Question 7 ON AFFECT: Emotion / Change / Desire / Audience? When we visit and experience buildings, be they contemporary or historical, buildings of our own culture or those from quite different cultural backgrounds, there is a possibility though no guarantee that we will in some ways be affected by these buildings. The term affect has two common, and potentially interconnected, meanings. On a base level it may be defined as producing an effect or change in (the person experiencing the building), while at what might be termed (from an architectural perspective) a higher level, the term implies triggering feelings or emotions in or impressing the mind of the experiencer. While an intellectual impressing of the mind might automatically suggest a positive reaction, the notion of triggering emotions may be either positive or negative, different people experiencing the same building in quite different ways, thus receiving quite different stimuli and expressing quite different views from the perspective of liking or disliking the building, in whole or part. Utilising a range of sources to investigate the notion of what constitutes affect, you are asked to develop a sound critical analysis addressing the following issues: (i) is experiencing a building inherently individual and personal or does it rely upon extant agreements or assumptions among specific groups, sub-cultures, professions, etc? In either case, to what extent does the analysis, interpretation and response inevitably depend upon the experiencers prior knowledge, prior education, prior experience, prior expectations, and/or taste and how? (ii) given that positive responses to buildings are or so we assume desirable to architects, how do architects build into their designs qualities or spatial effects, etc, that will trigger positive emotions in their audience; and how do they know that such effects will work in the ways that they intend? and (iii) is, from an architects perspective, the audience for architecture already pre-established such that reactions, positive or negative, from architecturally illiterate people are irrelevant, with only those from the architecturally educated being taken seriously, since only they can offer intelligent and informed views?