58 Wojciech Niebrzydowski, Agnieszka Duniewicz
2010, 32). However, the result of such a work methodology
is an untrue, fragmentary image of architecture, devoid of
the multidimensionality, spatiality and materiality inherent
in this art. As Juhani Pallasmaa notes, the real image of an
architectural work, consistent with the physical truth, can-
not be discovered otherwise than through touch (Pallasmaa
2005; 2013). This sense most fully perceives the structure
and material properties of solids, but also shapes partic-
ularly intense mental and spiritual equivalents accompa-
nying the experience of architecture (Kłopotowska 2020;
2021; Kurek, Maliszewski 2009; Łebkowska, Wróblewski
and Badysiak 2016). Unfortunately, issues related to de-
sign and haptic perception are not suciently researched
and popularized in architectural theory. Despite the emerg-
ing voices of researchers calling for the appreciation of the
sense of touch as an indispensable and even leading aes-
thetic language, unwavering, radical ocularcentrism still
dominates in contemporary architectural research.
The consistent distance with which architecture-science
approaches the issues of haptics seems surprising when
compared to the ennoblement this sense has received in
philosophy. The following should be mentioned here: the
concept of touch, subordinate to the intellect, formulated
by Aristotle (Arystoteles 1972); the medieval denial of the
sinful sense; the progressive thought of René Descartes
combining tactile sensations with other senses and noticing
the phenomenon of synesthesia (Descartes 2002); recog-
nition of the existence of common elements between sight
and touch by George Berkeley (Struzik 2009); the mental
concept of Pierre Maine de Biran, linking tactile experi-
ences with the resistance of things (Tisserand 1949); the
promotion of touch in the hierarchy of the senses created
by Johan Gottfried Herder (“I feel myself! I am!”) (Herder
1973), sealed by the 19
th
and 20
th
century philosophers of
touch, such as Edmund Husserl (Husserl 1974), José Ortega
y Gasset (Ortega y Gasset 1982), Emmanuel Lévinas (Lévi-
nas 1998), Maurice Merleau-Ponty (Merleau-Ponty 2001).
Due to the very weak basis of haptic issues in the the-
ory of architecture, the great interest in the sense of touch
among contemporary architects seems to be an interest-
ing phenomenon. The works of Zvi Hecker, Glenn Mur-
cutt, Peter Zumthor, Steven Holl, Kengo Kuma, Krystyna
Różyska-Tołłoczko, Dariusz Kozłowski, Tomasz Mańkow-
ski take the form of almost a tribute to touch and convey
a clear message that we should return to the corporeality of
perceiving architecture, which was a natural, intuitive start-
ing point for the rst builders (Stec 2015).
Tadao Ando’s
work also shows that the sense of touch is as important in
architecture as the sense of sight. He states that he always
uses natural materials in those parts of buildings that come
into contact with the human hand or foot because he is
convinced that people become aware of the true quality
of architecture through the body (Botond 1990, 125). In
his buildings, Ando brings people into direct contact with
the texture of concrete. This happens especially in entrance
areas, where narrow passages between monolithic walls
force the person to touch the material. In his projects, rail-
ings, seats and oors full similar tasks.
The gap between theory and reality identied by the au-
thors is well commented by Michał Podgórski: Ocularcentric
blindness does not allow us to notice the fact that hap tic
aesthetics is the dominant aesthetics. It has been used to
dene modernity, progressiveness, worldliness, luxury and
auence for over a hundred years (Podgórski 2011, 9). In
this situation, the authors considered it justied to address
the issue of haptics and its importance in the creation of
architectural forms.
The trend that the authors researched is brutalism. It
developed from the end of World War II until the end of
the 1970s (Niebrzydowski 2018). Haptic threads can be
seen both in the theory of brutalist architecture and in most
brutalist buildings. Brutalism placed great emphasis on the
issue of architectural form. Contrasting combinations of
solids, strong articulation of elements and dynamics of the
composition inuenced human senses and emotions. The
rough and expressive textures of raw materials encouraged
people to explore the buildings by touch.
The issue of haptics as an important component of the
aesthetics of brutalist works has not yet been the subject
of comprehensive, focused studies on brutalism, hence the
author’s team decided to subject this aspect, overlooked
by other researchers, to a detailed research analysis. The
main goal of the research is to discover, name and scien-
tically organize the elements of haptic aesthetics present
in the works of brutalist architecture. This article attempts
to build a scientic apparatus enabling the observation and
assessment of haptic aesthetics – analogous to commonly
recognized methods that refer only to visual perception.
However, in the longer term, by popularizing the results
of both parts of the research, the authors aim to draw the
attention of contemporary scientists to the need to question
the dominant ocularcentric perspective to appreciate the
role of touch in architectural experiences.
Materials and methods
The presented study is a continuation and complement
to the rst part of the research devoted to the identication
of pro-haptic threads in the theory of brutalist architecture
(Niebrzydowski, Duniewicz 2024). The research conduct-
ed so far has indicated a strong (though not directly articu-
lated) element of haptic thought, visible in such aspects as:
– negation of the doctrine of modernism,
–
architectural and non-architectural inspirations of bru -
talists,
– innovative architectural experiments,
– main ideas.
The results of the analyses from the rst part became
the starting point for the authors for research devoted to
the identication of haptic elements in completed brutalist
works. This duality of research is justied by Jacek Krenz,
who states that only in the workshop phase of the creative
process does the idea materialize based on the art of build-
ing. Then decisions are also made regarding the selection
of materials, textures, colours, etc. (Krenz 2010, 35, 36).
He also adds that it depends on the professional skills of
the architect whether […] the transposition of the idea into
a spatial shape will make the form become a carrier of
the intentional meanings assumed at the beginning (Krenz
2010, 36).
