At the same time, however, it necessitates a closer engagement with the interweaving historiographies of the body, the perceptual realm, and philosophical understandings of what it means to be human. To develop a critical engagement with the idea of atmospheres involves stepping outside the confines of European humanism. There is a tension, reflected in the phenomenological literature, between the precise characteristics of urban atmospheres associated with specific times, spaces, or situations, located within the wider dynamics of modernity, and an implicit attachment to a bounded, idealized, and to some degree ahistorical human subject. When considering urban atmospheres we encounter a paradox: on the one hand, we can think of distinctive urban atmospheres such as particular streets or quarters, but on the other hand, the idea of an urban atmosphere can denote more generic categories of experience such as airports, highways, or more impersonal modes of social interaction.
Atmospheres also inhere in the multi-sensory evocations of memory, both singular and collective, and can evoke a spectral penumbra within the synesthetic spaces of human meaning and habitation. The meaning can oscillate between, for example, the latent atmosphere of a room or the complex interplay between multiple subjects in crowd-like situations. An expanded conception of atmospheres has emerged in parallel with new theoretical reflections on space and subjectivity. 4 The word ‘atmosphere’ can simultaneously evoke both a body of air, or even simply space, along with its prevailing affective characteristics. As early as 1998, for example, the German philosopher Jens Soentgen refers to an ‘atmospheric turn’ within European phenomenology and reference to ‘affective atmospheres’ has become more frequent within fields such as anthropology, architectural theory, and cultural geography.
Over the last couple of decades there has been growing interest in atmospheres.
The discussion closed with a laconic remark about a popular singer being ‘an atmosphere all by herself’ in an ironic affirmation of the extended definition offered by the German phenomenologist Gernot Böhme, who claims, amongst other things, that an atmosphere can include the ‘aura’ projected by an individual in a spatial setting. For sceptics, however, the concept remained somewhat ‘fuzzy’ and ill-defined, seemingly conflating the idea of ‘atmosphere’ with that of ‘affect’, or not adding significantly to our understanding of urban life. For its proponents a focus on urban atmospheres enabled a richer understanding of collective forms of urban consciousness and experience. At a recent international symposium there was an extended discussion about the conceptual utility of the term ‘urban atmosphere’.
0 kommentar(er)
