The free access to this article was made possible by support from readers like you. Please consider donating any amount to help defray the cost of our operation.
CA Special Volume Atmospheric Design
& Everyday Aesthetics
Introduction
Zhuofei Wang (Editor) & David Brubaker (Co-Editor)
Since the 1990s, especially in the contemporary context of the revival of aesthetics as a theory of sensibility in a broader sense, the term atmosphere has transcended its physio-meteorological scope to become a new aesthetic concept. As an in-between constructed by the perceiving subject and the perceived object and imbued with specific affective qualities, atmosphere is an omnipresent phenomenon that forms the basic tone of our experience of life. Aesthetic discussion thus goes beyond the approach of aesthetic judgment that has prevailed in Western aesthetics since the eighteenth century, which presupposes a critical distance from what is perceived, and turns to phenomena that lie between subject and object, between form and formlessness, between presence and absence, and are essentially perceived as events and processes in a holistic way.
As affective-corporeal beings, humans always develop their atmospheric relationship to the world in a particular space. The scope of spatiality is extremely broad—from nature, landscape, and urban architecture to public and private spaces. In a world largely characterized by aestheticization, mediatization, and digitalization, the resulting atmospheres can affect human sensitivities (material, immaterial, and also energetic) in a variety of ways, fostering the tendency towards resonance or alienation. This effect works both ways: not only does the space have “a dispositional effect on the individual mood, but conversely the psychological state also shapes the perception”[1] of spatial features. Therefore, one focus of the aesthetic concept of atmosphere is on how we perceive and integrate with the atmospheric qualities emanating from our surroundings through our own bodies, thus increasing our awareness of the constant presence of something atmospheric and its influence (physical, psychological, spiritual, and so on) on individuals and social groups.
Another focus of the aesthetic concept of atmosphere, which takes a more prominent position in our discussion, is that, in line with other current aesthetic concepts (everyday aesthetics, environmental and ecological aesthetics, somaesthetics, and so on), it tends to critically reflect on the contemplative approach commonly used in modern aesthetic research and emphasizes engagement and action. More specifically, the aesthetic concept of atmosphere not only involves the way we perceive the world around us with our own bodies but also incorporates the dimension of design. It was Gernot Böhme who paved the way for the theory of atmospheric design to flourish. In the 1990s, Böhme took the concept of atmosphere from Hermann Schmitz’s New Phenomenology and combined it with Martin Heidegger’s concept of disposedness (Befindlichkeit). Schmitz’s priority is atmospheric reception. In this regard, his concept of quasi-object (Halb-Ding) explores how the perceived atmosphere acquires its existing characteristics from the objective pole. By contrast, Böhme takes a design-oriented approach, paying more attention to the relationship between everyday objects, works of art or natural elements, and the atmospheres they emanate.[2] In this sense, he defines atmosphere as follows: “Atmospheres are tuned spaces […]. It is the mood with which a space welcomes you.”[3] What is of interest here is how the arrangement and properties of objectively identifiable tangible components affect the feelings and emotions of the experiencing individual. For this reason, the focus of atmospheric design is to emphasize certain qualities of the design in order to influence the affective state of the perceiver. Since atmosphere, manifested as a quasi-object, is accessible through the object pole, atmospheric design and production presupposes the material constituents such as materials, technical media, spaces, and arrangements. The created atmosphere is only perceived when it affects us emotionally. In this way, the experiencing subject helps to shape the presence of the atmosphere.[4]
Aesthetic practitioners such as painters, sculptors, stage designers, and architects have long been aware of the importance of creating an atmosphere through spatial design, light, color, props, and other media. Even ancient rhetoric can be seen as a work of design that aimed to create a certain atmosphere through tone, facial expressions, and gestures, in order to influence the moods of listeners and achieve a persuasive effect.
Today, the deliberate production of atmosphere has become an essential part of aesthetic practices in the broadest sense, from eating, meditation, education, advertising, shopping, interior design, urban planning, and exhibitions to artificial intelligence. In this context, artistic and art-related practices offer a crucial testing ground for the staging, shaping, and enhancing of atmosphere. In this respect, aesthetics of atmosphere largely overlaps with everyday aesthetics, which developed in the Anglo-American context in the late twentieth century as a critical revision of art-centered analytical aesthetics.[5] According to everyday aesthetics, contemporary aesthetic reflection is no longer confined to artistic practices in the narrow sense, such as the visual arts, literature, music, theatre, film, and dance, but extends far beyond these fields into other areas of everyday life that are not traditionally considered aesthetic, such as eating and drinking, marriage, funerals, public speaking, meditation, and walking. Jonathan M. Smith argues that the aesthetic turn to everyday experience is both an extension of traditional philosophical aesthetics, which tends to focus on works of art in the narrow sense, and a step towards new aesthetic fields that open up a broader perspective.[6]
Not all designed atmospheres have a positive effect. Some can be physically, psychologically, and spiritually negative, or even harmful. In this respect, the normative studies of everyday aesthetics in recent years, which focus on the connections between the aesthetic and other value dimensions, such as moral, political, and ecological values, by examining modes of aesthetic experience in terms of mindful attention, sensual engagement, and sensual use,[7] can provide inspiration for benign atmosphere design. According to Saito, one of the challenges of everyday aesthetics is to practice the art of living and to negotiate everyday life, sometimes by developing the extraordinary aesthetic potential of everyday life, sometimes by enjoying the ordinariness of the ordinary, and sometimes by sharpening our critical perception of the aesthetically negative aspects of life in order to improve them.[8]
The dialogue between aesthetics of atmosphere and everyday aesthetics can, on the one hand, help us to reflect on the profound social, political, and ecological implications of the seemingly innocuous and trivial aesthetic choices and judgments that we make in our everyday lives.[9] On the other hand, such a dialogue can help us to think about how we can use sociopolitical, media, and technological means to transform and reshape an atmosphere that is perceived as negative or even harmful from a political, economic, interpersonal, or ecological point of view, in order to enhance our sense of well-being.
Today, the concept of atmosphere is explored in Western academic fields such as literary studies, media studies, film and theatre studies, architecture and design theory, education and political science, and even psychiatry and business psychology. Christiane Heibach therefore divides the discussion of this concept into three dimensions: primary (physical-climatic), secondary (social), and tertiary (medial).[10]
The omnipresence, complexity, and diversity of the production and experience of atmospheres encourage intercultural approaches to this concept in different contexts (geographical, ecological, historical, ethical, political, religious, and so on). In global communication, the mutual influence of different cultures has led to an increasing number of works composed of heterogeneous elements. Especially for designers working in an international environment, it is crucial to understand that the aesthetic concept of atmosphere is rooted in the affective sensibility (affektive Befindlichkeit) of everyday life in a particular cultural context, and can be complemented and enriched by exchange with the theories and practices arising from the affective sensibilities of everyday life in other cultures.
We are grateful to our team of contributors. Their articles show the diversity and richness of atmosphere design in contemporary everyday life, including education, medicine, artificial intelligence, interior design, architecture, urban and environmental design, and visual arts and exhibitions. The common features of their findings are trans/interculturality, interdisciplinarity, and practical orientation. The following issues are at the center of the discussion:
- How would the concept of atmosphere contribute to a rethinking of the theoretical foundations, principles, and methods of contemporary design?
- How might we design an atmosphere that can be experienced as good and meaningful, using technical and media means as well as different cultural semiotics?
- To what extent can a designed atmosphere resonate with recipients from different cultural backgrounds?
Our sincerest thanks go to Professor Yuriko Saito, Editor-in-Chief of Contemporary Aesthetics (CA), and all the members of her excellent editorial team. Without their hard work, this publication would not have been possible!
Editor: Zhuofei Wang
zfw@uni-kassel.de
Zhuofei Wang (PD Dr. phil. habil.), Privatdozentin in the Department of Art History and Aesthetics at the University of Kassel. Her interests include intercultural philosophy, phenomenology, aesthetics, art theory, image theory, media culture, and design theory.
Member of the International Advisory Board of the English journal Contemporary Aesthetics (CA), Assistant Secretary General of the International Association for Aesthetics (IAA), Editor-in-Chief (with Enea Bianchi) of the Annual of the International Association for Aesthetics (IAA) (in collaboration with Brill), Vice President of the German Society for Interdisciplinary Image Science (GIB), Editor-in-Chief (with Goda Plaum and Lars C. Grabbe) of the journal “IMAGE,” Member of the Atmoboard, Associate Editor of the Art Style | Art & Culture International Magazine.
Co-Editor: David Brubaker
3096054972@qq.com
David Brubaker is an independent scholar with previous appointments as professor at Hubei University and Wuhan Textile University. His interests include intercultural aesthetics, Chinese aesthetics, contemporary Chinese art, Merleau-Ponty, aesthetics of Buddhism, environmental aesthetics, and care ethics. His publications include Jizi and His Art in Contemporary China (2015) and many articles. He is editing a volume on the history of Chinese aesthetics. In addition to work as a curator, he exhibits paintings and prints.
Published December 10, 2024.
Cite this article: Zhufei Wang & David Brubaker, “Introduction,” Contemporary Aesthetics, Special Volume 12 (2024), accessed date.
Endnotes
[1] Hartmut Rosa, Resonanz. Eine Soziologie der Weltbeziehung (Berlin: Suhrkamp Verlag, 2016), 640.
[2] Cf. Zhuofei Wang, “Atmosphären-Ästhetik und interkulturelle Studien,” in Auf den Spuren von Anton Wilhelm Amo. Philosophie und der Ruf nach Interkulturalität, ed. Stefan Knauß (Bielefeld: transcript Verlag, 2021), 193–205: ref. on 195.
[3] Gernot Böhme: “Die Atmosphäre als Thema des Designs,” in Was ist Public Interest Design? Beiträge zur Gestaltung öffentlicher Interessen, ed. Christoph Rodatz and Pierre Smolarski (Bielefeld: transcript Verlag, 2018), 273–279; ref. on 275.
[4] Cf. Gernot Böhme, Aisthetik: Vorlesungen über Ästhetik als allgemeine Wahrnehmungslehre (München: Wilhelm Fink, 2001), 54.
[5] Cf. Yuriko Saito: “Aesthetics of the Everyday,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta. URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2023/entries/aesthetics-of-everyday/ (accessed November 27, 2024).
[6] Cf. Jonathan M. Smith (2005): “Introduction.” in The Aesthetics of Everyday Life, ed. Andrew Light (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005), ix-xv; ref. on ix.
[7] Cf. Yuriko Saito, (2017): Aesthetics of the Familiar: Everyday Life and World-Making (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 31.
[8] Cf. ibid.
[9] Cf. Yuriko Saito, “Living with Everyday Objects. Aesthetic and Ethical Practice,” in Comparative Everyday Aesthetics. East-West Studies in Contemporary Living, ed. Eva Kit Wah Man and Jeffrey Petts (Amsterdam University Press, 2023), 9-21; ref. on 9.
[10] Cf. Christiane Heibach 2012: “Einleitung,” in Atmosphären. Dimensionen eines diffusen Phänomens, ed. Christiane Heibach (München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 2012), 9-24; ref. on 9.