Conserve Wildlife: Applying Pallasmaa Insights on Rewilding Designs - Essay Example

?Applying Pallasmaa’s Insights on Rewilding Designs As human population grows at astonishing rates and as infrastructure is built at a rapid pace to support such growth, it is indeed the other species that have suffered the consequences. For every city or human settlement that expands, wildlife experiences the reduction of areas where it can continue to survive and thrive. Fortunately, for many decades already, people have become very conscious about the plight of wildlife animals. Although activities that adversely affect the natural habitat of such animals still continue, at least there is now opposition. Environmentalist groups have seen substantial gains in the struggle to legislate policies that would grant wildlife protection and territories as its natural habitat. However, recent studies have shown that the practice of establishing national parks and other protected areas meant to conserve wildlife have not really been beneficial. The reason behind this is that the design of the effort itself takes into consideration the interests of humans more than that of the animals, the supposed beneficiaries. Caroline Fraser’s article Rewilding North America provides a detailed discussion on the problem. It profoundly describes the inadequacies of the national park and protected area systems that exist in the United States in Canada. It also defines the challenges that confront conservationists and the governments of the two countries as they try to seek the most effective ways of protecting the remaining wildlife species in North America. Juhani Pallasmaa’s Architecture of the Senses, on the other hand, may be dealing with how architects tend to disregard the basic human senses as they try to create infrastructure for the use of people. However, in deriving the basic principles from the architectural theories pointed out in his book, it is clear that Fraser’s key concerns can be addressed by Pallasmaa’s insights. Pallasmaa’s perspectives are applicable in redesigning the current wildlife protection efforts being carried out. Rewilding should just take into consideration the natural animal behavior and the make the principal basis of the designs instead of what human beings desire. One clear reason why men have failed to come up with the appropriate solutions to problems is that they tend be myopic on their analysis. When the appreciation of a problem is one-sided or when it does not consider the other angles that may be just as important as that which have been treated, it is only expected that the solutions formulated are those that are bound to fail. In his discussion, Pallasmaa points out that architecture sets limits as to what space man can exclusively use. He explains that “as a consequence of (the) interdependence of space and time, the dialectics of external and internal space, physical and spiritual, material and mental, unconscious and conscious priorities concerning the senses as well as their relative roles and interactions, have an essential impact on the nature of the arts and architecture.” (Pallasmaa 284) This statement clearly describes that the process of creating a good architectural design is only possible if the architect actually touches base with all the information gathered by using the five senses. If he employs only one of the senses, he is sure to disregard the interdependence of things. It is the issue of interdependence that has also been forgotten when a number of biologists were not able to see the importance of connected ecosystems in order for wildlife to flourish under the most normal natural conditions. Fraser points out that “many biologists were quick to agree that when it comes to preserving ecosystems, large is better than small, connected is better than isolated, and whole is better than fragmented... some were resistant, arguing against a rush to judgment, suggesting that protected areas in the real worlds might prove vastly more complex, each with unique characteristics that might affect the outcome.” (115) In this statement, Fraser was referring to the fact that there are biologists now who have seen the benefits of bigger natural preserves that are connected to each other. However, even with this basically correct conclusion, she points out that there are still many other issues to that need to be studied further before coming up with a perfect solution. It is clear that both Pallasmaa and the biologists that Fraser was referring to saw the necessity of overcoming myopic perspectives of the use of space. Pallasmaa sees this possible if the architect uses the five senses while Fraser believes that biologists should dwell on the interdependence of ecosystems. Connectivity has always been the key in man’s effort to introduce the appropriate solution to problems, particularly when it comes to the utilization of space around him. In the case of architecture, connectivity is a concern as man tries to allocate space for his dwelling or workplace. In the case of conservation, the same concern is also tackled as man designates areas strictly meant for wildlife. Fraser wrote about the point raised by biologist Michael Soule. According to her, after the problem has been analyzed, which was that “protected areas were too small and too far apart” and that Soule “knew it was time to prescribe the remedy: restoring connectivity.” (Fraser 117) From a myopic hindsight, pockets of the protected areas would be enough for wildlife. However, upon learning how animals behave, it has become clear that asides from the necessity of creating larger protected ecosystems, these should also be connected with each other. This is also the principle that Pallasmaa is insisting on when he explained that feeling of loneliness evoked by certain architectural designs are caused by the lack of connection that is made possible by the use of all the senses. He said that “the growing experiences of alienation, detachment, and solitude in the technological world today, for instance, may be related with certain pathology of the senses.” (Pallasmaa 284) This statement obviously the articulates that inadequate or erratic used of the senses can result into the feeling of being disconnected, which is an immensely tragic thing for humans because their being inherently social. This problem of being not connected though is also caused by an issue in connectivity. If the architect fails to use his senses and connect with the subjects of his design, the people who would be using will also feel the alienation or the disconnection. Pallasmaa insists that the architect should connect with his human senses while Fraser describes the significance of biologists actually connecting with the instincts of animals. In designing structures for human use, it is very important that man takes into account the satisfaction of all five senses. The architect is not just an artist who creates a painting for visual gratification but also for other practical reasons. This is the same principle that can be applied when designing the natural habitat for wildlife man should also put himself in the place of the animals. In summing up a portion of his book, Pallasmaa stated that “architectural experience brings the world into a most intimate contact with the body.” (298) Pallasmaa clarifies that the architecture is where man attempts to put dimensions under his control and to serve his interest. However, in order to achieve this, man, the architect should really embrace the world with the use of his senses. He should not just consider himself as one with an eyesight, but one who has all the other senses that could be used to appreciate both space and structure allocated to him. Apparently, if man has to define and utilize space for the advantage of wildlife, he should not use his senses for this matter. Instead, he should take into account how animals would behave in reaction to man-made designs. This may require thinking out of the human mindset. Fraser writes that “biologists, for all their carefully calibrated qualifications, excel at this kind of startling bestial insight, stepping outside our species to see how we affect others.” (127) Fraser points out here that in order for man to understand the demands of wildlife, it must think not as humans but as animals who also need space in order to survive and thrive as distinct species. Once man upholds his being ‘superior’ specie, he would naturally the give credit more to his being a predator himself, one who survives at the expense of another. This mindset would naturally result to some concessions provided to wildlife but still not to the extent that that these are given ample space to flourish. However, if man begins to think of himself that he is just part of the animal kingdom, then he would certainly see the need for more viable ecosystems that take into consideration the natural behavior of the different species that occupy it. Before any product made by man, there is mindset or perspective. The quality of the product or the results of man’s actions are always reflective of such mindset. Oftentimes, this perspective of things is not even verbalized. However, the study of all the things that are said and done would naturally expose the mindset of the individual. Both Pallasmaa and Fraser basically discussed about the proper mindset that man should have in dealing with two issues. The difference though is that Pallasmaa encourages man to connect with himself as a total human, one with all the five senses, in order to determine which architectural design would serve his purpose. Fraser, on the other hand, wishes man to deny his humanness and instead acquire the mindset of a wild animal that may be threatened with extinction unless it finds a new habitat that is fit for living. Despite the difference though, the point is that man should connect first to things that are more basic and instinctive in order to appreciate of space and its use for the good of mankind and the rest of nature. In architecture, failure to do this would result in office buildings that may not encourage efficient work or in residences that do not feel like these are homes at all. In the field of establishing conservation areas, man may just end up allocating tracts of land for preserves that are not even enough for the number of species present or that are not appropriate for the survival of certain species. Apparently, mistakes are to be made if an objective appreciation of things is not achieved. In order for such objectivity to be achieved though, it is necessary for man to grasp his essence as a human and as an animal when it comes to the treatment of the non-human species. Works Cited Fraser, Caroline. “Rewilding North America.” Pallasmaa, Juhani. “Excerpts from the Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses.” Read More