144
so that we clearly perceive right angles, for example, despite
minimal deviations.
We become aware of this capacity for accommodating ir-
regularities in perception, for generating simplicity and regu-
larity through sensory activity, as a mode of psychic activity,
when we achieve recognition of a gestalt despite deviations
by actively ‘working it out’. In contrast, a flawless, perspective
gestalt remains lifeless. This active process of working out is
often experienced as an advantage.
In German, the verb gestalten means ‘to design’ (and the
English term is also borrowed in German). But a distinction
must be made between gestalt as design and the term gestalt
as used in Gestalt psychology and related theories of percep-
tion. When we recognize that the appearance of a building,
spatial structure, or urban texture is not the result of exter-
nal constraints, but instead follows a purposeful design (or
gestalt) intention, we experience this as a special quality
(> architecture), as a form of intentionality and valuation. A
reciprocal relation between the two terms does exist, how-
ever, to the extent that perception of a gestalt is fostered by an
incisive architectural design (or Gestaltung), one that may in
turn rely upon the laws of gestalt psychology.
Literature: Arnheim 1977/2009; Gosztonyi 1976; Seyler 2004Although architecture is mostly immobile, people habitually
read movement into unmoving built structures as their > form
character. Through such suggestive effects, certain movements
appear as the traits of the forms themselves, so to speak as
their forms of behaviour: elongated buildings stretch them-
selves out, round-bodied buildings seem to expand, some
buildings open themselves up, or seem to be oriented towards
a particular side, to turn towards other buildings, or to en-
gage in dialogue with them.
We experience such architectural forms as spatial ges-
tures when we feel addressed in relation to our own behav-Gesture, spatial