Image: foxypar4 |Flickr

In recent lab tests, studies are showing that it is possible to replay memories within a rat’s brain to restore its memory. By using an implant, signals are sent to the hippocampus part of the brain by recording and replaying electrical activity of neurons. (1) Here is a brief excerpt describing this process a bit more:

This implant operates on the same principles as other neural prosthetics, communicating with the nervous system using electrical signals. Instead of sending signals from the brain to control a prosthetic arm or a computer cursor, however, this system sends the signals to another part of the brain. (1)

So what does this have to do with architecture you may ask?

In thinking about how architecture affects the humans that experience it, I wonder what effects on the brain such buildings as museums, memorials, ruins or other historical buildings might bring. And in this line of thinking, I would like to know how architectural symbols impact architectural perception — whether that architecture is meant to represent an event (present , past, or future), a thing or even a person.

Is designing and building an architectural symbol a way to “replay a memory”?

In theory, such architectural symbols have opportunity to teach memories, where a collective event, or a relationship can be better understood, explored further and even built upon.

When you design, do you ever consider what within your work might become such an architectural symbol? Even if it is not an overt grand gesture like the Taj Mahal, perhaps even a significant detail within your architectural built work might serve as a symbol for someone that experiences your building. And in the end, that does give it a form of meaning.

If so, ask yourself what your architectural symbols mean to your building occupant? What is it that they “replay” in their memories (whether positive or negative). Then understand why and how those architectural moments work. After all, by dissecting what about your architectural designs become symbolic for people, you will take on a much deeper understanding about what your current architectural designs are doing for your occupants, as well as how to build upon them in your future projects.

So in the end, perhaps architectural symbols are one way to replay a memory for occupants. How can you use this to your advantage as an architect? And at what times would you choose not to?

Please Tell Me What You Think

I would really like to get your feedback on my post today, so please leave me a comment in the form below. And if you enjoyed it, make sure you share it with your Twitter and Facebook followers by clicking on the “re-tweet” and “like” button at the beginning of this page.

(1) Ross, Valerie. Brain Implant Restores Memories in Rats by Recording & Playing Them Back. Discover. June 20, 2011.

© 2008-2011 Sensing Architecture by Maria Lorena Lehman

Image: Astroboi | Dreamstime

Architecture has always been part design and part science, but – once again – we are in an era where the two have great potential to help one another. A design science marriage will be key as both scientists and designers strive to push their respective fields forward. Each can provide insight to the other as designers can help scientists think “outside of the box” while scientists bring newfound technologies and theories to the design disciplines – including the architecture process.

Paola Antonelli, the senior curator of design and architecture at New York’s Museum of Modern Art, is starting a wonderful column on the “interface of science and design”. (1) I have heard Paola Antonelli speak and she is quite insightful and forward-thinking. In her new column, Antonelli writes the following:

“Design today has to deal with a timely set of priorities and responsibilities: a concern for the environment, an evolved sense of responsibility toward other human beings, new technical advancements in manufacturing and distribution, new ideas about what constitutes privacy and ownership of things and spaces, the immateriality of new forms of design, the interactivity that many objects allow, and the resurgence of local cultures in response to the global market, to name a few.”(1)

Needles to say, her article entitled Core Principles touches upon how and why a design science approach is so important. We live in an age where scientific and technological findings are influencing everyday life in more profound ways. From sensory devices to nanotechnologies, the sciences are providing not only new methods for design and construction – but they are also providing for new materials as well. Conversely, as science searches for answers to solve some of society’s biggest questions, it is the field of design which can provide for the some of the most innovative ways of thinking.

As Antonelli states, “Science can teach design how to find its core. The points of contact between science and design are countless.”(1) Developing a stronger design science approach is important. Opening the lines of communication between the two disciplines is critical. Each can inform the other in exciting new ways – where science can find creative solutions and design can develop more innovative creations. The renewed advent of design science is here — and the architectural process is a key contributor.

(1) Antonelli, Paola. Core Principles. SEED. February 9, 2009.

© 2008-2011 Sensing Architecture by Maria Lorena Lehman