Nordic Journal of Aesthetics 22 (40-41) (2011)
|Abstract||Light seems to be a very changeable size in our build environment. Being an immaterial building stone, light takes a very liquid shape in our design-vocabulary. It consists of an invisible material – photons – and therefore it takes no specific form in itself but is only articulated through the meeting with form. Therefore, since form has been the major theme for the aesthetics up until now, giving form to light is a complex and challenging task and reducing it to Lux and measurable numbers only an escape from facing what is actually perceived. In this way light seems to suffer from what can be called the dichotomy between the aesthetics of the objects and the aesthetics of the perception – as stated by Boehme. To improve practice this article conducts a study of our perception, focusing more on the effects of light and less on the physical light (lux). By doing so the article tries to give a better understanding of the differences of the regional lighting cultures and the influences creating the differences. The article tries to establish a link between the regional daylight and the use of artificial lighting, showing that daylight, as a background, along with our perception, are determinant factors for how the artificial lighting and the brightness of the room is perceived. The articlehereby suggests that light is not an absolute factor. This means the end of the dichotomy between daylight and artificial light – often expressed by artificial light replacing daylight – instead this article tries to establish a dialogue between the daylight and the artificial lighting. The article describes how light – this intangible building block – can become a more workable size in the aesthetic and architectural practice of today.  |
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Nolen Gertz (2010). On the Possibility of a Phenomenology of Light. PhaenEx 5 (1):41-58.
Barbara Bolt (2000). Shedding Light for the Matter. Hypatia 15 (2):202-216.
David Grandy (2002). Light as a Solution to Puzzles Aboutlight. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 33 (2):369-379.
Daniel Alroy (1995). Inner Light. Synthese 104 (1):147-160.
David B. Morris (2002). Light as Environment: Medicine, Health, and Values. Journal of Medical Humanities 23 (1):7-29.
Fanchon Fröhlich (1971). The Locations of Light in Art: From Rembrandt to Op Art and Light Environment. British Journal of Aesthetics 11 (1):48-62.
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong & David Sparrow (2002). A Light Theory of Color. Philosophical Studies 110 (3):267-284.
Vivian Mizrahi (2010). Color and Transparency. Rivista di Estetica 43 (1).
Virgil C. Aldrich (1974). Sight and Light. American Philosophical Quarterly 11 (October):317-322.
Seweryn Blandzi (2010). The Goodness of Light and the Light of Good. Symbolism of Light in Ancient Gnoseology and in Eastern Christianity. Archiwum Historii Filozofii I Myśli Społecznej 55.
L. Harris & M. Jenkin (eds.) (2003). Levels of Perception: A Festschrift for Ian Howard. Springer-Verlag.
Nicholas Dixon (2002). Light Trucks, Road Safety and the Environment. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 9 (2):59-67.
David Grandy (2011). Gibson's Ambient Light and Light Speed Constancy. Philosophical Psychology 25 (4):1-16.
B. M. Arthadeva (1961). Naive Realism and the Problem of Color-Seeing in Dim Light. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 21 (June):467-478.
Mohan Matthen (2010). How Things Look (And What Things Look That Way). In Bence Nanay (ed.), Perceiving the World. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2011-06-07
Total downloads19 ( #71,113 of 722,700 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,006 of 722,700 )
How can I increase my downloads?