Architecture and the Human Condition

 
The Sagrada Familia, Barcelona; Antoni Guadi, architect (photo by Garry Nishimura)

From the moment I first became fascinated with architecture as a child, I have believed the buildings and places we respond to most deeply are founded upon bases that are truly profound. My dilemma was and remains my inability to articulate how we know them. Why is this? Even as a youngster I recognized something distinguishes an inspired work of architecture from designs that merely fulfill a pragmatic need. I still know a great building or place when I see it, but entirely why this is so continues to elude me.
 
I do think it boils down in part to how effectively a given example tells us something about the people for whom it was designed. Essentially, architecture provided these people with a means to frame their being in the world—a form of art and spatial thinking for exploring and expressing the human condition.
 
The “human condition” refers to the fundamental aspects of human existence, experience, and the challenges, emotions, and questions that are inherent to being human. It encompasses the complexities of life, society, morality, identity, and the search for meaning in the human experience. These universal themes recur throughout art, literature, music, and architecture, resonating across different cultures, time periods, and backgrounds. Architects have engaged with these themes to create spaces that not only address practical requirements, but also elevate our experiences and help us understand the complexities of our existence.
 
Buildings shape our perceptions and interactions with the environment, providing a tangible and sensory experience of the world. They possess the power to convey shared experiences and memories. Just as a poem, tale, or religious text may speak of the particular while touching upon the universal, great architecture meaningfully defines the spaces we inhabit while underscoring the relationship between us and our surroundings. Great architecture reminds us of our capacity to shape the world, our societies, and our experiences. In doing so, it helps us explore the complex and universal aspects of the human condition, providing spaces that inspire, connect, and reflect our humanity.
 

Hannah Arendt

Citing the human condition prompts a discussion about the book bearing that as its title (The Human Condition) by the German American philosopher Hannah Arendt (1906-1975). Arendt explored the idea that human existence is deeply intertwined with the realms of labor, work, and action, and that these distinct activities shape our understanding of the human condition and our engagement with the world. She regarded spatial thinking as “political” thinking, as it is concerned about the world and its inhabitants. We certainly can understand spatial thinking here as architectural thinking: the “world” for Arendt meant the ways in which we make the globe habitable for people: how we build houses and cities, infrastructures, and other networks, and furnish spaces with tables, chairs, paintings, and photographs.
 
Hannah Arendt's insights on spatial thinking as political thinking illuminate the significance of architecture in the human condition. Architecture is not isolated from the world it inhabits; rather, it plays a crucial role in making the world habitable. It shapes our sense of place, connects people, and influences the dynamics of society. The built environment, from houses and cities to infrastructure and furnishings, contributes to the durability of the common world, providing a relative permanence to human affairs.
 
Architects thus have a responsibility to consider the greater good in their designs, just as artists engage with the human condition to offer life-affirming narratives. While there is value in art that critiques, shocks, or perplexes, architecture's enduring impact on daily life calls for spaces that aspire to be pleasing and meaningful. Buildings should heighten our awareness of our existence in a particular time and place, offering rewards with each visit and turn. As Hannah Arendt indirectly implied, architecture is intrinsically tied to societal, cultural, and environmental factors. Architecture should engage with these external considerations while remaining true to its fundamental duty of helping us understand our place in the world.

 

Cloud Gate ("The Bean"), by Anish Kapoor (my photo)

Identity and belonging are integral aspects of the human condition. By incorporating cultural elements, materials, and motifs that embrace a specific identity, architecture fosters a sense of connection to one's heritage and community. Community and isolation are themes deeply embedded in architectural choices. Well-designed public buildings, communal spaces, and mixed-use developments encourage social interaction and the formation of bonds between individuals. In contrast, poorly conceived environments lead to isolation and disconnection.
 
Architecture can also address themes of conflict and harmony. In regions marked by historical strife, buildings can serve as beacons of reconciliation and unity. Conversely, the urban environment itself may reveal tensions and contrasts, echoing the complex interplay of diverse societies coexisting in shared spaces.
 
Mortality and legacy are constants of the human condition. Enduring structures stand across time as monuments to human achievement and culture. Museums, libraries, and iconic landmarks become tangible representations of our collective history and aspirations. Sacred architecture, found in temples, churches, mosques, and other religious structures evoke feelings of awe, reverence, and a profound connection to the divine.
 
Architecture often serves as a canvas for the spirit of innovation and progress. New designs embody optimism and the potential for advancement in technology, culture, and society. Through its materials, spatial organization, symbolism, and sustainability features, contemporary architecture increasingly engages with and reflects the multifaceted aspects of today’s human condition, offering us spaces that not only satisfy practical needs but also elevate our experiences.
 
Architects and designers continually explore these universal themes, adapting them to modern-day contexts and challenges. The built environment has the power to influence and shape human experiences, making architecture a powerful medium for expressing and addressing the complex and universal aspects of the human condition.

 

Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York; Frank Lloyd Wright, architect (my photo)

By defining architecture in part as an expression of the human condition, am I closer to breaking the code? Is the extent to which architects consciously design buildings as representations of ourselves a key to understanding architecture? Beyond our perceptions of their utility, construction, and beauty (associated with such qualities as proportion, harmony, elegance, and more) is how buildings express the human condition an equal prerequisite for qualification as great or simply good architecture? I think so.   

*    *    *    *    *    *

One reason I blog is because doing so provides me with a record of some of my more pretentious musings. I get these thoughts in my head and feel compelled to write them down before I lose them. I’ve consequently gone down more rabbit holes than I care to admit in pursuit of architectural truths. Such was the case for me today, a rewarding and satisfying way to spend a lazy, rainy September afternoon. Happy Sunday everyone.