are when occupying it?
(2)Does your home currently inspire healthy living – and uplift your emotional state?
(3)Or does it actually do the opposite due to LIFE’s white noise?
(chores, cooking, work, sleep, and personal relationships.)
The first step to solving a problem, is by first identifying (knowing) there is one.
Should you have something to share of your own – Consider saying Hello by leaving a comment below.