We live in a society where overarching, ideological references have lost their universal validity. Worldviews have become a private matter, and ideological dogmas are increasingly questioned. At the same time, this has also led to a certain loss of common narratives within our society, which, according to some contemporary scholars, has resulted in a “crisis of meaning” that currently seems to bear troubling consequences: a rising escapism into fantasy worlds (ranging from superhero sagas to the growing popularity of conspiracy theories) an eclectic search for spiritual fulfillment, or a rise in political and religious fundamentalism (Vervaeke et.al. 2024). These tendencies, among many other factors, might nowadays contribute to the obvious erosion of social cohesion and individual mental well-being. These developments reflect both an individual struggle for significance and a wider societal need for the attribution of meaning.

 

„One day, and probably soon, we need some recognition of what above all is lacking in our big cities: quiet and wide, expansive places for reflection. Places with long, high-ceilinged cloisters for bad or all too sunny weather where no shouting or noise of carriages can reach and where good manners would prohibit even priests from praying aloud - buildings and sites that would altogether give expression to the sublimity of thoughtfulness and of stepping aside. […] We wish to see ourselves translated into stone and plants, we want to take walks in ourselves when we stroll around these buildings and gardens.“ (Nietzsche 1974, 226)

 

Architecture, as both a discipline and practice, has the potential to play a role in this search for meaning. Throughout history, architecture has been closely linked to collective ideologies—whether religious, political, or cultural. Buildings often served as symbols of specific ideological doctrines, carrying an imposed meaning or acquiring a new significance through ideological reinterpretation [1]. 

This codification of space was questioned throughout modernity and beyond, replaced by an evaluation of architectural quality based on functional or quantitative parameters, or attention-seeking hype. This shift has inevitably led to the often-criticized loss of emotional impact in architecture. However, if we can no longer agree on shared societal references and reject the ideological or metaphysical codification of space, how can we create buildings that provide meaning for a diverse range of people [2]? Recognizing a multifaceted, polyvalent and individualistic society, one possible answer might lie not in the dedication of collective meaning but in openness to the individual attribution of significance.

 

This research aims to explore the poetic potential of a speculative category of non-propositional spaces that provoke individual attribution of meaning / purpose / significance.

 

Two central parameters are key in the search for this potential: emotional resonance and the absence of dedication ex ante. Emotional resonance is understood as a fundamental prerequisite for a space to inspire attribution of significance. In this case, emotionally resonant spaces are defined as those that elicit an affective response from their visitors—spaces that move people. This term serves as an umbrella for concepts that are vastly different yet similarly ineffable and difficult to articulate, such as aura, atmosphere, the sublime, or the sacred (in its original sense, “that which stands apart”). Resonant spaces can amplify the emotional disposition of their visitors. The traditional association of resonant, moving spaces with ideological charging is challenged by the second prerequisite. Spaces designed to encourage individual attribution of meaning must be free from underlying ideological dogma. This does not imply that such spaces lack purpose or utility [3].

Can spaces be designed that are not subject to ideological dedication ex ante and instead invite, inspire, or even provoke the personal and individual attribution of meaning through their resonance? Such spaces do exist—places that move us yet are not ideologically charged: The positive effect of natural spaces on our mental well-being is not mitigated but strengthened by its openness to the attribution of individual meaning. Industrial ruins, having lost their original purpose yet sometimes emitting specific atmospherical qualities, might as well evoke a projection of personal significance. Abstract works of art, not containing a specific ideological imposition, invite the recipient to be emotional touched. Yet an architectural typology that has been intentionally designed to explore this effect is relatively unknown.

 

“When writing, one is alone. There is no other way. Writing is not a democratic process. It is the opposite. But later, the books do not belong anymore to the one who wrote them. They now belong to the one who reads them.“ (Von Schirach 2025, 11)

 

These spaces can touch us and invite the projection of individual meaning without ideological coloring. The absence of an ideological label does not make these spaces any less significant on an emotional level.

This research project does not aim to establish handbook-like guidelines but rather to examine the poetic potential of such spaces. Intuitive hand drawings, models, atmospherically charged perspectives, and traditional project representations create a series of suggestive artifacts for these non-propositional spatial situations. An essayistic reflection, which considers relevant theoretical approaches and existing examples of such spaces, accompanies the design-based artifacts and articulates the phenomena that emerge. 

Within this process a set of design-tools emerged which can be employed to design undedicated spaces that provoke emotional appropriation: locking out the context from the inner world of the space, combining archaic forms with irrational compositions that irritate the visitors and require deciphering as well as the creation of a sense of physical awareness of one’s own “bodily presence” (Böhme 2013, 126) through elements that exceed the visual (Pallasmaa 2005) . Using these tools, amongst others, can lead to the creation of suggestive atmospheres that invite the observer to draw their own conclusions, based on the idea “ […] that well-being can be defined as a very special atmospheric feeling, a deep mood that is both personal and collective […]. (Griffero 2021, 154)

__

[1] i.e. the ever-changing recodifications of the Neue Wache Memorial in Berlin

[2] See for example the contemporary idea of Olgiati and Breitschmid‘s „Non-referential Architecture“ where it is argued that the architecture itself is to create the meaning, how exactly this can be achieved or how valid this form of meaning is, is not sufficiently answered though. (Breitschmid et. al. 2019, 122)

[3] The inherent and seemingly ironic contradiction that the goal to create spaces which are free of social barriers and open for democratic and personal attribution of meaning, is in itself a form of contemporary ideology is being acknowledged by the author.

__

Böhme, Gernot. 2013. Atmosphäre: Essays zur neuen Ästhetik. Suhrkamp

Breitschmid, Markus and Olgiati, Valerio. 2019. Nicht-Referenzielle Architektur. Park Books.

Griffero, Tonino. 2021. The Atmospheric “We”: Moods and collective Feelings. In: Atmospheric Spaces No.10. Mimesis International

Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1974. The Gay Science. Book Four. 280. Translated by Walter Kaufmann. Random House. Based on second edition published 1887

Pallasmaa, Juhani. 2005. The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Vervaeke, John and Mastropietro, Christopher. 2024. Awakening From the Meaning Crisis: Part One: Origins. Story Grid Pulbishing LLC.

Von Schirach, Ferdinand. 2025. Regen – eine Liebeserklärung. Penguin Random House. Translation by author.