Meet TTS Scholar Henrik Ilvesmäki, Class of 2020-21
Henrik is a Finnish architect who is currently pursuing two Master’s Degrees at Harvard University. His academic goal is to utilize the tools of computer-aided parametric design to define and enhance intangible and often overlooked qualities – such as empathy and atmosphere – that are inherent in the way we experience architectural spaces. Henrik hopes this work will result in a future-oriented methodology for creating more culturally sustainable places.
Which Master’s Degrees are you pursuing and why two?
I am completing the Master in Architecture 2 and the Master in Design Studies: History and Philosophy of Design programs. When I applied for these advanced programs back in 2018, I thought that they were both ideal for facilitating what I wanted to do. To my surprise, Harvard offered me a chance to complete both of these degrees concurrently and receive them for what essentially constituted a great discount. It felt like a great opportunity so I went for it.
Your architectural interests are intriguing. Can you clarify your goals for those of us who don’t understand parametric design?
Of course! Parametric Design is basically designing with the aid of algorithms and code. A designer creates a set of modifiable parameters within context-specific rules that output for example a building layout or a 3d structure. It is a method usually reserved for optimization tasks in construction or the creation of formally complex shapes that would be difficult to create via more traditional methods. What I want to do is to use these types of techniques to research the more ephemeral aspects of architecture, such as ambience and atmosphere. These aspects can be difficult to research via traditional 3d modeling methods due to their wholistic nature, as such methods usually rely on the designer consciously crafting architectural elements. An algorithmic approach can allow one to input a larger array of design elements all at once, without conscious, direct input – essentially randomizing parts of the design process. This more emergent result is crucial for a phenomenon like atmosphere to manifest in a given design, as it is not tied to individual design decisions but more to larger wholes. To put it simply, a desired atmosphere is difficult to manufacture by simply designing in a certain manner because the end result can often feel artificial (think of for example an uplifting venue at a theme park and imagine how that has the potential to feel off). A degree of randomness and the undeliberate can help create more credible atmosphere, thus promoting design methods with a degree of parametricism.
How would you define “empathy” in architecture?
Empathy is a very interesting phenomenon since the concept only arose recently, at the end of the 1800s. It originally meant a process of subconscious projection, where a person looking at an inanimate object could for example feel its shape within their own body (imagine looking at a twisted column for example and feeling its contractions in your stomach). The phenomenon was originally called Einfühlung in German, which means in-feeling in English. Empathy in its current, interpersonal form arose from a popular study conducted in the 1950s, wherein it was relegated to a person’s ability to correctly ascertain the feelings and thoughts of other people. The original concept of empathy was thus sidelined and has been largely forgotten today. I would however maintain that it still has a place in architecture, which mainly deals with inanimate objects. In addition to this, empathy in architecture can also take the form of an architect’s ability to imagine themselves in place of their client, in order to then create a space relevant to the desires of said client. I wrote about the connection between empathy and atmosphere in the architectural design process in my research thesis at Aalto University in 2018. The history of the subject has only recently surfaced, in great part thanks to the work of Susan Lanzoni, a professor at Harvard, who published the first comprehensive book about the subject in 2018.
Finland has produced a number of notable architects. Has any of their work influenced your decision to pursue this career?
Finland is mostly famous for the work of Alvar Aalto and his Nordic modernism, which notably featured softer, human-centric elements, such as the material wood, when compared to his Central European contemporaries like Le Corbusier. While academic inquiry and focus within the architectural field has largely been sidelined in Finland, the priorities of Alvar Aalto are still transferred to each new generation of architects — at least subconsciously. As such, his influence can clearly be seen in my work and even in my interest in the aforementioned ephemeral qualities of architecture. That said, my research is greatly motivated by the current Finnish attitude, which is perhaps a little too happy to leave these subjects into the realm of something ill-understood.
What is the most valuable lesson of your international education?
Harvard has been an absolutely wonderful melting pot of ideas, and to be honest, what I will remember most fondly about the school are the people I have met there. The most valuable lessons I have learned include the internalization of the discursive attitude towards architecture present at Harvard, and understanding, how the challenges of a given country’s construction industry are reflected in its architecture. These challenges are often responsible for at least as much of the unique features of the country’s architecture, as is the climate of the country. Harvard is a unique place in that, it collects together so many different nationalities, that one cannot help but gain a more profound understanding of one’s own biases. The school has shattered my euro-centric viewpoint, which I was completely unaware of before coming to America.
Has the current COVID pandemic affected your thinking about architectural spaces?
Definitely! I have simultaneously realized the power of architecture and the inherent futility within its means. Remote studies are a pale comparison to the real experience one has within the classrooms of Harvard GSD. It is not only about the people but also about the architecture of the school buildings that keeps one’s motivation high. The physically non-hierarchical virtual classrooms do little to convey the energy (or lack-thereof) of the students within it. The physical constraints of a space can serve to enhance this energy, as it builds up, reflecting from student to student and wall to wall. However, the problem is that creating such a space deliberately is very difficult. As I mentioned earlier with regard to atmosphere, architecture can only function as a catalyst for a feeling and not enforce any specific feeling. It is completely possible to go to a virtual classroom with a high-energy mindset and have a great experience, no matter where you are physically. Yet despite this apparent lack of control inherent to architectural design, the creation of atmospheric spaces remains the highest goal architecture can hope to reach in my mind. I hope that I can pursue my goals further, not only in academia but also in my architectural practice in Finland.
Interviewed March 2021