Less is more or a bore?

- Detail and Formal Complexity in Architectureo

L.K. Chan Abstract Richness and complexity strike back at the architectural maxim 'less is more' replacing it with the conviction that 'less is a bore'. This article uses the multi-disciplinary Information Theory to relate the degree of complexity in a building with the amount of information it contains. Of the two differentforms of information, 'semantic' and formal' theformer has been extensively explored by Post-Modernists while the latter, formal information' is seldom discussed . This article tries to define details as the units offormat information in architecture . The Gestalt Theory on visual perception will be used to explain how to read architecture through units of details, and show how the amount of detail in a building relates to its formal complexity . An assessment of the truth of the statements 'less is more' and 'less is a bore' will serve to conclude the article. Keywords : architectural details, architectural complexity, information theory

From "Less is more ' to 'Less is a bore' The statement "Less is more" made by Mies van der Rohe in 1928 (Blake 1976) and its corollary "Less is a bore" (Venturi 1966) best summarize the trend in architecture from the early to later half of twentieth century : from a simple and pure modern language to a richer, more complex and pluralistic form . The key issue to be addressed in these two statements is what is less? In other words, less of what is more ; less of what is a bore? Apart from the general dissatisfaction with the weathering properties and functional inadequacy of modern buildings, people found them too homogenous, boring and monotonous (Fig . 1) . Some feel there is no 'meaning' in architecture . Others have condemned modern architecture for the lack of 'detail' : "Fascination with speed encouraged the modern tendency to omit small, human-scaled details . . .Architects saw no need for intricate details on which the eye could linger .. . "(Brolin 1976 :27) . 'Meaning' and 'detail" represent two different forms of information, namely 'semantic' and 'aesthetic' information . It depends very much on the experience and knowledge of the receptor to understand or appreciate the former, while the latter, 'aesthetic' information, relies more on a spontaneous reaction . For example, speech contains more semantic information while music

FigJ (L. Hellman, 1988) contains more aesthetic. Abraham Moles, in his book Information Theory and Esthetic Perception (1966:169), gives a full and clear account of the differences between semantic information and aesthetic information . Gombrich draws a similar type of distinction between a sense of 'meaning' and a sense of 'order' in his writings (1979:145).

The paper is extracted from Chapter 1, 2 & Appendix II of the Ph . D. Thesis "The Genesis of Architectural Details", completed in December 1997 by the author .
Hong Kong Papers in Design and Development Volume One

59

A public alienation from buildings, caused by a lack of semantic information in Modern Architecture, has been the basic theory behind the Post Modern Movement . The lack of aesthetic information (or 'details'), however, remains no more than a comment made by the general public or architectural critics. It is seldom defined or analysed and there is no precise and complete definition for the term 'detail' in architecture . Details in architecture It is surprisingly difficult to find a definition for the word 'detail' in most architectural dictionaries, probably because it is used in everyday English and as a layman's term of reference . As defined in English dictionaries, a detail literally means 'a small part of something which gives more information and particulars about the whole' . There are two important concepts embodied in this definition . The word 'detail' has its root in the old French verb tailler, which was, in turn derived from the Latin taliare meaning to cut . Add the prefix de meaning apart, and 'detail' becomes 'a part cutting from something' (Woodbridge 1991 :1). A detail can only exist in the context of the whole. A dress detail is a part of a dress; it can be a collar, a hemline, a seam, or a sleeve of the dress. A building detail is a part of a building ; it can be a window, a column, a moulding or ajoint of the building . On the other hand, a building is a part of a city and therefore it can be considered as a detail of the city . When can we consider a part as a detail? How many details can we find in an object? According to the above definition, a detail should contain information . The information should be sufficient for someone to consider it separately as a meaningful whole. If a detail contains further meaningful units within it, secondary details can be found within a detail . This process of subdivision can continue in descending order until the subdivided parts no longer mean anything and hence, can no longer be perceived as isolated entities . Applying the above concepts, a building detail is a small part of a building which gives more information about the building . Conventionally there are two types of building details. Constructional details give information about how a building is constructed . Architectural details form parts of the design and architecture of a building . This paper is about the latter type of detail . Architecture can also be appreciated through the other senses, for example, the 'shape' of a door knob by 'touch'; the 'space' of a church by its 'echoes' ; the 'wood' of a building by its 'smell'; nevertheless, the art of building is appreciated primarily through visual perception . Architectural details, (known simply hereafter as 'details'), are defined as the parts of a building that carry visual information in a manner that they can be considered separately . These are the 'stressed',', 'accented' or 'eye-catching' elements of a building . An abundance of them can make a building look interesting, rich and complex ; a concept which will be explored further later in this paper. 60 Fig. 2

~-

Decreasing light intensity or Increasing Distance

Lower Level of Detail -~

Detail as the perceptual unit of buildings People detect changes in light and colour and create an image of the object in focus . This process is known as perception . Our visual field is limited by the cone of vision . Because the size of a building is large in relation to human beings, unless viewed from a distance, buildings are inevitably perceived as a collection of parts. By the movement of the eyes, head and body, these visual parts are collected and gradually combined into an image of the whole . Even when the building is at such a distance that it can be completely contained within our cone of vision, scientists have concluded that we can only 'read' and 'remember' it by the process of 'fixation', fixing our eyeballs and focusing on one part of an object at a time . Through this process of scanning over a body, piece-meal parts of information are merged, just like mosaics, into a meaningful whole. "To take an aesthetic interest in a building is to attend to it in all its completeness, to see it, not in terms of narrow or predetermined functions, but in terms of every visual significance that it will bear" (Scrutonl979 :206). These parts form the basic units of our perception and are often referred to as details. Considering vision as a perceptual system, the eyes are the receptors of the system, the light that goes into our eyes is the stimulant, and the brain is the processor of these stimuli into information . The amount of information or, in other words, the number of details one can perceive and digest at a time is limited by the strength of the stimulus, the sensitivity and resolution of the receptor and the ability of our brain in processing it. For normal people, the latter two factors are more or less constant. The amount of detail perceived depends very much on the amount of reflected light reaching one's eyes, which is a function of the lighting intensity of the environment and the reciprocal of the distance between the source and the receptor . From everyone's experience, images become blurred and details lost as distance and dimness increases . Tiny parts merge into bigger parts, and their individuality gradually disappears as we move away from the source of information . This phenomenon, the "perspective of disappearances" was recognised by Leonardo da Vinci who described in detail how information was lost with increasing distance, "when we see a man close to you, you will discern all these three elements, with increasing distance you will first fail to recognise who it is, from further away you cannot tell his colouring but see him simply as a dark body, and in the

Hong

Kong

Papers

in

Design

and

Development

Volume

One

end he will appear as tiny dark round spot" (Gombrich's 1979 :96) . A similar process of loss of definition happens when the light source is gradually dimmed . The above phenomena can be represented in the diagram of a typical system . Smaller details merge into a detail of higher level and bigger size at a greater distance or in a dimmer environment (Fig . 2) . More specifically for buildings, each successive level of boxes represents different types of details in decreasing size and increasing quantity . The spatial relationship between the viewer and the building dictates which range of details is dominant in his visual field. Something perceived as a detail may be 'too big' at a closer distance because it goes beyond our visual field and no longer perceived as parts, or 'too small and insignificant' at a larger distance as the problem of insufficient light renders it unresotvable . For example when people are very far away from a building, they see the building as a silhouette, the shape of the roof or wall as details. At a closer distance, the windows and doors appear as details, while the building form and shapes are no longer conceivable . Finally he may get so close to the building that the patterns of joints on the walls become the prominent details (Fig . 3) . Frank Lloyd Wright's A. Heurtley House at Oak Park is shown as an example of different levels of details at differentdistance
(a) At this distance the whole shape of the roof, the horizontal row of window, the dark semicircular opening and the pair ofpiers stand out as details

Martin Krampen (1979) employed a similar concept in his research on the cognition of building facades. He resolved visual information of buildings into four levels of details: namely the form, the fenestration, the sub-fenestration and finally the texture (Fig . 4) . Although the way he classified this visual information into levels of detail is personal and arbitrary, it reconciles with the model presented above.

l 717

~ ;r I R

Fig . 4 Different levels of details (Krampen 1974)

Detail as 'figure'
After reviewing the way buildings are perceived as parts, we have to address the question why some parts of an entity stand out from their context in a given visual field and draw our eyes to inspect them in isolation. What makes a part of building appear to be more interesting and eye-catching such that it can be read as a detail? The theories on the perception of visual forms give us some guidelines . According to the Gestalt Theory, all visual forms possess at least two distinguishable aspects, a figured portion called Figure and a background called Ground . Figure has the following properties which contrast with ground :figure occupies an area that is smaller than that of ground ; Figure has a contour or an edge while ground is boundless ; Figure appears to be nearer to the observer while ground appear to extend beyond and unbroken by the figure ; figure may have a 'think-like' quality or be representational while ground is formless, diffuse and indefinite ; figure appears to be brighter than ground; and finally figure is more strongly organised than ground (the term 'organised' will be further explained) . The Gestalt Theory has been the scientific theory behind the aesthetics of Modern Art and Architecture . Since the philosophy and aesthetics of the Modern Movement are still very much in doubt, one may well challenge the validity of applying this theory to the 'perception of detail" in this paper. While still being
Volume One

(b) At this distance the key hole opening, the plastered borders at the edges of the wall and the whole arch stand out as details

(c) The paired string courses of bricks and the coping with its heavy shadow line stand out as details

(d) With reduced intensity of light only the silhouette or in other words the shape of the building form stands out as detail Fig. 3 Loss of details with Distance and Dimness Hong Kong Papers in Design and Development

61

perhaps the most comprehensive theory on the visual perception of form, it is interpreted objectively in here without imposing any value judgment . In Information Theory a 'figure" represents a concentration of information . An irregular shape is a stronger 'figure" than a regular one because it requires more information to describe it . A curve is a stronger 'figure" than a straight line because every point of inflexion in it is different . A 'figure' also appears stronger if it is in higher contrast from the ground . Applying Rubin's concept of 'figure-ground' (1914) to the perspective of a building, some parts of a building possess the properties of 'figure' and draw our attention to them ; the rest of the building, which receives less attention, thus falls into the background . Research on eye movement supports this theory (Yarbus 1965). When a person was asked to stare at a face or a statue of a head, their eyes continued to cling to the 'figures' of the face, in other words they focussed on the eyes, nose, mouth and ears ; these figures are the 'details' of the face (Fig . 5) . The same eye fixation test on a column shows that the capital and joints of a column receive the most attention (Gombrich 1979 :122) (Fig .7). Although such an experiment has not been conducted on a building, one would expect that for example, in a classical building, the roof silhouette, mouldings, and column capitals would receive more attention as they possess the quality of 'figure' . They become the details of the facade (Fig . 6) .

This figure-ground relationship can be upset by the blurring of the difference between the figured and ground parts of a form . For example, when the figure and ground get closer in size, or each possess a special shape and contour, the configuration becomes ambiguous and reversible . This is best demonstrated by Rubin's famous Vase-Face (Zusne 1979 :114) (Fig . 8) and Escher's (1960) interchangeable Fish-Frog (Gombrich 1979 :89) or Heaven-Hell (Zusne 1979 :114) patterns .

Fig . 8 (Rubin)

In the case of buildings, Rudolf Arnheim (1974) has noted that we can interpret solids and voids in facades in several different ways (Fig . 9) . Small windows may appear as discrete figures upon a continuous ground of wall . If we enlarge the ratio of opening to wall surface, as in Gothic architecture, we interpret a facade as an alternation of open-and-solid elements, neither of which is unambiguously 'figure' or 'ground' . If we carry this process still further, as perhaps in the glazed wall of a modern office building, we eventually produce the figure of a structural frame seen against a continuous ground of window surface (Mitchell 1994 :5).

punched windows as details

Fig. 9 (Arnheim, R . 1974)

ambiguous

frame as detail

Building details as figures on ground

Fig . 5 (Yarbus 1965)

M3LLL~J3Lr -7ZJL11 -M

r rr

I ~'l ~ ! Fig . 6 (extrapolated by author)

Building details can be interpreted as 'figures' on 'ground' . Because of the self-contained and distinguishable properies of a figure (or detail), we often assign specific 'words' to describe them : a 'joint', 'door' or 'roof' .In this aspect architecture and linguistics are very similar. Roger Scruton (1979) explained in his book The Aesthetic of Architecture that, "It seems then that we can trace linguistic meaning down to 'significant detail'. And the process is finite : there is a point beyond which meaning expires. That, indeed, is how we distinguish words from the sounds which compose them . In architecture, too, the pursuit of meaning comes to an end. There are genuine 'units' of architectural meaning - the classical and Gothic mouldings, the types of building stone, the unadorned vertical, and so on ." The mouldings or groove lines around panels ; the joints between tiles or glass ; the frames around a window ; or the silhouette of a building are just a few examples of details which exist in the form of a contour, the boundary between a figure and its ground.

Fig. 7 (G.T Buswell1935) 62

Hong

Kong

Papers

in

Design

and

Development -

Volume

One

This represents the smallest and the most basic form of detail . A shape is a figure bound by, or almost bound by contours . A dot represents the smallest shape at which its contour condenses into a point. This is of little importance in architecture as almost everything used in buildings are of a considerable size, and every detail has to be big enough to be visually significant. A bolt, an opening, a door handle or a gable are examples of details in the form of a shape (Fig . 10) . A texture and a pattern can be interpreted as a figured ground which stand at the borderline between the 'figure" and the 'ground' . Whether a pattern or texture is viewed as a collection of figures or simply as a background, depends very much on the distance at which they are inspected and the presence of other

figures. Gombrich (1979 :95) gave a clear definition for texture: "For in those combinations of elements which we have analysed in geometrical terms, all of which are too small, too densely spaced, or too distant from the observer, will inevitably merge into an impression of texture, which in its turn, can dissolve into its elements under a close scrutinising glance ." The cobbles of a paved floor show up clearly under one's feet, but merge into a texture at a distance. A pattern is very similar to a texture. It also consists of many repetitive elements though they are less densely spaced and more organised. This makes the existence of individual elements more identifiable . The joints of a brick wall appear as details at a close distance but becomes a pattern at a distance, particularly when there are stronger details on the brick wall such as a window (Fig . 10). The gradual fusion of figures to become a ground also play an important role in the perception of distance and space as the convergence of texture and pattern are important visual clue in guessing a distance according to J. J. Gibson (1950 :77-116) . As previously explained, the distinction between 'figure'and 'ground" is relative . The appearance of a stronger figure will overshadow weaker details and turn them into parts of the ground . On the other hand, the ground can also be strengthened by the inclusion of a pattern or texture which represents a collection of regularly or densely spaced fine figures. When such figures in the background become so strong or disorganised that they compete with, and obscure the perception of the figure, they become the 'noise' in the composition . The dirt on building facades is an example of such noise in buildings (Fig . 10). The same dirt may appear much more conspicuous, or 'noisier' on the facade of a Modern rather than classical building since the latter may be richer in detail . Law of organisation and higher level of detail What makes discrete parts of a building collect into a detail of higher level? This lies in the methods in 'combining' these parts into something which possesses more properties of a figure than that of the ground in a composition . Through experiments Gestalt psychologists identified a list of factors that influence the perception of a group of smaller figures (Lang 19974 :104). Discrete parts will become bigger and stronger figures under these rules . These factors or properties are summarised below: Law of continuity - continued objects or lines appear to be stronger than discrete objects or lines. Continuity of a curve and an inclined line is normally more obvious (Figs . I la &12a).

(a) Contours as details (b) A shape as a detail (e) Closely spaced figures appear as a texture at a distance (d) Regularly spaced contours appear as a pattern at a distance

Law of proximity - objects that are close together tend to be grouped together visually as a whole, and appear stronger than objects lie loosely apart (Figs. l lb & 12b) . Law of closure - objects that are organised into a closed shape or almost a close shape appear stronger than unrelated objects (Figs. l l c & 12c) . Law of similarity - objects with similar qualities such as size,

(e) A figure of a higher order emerges out of a ground with a pattern (f) Dirt makes the ground "noisy" (g) Defects appear as details Fig. 10 Building details as figures on ground Hong Kong Papers in Design and

Development

Volume

One

63

texture, colour, and so forth tend to be perceived as a single units, and appear stronger than groups of different looking objects (Figs. l 1 d . & 12d) . Law of symmetry - symmetrically arranged, radially arranged or other geometrically arranged objects appear stronger than randomly arranged object (Figs . I le &12e) . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 * 0 * 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 random 0

0 0 a) law of continuity * 0

0 b) law of proximity

0 0

0 0 0

0 0

0 0 0

0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0 e) law of symmetry

0 0 0

0 0 0

c) law of closure

Fig. I1 The dots organised into a variety ofpatterns according to different rules Details and formal complexity How do details relate to the complexity of a building form? Information Theory, (the multi-disciplinary theory on how information is perceived and processed developed by communication scientists) explains the cause of complexity . Abraham Moles, in his book Information Theory and Aesthetic Perception, explains that complexity is measured by the quantity of information in a message. "Messages are measured by a quantity of information which is the originality, that is, the quantity of unpredictability (unforeseeability) that they present. . . Information appears to be a measure of the complexity of the patterns of perception" (1966:54) . A more complex object contains more units of new information, which is also known as novelty, originality, dissimilarity or unpredictability and the information has to be intelligible to the receptor . To reiterate, details thus represent units of information in architecture. As D.E . Berlyne (1960), in his book Conflict, Arousal and Curiosity explained in detail, the complexity of a visual pattern is affected by the quantity, novelty and organisation of its elements . Berlyne used a group of lines to illustrate the effect of these factors. If we apply his findings to architecture, and translate his illustration into a group of windows, we find that the formal complexity of buildings is affected by a number of factors : 1 . The number of details: If other factors remain the same, complexity increases with the number of distinguishable elements . 64 Hong Kong Papers n Design and Development Volume One

d) law of similarity

(a) Rule of Continuity The curve and continuous elements tie the discrete units into a whole (b) Rule of Proximity The four windows are so close to each other that they are practically read as one (The Rule of Similarity and Closure are also at work) (c) Rule of Closure Discrete windows are tied by the enclosed frames into larger vertical units (d) Rule of Similarity The facade is segmented into three rows of openings in different shapes (The Rule of continuity is also at work) (e) Rule of Symmetry Thefacade is organised into a whole by the bilateral symmetry (f) Discrete brick units are grouped into bands units by their similarity in colour andsize and their continuity. (g) The frames organised thefacade into units of multi-storey height which become details of higher order Fig. 12 Elements are grouped into details of higher hierarchies by the Rules of Organisation in Gestalt Theory

less complex

more complex

less complex

more complex

2. The novelty of details : Also sometimes referred to by 'infor-

mation theorists as the originality, dissimilarity, surprisingness or unpredictability of the details - if the number of elements is held constant, complexity increases with the dissimilarity of elements . _.
17

important factor in determining the apparent complexity of a building . Rhythm in architecture represents a predictability or pattern of details through time which reduces the overall complexity of a system in a similar way as the above factor on organisation of element. On the other hand the effect of unfolding different scenes in sequential perception such as walking through a medieval urban space is a process of taking novel and unpredictable information through time .

less complex

more complex

less complex

more complex

inversely with the level of organisation within elements as organisation represents a certain degree of redundancy of infor.In other words complexity decreases when the elements mation ,can be grouped into larger units.

3 . Level of organisation within elements : Complexity varies

Fig . 13 The same details may appear more complex in a smaller surface .

The reduction of details These concepts have been employed by many Modern and Minimalist architects to make their buildings appear apparently simple and pure . Details are eliminated in the following ways :
1 . Suppression of irregularities and differences : Natural differences caused by different functional and structural requirements (such as the distinction between a corner column and that at mid span, or any contrast between the glazing of an openable sash with that of a fixed-light window) are deliberately disguised in order to achieve artificial uniformity . Concealed or sunken fixings and fittings are preferred to surface mounted ones . 2 . Organising individual details into a larger detail or a pattern :

ooEaa
less complex more complex less complex more complex

Instead of organising elements into abstract patterns according to the Gestalt Theory they can also be organised into meaningful units. The receptor must be literate in that language and people from different cultures may read the same pattern in different ways .

OR
less complex more complex less complex more complex Westerners may read it as a cross' while Chinese may read it as the Chinese chatracter of ten

Smaller elements are combined (according to the above mentioned Rules of Organisation) into details of a higher order such as grouping discrete hinges into a continuous piano hinge . The size and disposition of individual punched openings are regulated by a pattern such as a gird by which they can become part of the pattern of the ground .
3 . Avoid elements containing a high concentration of information : Straight lines, regular shapes and flat roofs are preferred to

j 4. The rate of details : Apart from the above factors the time

"element is not reflected in Berlyne's model because his experiments were conducted on some small graphical patterns while the details of buildings were perceived through both the spatial and temporal channels . A building can seldom be contained by only one visual field. By moving our bodies we can assemble the details of the different orders from all the different sides of a building . Even within a single visual field it is only through the scanning process that individual bits of information are put c together into a collaged whole picture . The same number of ',elements may appear simpler in a larger building than in smaller 'one (Fig . 13), which shows that the number of elements perceived through the same time span or the rate of details is also an
Hong Kong Papers in Design and Development

curves, irregular shapes and pitched roofs as the latter contains more novelty . Surfaces should be plain, flat and free of texture and patterns . Ornaments that contain a high intensity of both aesthetic and semantic information become taboos in Modern or Minimalist architecture . Interaction of details The above model involves only a group of elements in isolation or responded only to one organisational rule at a time . The whole, however, is often more than the summation of its elements or a mere fortuitous collision of its parts. In an abstract way different organisation rules may interact and compete with
Volume One

65

each other for attention. Jon Lang (1974:103) quoted an example in which the 'rule of similarity' and 'rule of proximity' compete with each other and lead to "a vital experience of plastic tension" (Fig . 14). In a semiotic way meanings embodied by elements may be contradictory to each other and caused an ambiguity in buildings as explained by Robert Venturi (1966) in his book Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture. Complexity and richness are created in buildings by the differences and contradiction of meanings which is the theoretical basis of Post Modernism (Fig . 15).

ever, there beyond an optimum complexity, thepleasure found in the pattern starts to decrease as complexity increases (Smets 1973 :11-21). These relationships are portrayed in the diagrams below (Fig . 16) .

Fig. 16 The correlation between 'pleasurableness', 'interestingness' and 'complexity'

Fig. 14 Boxes 1, 2 & 3 which are grouped by the 'rule of similarity', are in competition with Boxes 4, 5 & 6 which are in close proximity .

Although these findings may have been over-simplified to represent the complexity of architectural forms, which include also the dimensions of depth and movement as well as both formal and symbolic information, such findings, however, reconcile with that of our daily experience and Information Theory . Too much and too little detail Objects that are over-decorated, or contain too much detail, are often described as 'decorated like a Christmas tree' or 'a wedding cake' . In other words the ornamentation represents an excessive amount of information, more than that can be comfortably absorbed and digested (Gombrich 1979 :28) and these ornaments or details often masked their parent forms. This phenomenon can also be explained in terms of Information Theory . One of the fundamental characteristics of the human receptor, as identified by psychologists, is the existence of a maximum limit to the flow of perceptible information . When this maximum flow is exceeded, the individual has to select among these messages with the aid of criteria derived from his previous experience . If these criteria fail him, the individual is overwhelmed and left behind by the originality of the message, he loses his interest in it. In other words a message of maximal information may appear senseless if the individual cannot decode and make it intelligible . It explains the reduction of 'pleasurableness' when the degree of complexity goes beyond the optimal level in Berlyne's diagram. More can be a bore! This is also congruent with the Gestalt Theory . When there are too many figures in a visual field, the ground is overwhelmed by them in terms of size and area and individual figures gradually become indistinguishable and finally dissolve into the background . On the other hand, empirical research also shows that it requires a sufficient quantity of information to arouse the interest of an individual to attend . Below this threshold the information transmitted is easily lost in the system and the receptor become indifferent to it . Man lingers his eyes on one detail after the other until he exhausts all information in his visual field through which he gains the pleasure of perception . If there is too little information in the system, or in other words too little detail, he quickly finishes the exercise and lose his interest in it . Less is a bore!
in Design and Development Volume One

Casa per Uiffici ed Abalazioni, Rome

Bentley Library

The Yin & Yang

Fig. 15 Ambiguity caused by two contradicting languages in equal proportion.

Complexity, interest and pleasure We return to our original question : is less (detail) more or a bore? According to the previous definition, this could be rephrased as : what degree of formal complexity do people prefer? Many psychologists have conducted experiments in an attempt to discover whether there is a correlation between the complexity of a visual pattern and how 'interesting' or how 'pleasurable' that pattern is perceived to be . Findings on this empirical relationship may assist us in answering the question . Psychologists found that the interest afforded by a pattern, (which was either measured objectively by counting the length of time people paid attention to the pattern or judged subjectively), varies positively with the complexity of the pattern (Lang 1987 :196). This relationship, however, does not apply to the quality of 'pleasure' . The 'pleasurableness' afforded by a pattern rises as the complexity of the pattern increases. How66 Hong Kong Papers

Gombrich (1979) explained why a very regular paving pattern appear to be monotonous, "Is it not because it can be taken in so easily that it leaves our perceptive process without enough work to do ." The same reason accounts for some of the complaint about Modern architecture . As explained above, the apparent complexity of a building is also affected by the time required to perceive the elements . Therefore the question of too much or too little detail is not so much about its exact quantity but more about its proportion relative to their ground . Details concentrate on a small facade may be excessive while the same spread over a large building may not be too much . The ground in this sense, whether it is of temporal or spatial nature helps to 'dilute" the intensity of the figures. It reinforces the figural quality of a detail by providing sufficient 'breathing space' for it . Pleasure from complexity Many psychologists suggested that the human sensory apparatus is basically tuned to register novelty and changes in the environment, which is essential for human survival, for example to be aware of an approaching enemy. These systems work on the assumption of a continuity until changes happen . Any continuous and repetitive objects, feeling, sight or sound will sink below the threshold of attention so as to save our attention for the appearance of novelty. Therefore only dissimilarity, discontinuity, variety or novelty can cause a sensation and arouse feelings in people. The next question will be why sometime dissimilarity appears as chaos while in other cases it gives us pleasure in perceiving it . Since Aristotle's time, the concept of 'similarity within dissimilarity" has existed; a concept used by Peter Smith in his writings (1974, 1987) to explain the experience of pleasure derived from complexity in aesthetic perception . Smith's hypothesis is that pleasure is not only derived from the process of confronting novelty and surprise, but also from the successful adaptation to the new information . The latter requires an overall view or a basis on which these new information can be successfully plotted and registered . He argued that aesthetic reward has been associated with the clash between 'complexity and order' or 'likeness tempered with difference' . The primary aesthetic condition is that 'wholeness" should outweigh 'particularity' or as we say, 'unity within variety' . When unity or wholeness is overwhelmed by complexity or particularity, new information cannot be grafted onto the corpus of existing knowledge and classification fails, people find difficulty in enjoying the information in it . On the other hand, there has to be sufficient novelty to make the perception of unity a worthwhile mental achievement, which explains why over simplified patterns do not give as much pleasure or are as much fun to look at . The term 'form" is used in architecture to describe the overall physical entity of a building . In Information Theory it covers a wider and more abstract concept than its physical existence. It refers to the integral result, or the internal coherence of information, as apprehended by a receptor . It represents an elementary

stage of abstract intelligibility in Information Theory (Moles 1966 :100) and corresponds to the 'wholeness', 'similarity', 'likeness' and 'unity' in discrete information described in the above paragraph . Terms such as concept, theme, style or order in our daily language refer to the same concept of 'form' in Information Theory . We also ask whether it 'makes sense' . The dual roles of detail As defined before, details are the visual information units of buildings and represent the novelty or dissimilarity in perception of buildings. On the other hand, it is also the means through which we grasp the 'form' of a building . The two modes in appreciating the details of buildings were explained by Roger Scruton (1979 :207) in his book The Aesthetic of Architecture . "What is a detail if not itself a small, but completed, form? By contrast, to explain detail in terms of its contribution to a completed form, and so to place the sense of the whole before the sense of its parts." The first mode considers details as discrete units of information and corresponds to the concept of dissimilarity explained before . In the second mode details, like a mosaic, combine together and give an overall picture of the building . Taking the analogy of language, details work like the words in giving meanings to a sentence . It represents the means through which the concept of a 'form" is grasped. Details that are coherent with the 'form' are 'explanatory articulation' while those that are inconsistent to it can be a 'camouflage' . Importance of details in architecture Detail is both the dissimilarity and the means to similarity, both the variety and the means to unity in buildings. The success of a building often lies at the delicate balance between the two contradictory roles played by details. Inclusion of too many dissimilar and inconsistent details often obscure the 'form' while insufficient dissimilarity is boring and makes the arrival of a 'form' unrewarding . The importance of details as the 'parts' and the 'means to a whole' in buildings have long been recognised by many architects . Vitruvius defined 'eurythmy' in architecture as the beauty and fitness in the adjustment of the members although his emphasis is on the proportion (1960:14) . Alberti said that "Beauty is a concordance and mutual attunement of parts", and considered the beauty of a building to reside in a harmony of parts, fitted together with just reflection, in such a way that nothing could be added, diminished or altered but for the worse. More recently, architects such as Mies van der Rohe have proclaimed : "God is in the details" ; while Tadao Ando (1991), in his introduction to a book on his details, writes : "During the process by which an architectural idea is realised as a building, the whole and the parts enter into a tense relationship, and that relationship persists until all work is completed. That relationship of tension provides the context for architectural details. Details are the traces left by an architectural idea as it traverses the gap between the whole and the parts . It is out of the complications met in this process

Hong

Kong

Papers

in

Design

and

Development

Volume

One

67

that the most appropriate details for a building emerge . The intention is to create details that activate one another and take on life ." Less (detail) is more or a bore Having emphasised the importance of detail in architecture, we should also address the fact that the experience of a building is also affected by other aspects of architecture . A lack of detail is sometimes compensated for by an excellence in other aspects. Tadao Ando's or Mies van der Rohe's buildings ( where details are deliberately eliminated) are highly praised for their fluidity in space, nobleness of material and precision of workmanship. Although some buildings may be of little architectural interest, the house where we spent our childhood may arouse a strong feeling in us because of its semantic content . Less may be more . But in most cases, buildings with insufficient formal complexity caused by a lack of detail often look boring . Less is often a bore . On the other hand, an inclusion of excessive details or details that are inconsistent with the style, concept or theme of a building may not necessary be an advantage to the building . More can also be a bore .
REFERENCES

Smets, G . (1973) Aesthetic Judgement and Arousal: An Experimental Contribution to Psycho-Aesthetics . Louvain : Leuven University Press . Smith, P. ( 1988)"Complexity, order and an architectural aesthetic" in Environmental Perspective. New Castle upon Tyne : Athanaeum Press . Smith, P . (1987) Architecture and the Principle of Harmony, London : RIBA Publications . Smith, P. ( 1974) The Dynamics of Urbanism, London : Hutchinson Educational . Woodbridge, S .B . (1991) Details- The Architect's Art. San Francisco : Chronicle Books . Zusne, L. (1979) The Visual Perception of Form. New York : Academic Press . Venturi, R . (1966) Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture . New York : Museum of Modern Art . Vitruvius, P . (1960) The Ten Books on Architecture . New York : Dover . Yarbus A .L . (1967) Eye Movement and Vision. New York : Plenum Press .

Ando, T .(1991) "The trace of architectural intention" in Tadao Ando : Details . Tokyo : ADA Edition GA . Arnheim, R . (1974) Art and Visual Perception : A Psychology of the Creative Eye. Berkeley, California : University of California Press . Berlyne, D .E . (1960) Conflict, Arousal and Curiosity . New York : McGraw Hill Book . Blake, P. (1976) The Master Builder. New York : W .W . Norton . Buswell G.T . (1935) How People Look At Pictures . Chicago . Gibson, J.J. (1950) The Perception of Visual World. Boston : Houghton Miffin . Gombrich, E.H . (1979) The Sense of Order: A Study in the Psychology of Decorative Art. Oxford : Phaidon Press . Mitchell, W . J . (1994) The Logic ofArchitecture : Design, Computation, and Cognition . Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press . Krampman, M . (1979) Meaning In The Urban Environment. London : Pion . Lang, J . (1974), "Theories of perception and formal design" in Designing
for Human Behaviours: Architecture & the Behavioural Science.

Dowden : Hutchison & Ross .

Lang, J. (1987) Creating Architectural Theory - the Role of the Behavioural Sciences in Design . New York : Van Nostrand Rehinhold . Moles, A . (1966) Information Theory and Esthetic Perception . London University of Illinois Press . Rubin, E . (1914) DieVisuele Wahrnehmung von Figure . Leipzig : Barth Sanoff, H . (1988) Visual Research Methods in Design . New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Seruton, R . (1979) The Aesthetics ofArchitecture . Princeton : Princeton University Press .

68

Hong

Kong

Papers

in

Design

and

Development

Volume

One