Adhrita Roy

AR3596

Architecture is not autonomous. It is an outcome of many different systems of thought, and utilises different means of expression to both express a design in real space, or to communicate an idea to its spectators. This ties it back to what Calvino suggests as the components of an imaginative process : image and written expression. However, there is a marked difference in the way the two forms of expression are conceived. In written texts (here, stories), one finds it easier to grasp the narrative; while in an image (here, architecture), it is easier to grasp the “compositional structure” (Kanekar, 1999) of the built form. As Sofia Psarra explains, while stories become a representation of reality; architecture expresses itself through the actual construction of space. What becomes the dominant perception of architectural projects - is its image and a sequential understanding of its spaces. The meaning put forth by the spatial construct slips one’s attention. The research is thus an attempt to understand the way narratives of space add a layer of understanding to architectural spaces and bring them closer to the lived experience of its inhabitants. “The reason for analysing works of literature is because, similar to the sequential motion of perception through language, buildings are experienced gradually through movement.” (Psarra, 2009). Created by the intersection of the conceptual and perceptual realms, architecture exists in the cognitive memory of its perceived characteristics in the reader / viewer’s mind. Narratives are thus deeply ingrained in the spatial experience of built spaces. Given this intrinsic relation between the two forms of expression - it becomes pertinent to investigate how approaching the understanding of an architectural project from the perspective of a story can help one gain a different perspective of the meaning of said space.