Multisensory Landscapes: Theories and Methods 3658404132, 9783658404130

Table of contents :
Contents
Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, Research Fields, Methods—An Introduction
Abstract
References
Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Landscape Theory Basics
3 Acquisition of Multisensory Landscapes and Their Representations
4 Conclusion
References
The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes—An Update After Georg Simmel
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Simmel’s “Philosophy of Landscape” and Beyond
3 Florentine Landscapes
4 Conclusion
References
Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Hierarchy of senses and visual primacy
Hierarchization of the Senses
Criticism of Visual Primacy
3 Senses as Media with Specific Function: Multisensuality
4 Defense of the Visual Primacy
Landscape as Image
Vision as ‘Primus Inter Pares’ in the ‘Unity of the Senses’
The Visual Primate in Landscape Phenomenology—Some Hints
5 Conclusion and Outlook
References
Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Social Systems and Landscape
3 Psychological and Social Systems
4 Perception, Cognition, and Communication
5 Landscape as a Form
6 Conclusion
References
Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations, Phenomenological Approaches and Historical Developments of the ‘Multivillage Metropolis’
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Landscape-Theoretical Approaches – About Three Landscapes and a Neopragmatic Approach
3 Baton Rouge – Historical Approaches to Planlessness, Modernization, Multiple Villages, and the Search for a Center
4 ‘Hollywood South’ – Baton Rouge (Disguised) in Movies
5 An Experience of Baton Rouge Between History and Film
6 Conclusion
References
The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer Adventure Game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps”
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Landscape—Some Theoretical Preliminary Considerations
3 Functions of Landscape in the Game
4 The Game “Louisiana: the Secret of the Swamps”
5 The Acoustic-Visual Construction of Landscape in the Game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps”
6 Conclusion
References
From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure to Landscapes of Fear
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Theoretical Preliminary Considerations
On the Sensory Construction of Landscape in the Dynamics of the Three Levels of Landscape
From Landscapes of Aesthetic Displeasure to Ex-Sensory Landscapes of Anxiety
3 Empirical Results—Between Displeasing Physical Manifestations and Anxiety-Producing Ex-Sensory Radiation
4 Conclusion and Need for Further Research
References
Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 All Eyes on Me—How the Western Perspective Shifted
3 Smellscapes as Social Constructs
4 Conclusion
References
To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged?—A Multisensory Walk Through the Wilhelma Zoo
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Social Constructivism and Theme Worlds as Theoretical Framework
3 A Phenomenological Walk Through Wilhelma Zoo
4 Our Subjective Gain in Knowledge as Tourists
5 Conclusion and Outlook
References
Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place?—A Phenomenological Walk Through Altenahr After the Flood Disaster
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Social Constructivist Understanding of Landscape and Phenomenology
3 Landscape Access by Phenomenological Walk
4 A Phenomenological Walk Through Altenahr
Chronological Story
Reflection on the Multisensory Approach
5 Conclusion
References
Geospatial Data Literacy: Considering the Multisensory Perspective
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Official Geospatial Data
3 Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI)
4 (3D-)Objects from the Gaming Community
5 Geospatial Data Literacy in 3D Landscape Visualisation
6 Geospatial Data Literacy: The Multisensory Layer
References
Street-Food and Multisensorial Construction of Cityscapes
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 The Ubiquitous Momos
3 The Constricted Momo Makers
4 The Multiple Delhi(S)
5 Conclusion
References
Influence of Perceptual Experiences, Especially Sounds, on Forest Attractiveness
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Current State of Knowledge
Assessment of Physical and Social Forest Data
Multisensory and Auditory Forest Perception
3 Material and Methods
Qualitative Approach: Go-Along Interviews
Quantitative Approach: Forest Visitor Survey with Sound Measurements
4 Results
Go-Along Interviews
Forest Visitor Survey with Sound Measurements
5 Discussion
References
Fleeting Beauty and Constant Noise—Perception of the Urban Landscape (Using the Example of the Eastern Edge of the Rhine-Main Agglomeration)
Abstact
1 Spaces are not Pictures—On Evaluating Beyond the Visible
2 Local Recreation, Day-Trip Tourism and Conflicts in the Kinzig Valley
The Limits of Traditional Assessment Procedures
Working with Atmospheres?
3 On the Concept of Atmosphere and a Methodical Approach for its Assessment
The Concept of Atmosphere—Approach and Understanding
Two Approaches to Recording and Assessing Landscape Characteristics
“Atmosphere” as an Attempt at Multisensory Recording of Spaces
4 Multi-Sensing, Atmosphere and Environmental Justice
Walking as Multisensory Method
Environmental Justice in Landscapes Shaped by Infrastructure and Urban Sprawl
5 Summary and Outlook
References

Citation preview

RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft

Lara Koegst · Olaf Kühne ·  Dennis Edler Editors

Multisensory Landscapes Theories and Methods

RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft Series Editors Olaf Kühne, Forschungsbereich Geographie, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany Sebastian Kinder, Forschungsbereich Geographie, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany Olaf Schnur, Bereich Forschung, vhw – Bundesverband für Wohnen und Stadtentwicklung e.V., Berlin, Germany

RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft | SpaceAffairs: City – Region – Landscape Im Zuge des „spatial turns“ der Sozial- und Geisteswissenschaften hat sich die Zahl der wissenschaftlichen Forschungen in diesem Bereich deutlich erhöht. Mit der Reihe „RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft“ wird Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern ein Forum angeboten, innovative Ansätze der Anthropogeographie und sozialwissenschaftlichen Raumforschung zu präsentieren. Die Reihe orientiert sich an grundsätzlichen Fragen des gesellschaftlichen Raumverständnisses. Dabei ist es das Ziel, unterschiedliche Theorieansätze der anthropogeographischen und sozialwissenschaftlichen Stadt- und Regionalforschung zu integrieren. Räumliche Bezüge sollen dabei insbesondere auf mikro- und mesoskaliger Ebene liegen. Die Reihe umfasst theoretische sowie theoriegeleitete empirische Arbeiten. Dazu gehören Monographien und Sammelbände, aber auch Einführungen in Teilaspekte der stadt- und regionalbezogenen geographischen und sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschung. Ergänzend werden auch Tagungsbände und Qualifikationsarbeiten (Dissertationen, Habilitationsschriften) publiziert. Herausgegeben von Prof. Dr. Dr. Olaf Kühne, Universität Tübingen Prof. Dr. Sebastian Kinder, Universität Tübingen PD Dr. Olaf Schnur, Berlin In the course of the “spatial turn” of the social sciences and humanities, the number of scientific researches in this field has increased significantly. With the series “RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft” scientists are offered a forum to present innovative approaches in anthropogeography and social space research. The series focuses on fundamental questions of the social understanding of space. The aim is to integrate different theoretical approaches of anthropogeographical and social-scientific urban and regional research. Spatial references should be on a micro- and mesoscale level in particular. The series comprises theoretical and theory-based empirical work. These include monographs and anthologies, but also introductions to some aspects of urban and regional geographical and social science research. In addition, conference proceedings and qualification papers (dissertations, postdoctoral theses) are also published. Edited by Prof. Dr. Dr. Olaf Kühne, Universität Tübingen Prof. Dr. Sebastian Kinder, Universität Tübingen PD Dr. Olaf Schnur, Berlin

Lara Koegst · Olaf Kühne · Dennis Edler Editors

Multisensory Landscapes Theories and Methods

Editors Lara Koegst Universität Tübingen Tübingen, Germany

Olaf Kühne Universität Tübingen Tübingen, Germany

Dennis Edler Ruhr-Universität Bochum Bochum, Germany

ISSN 2625-6991 ISSN 2625-7009  (electronic) RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft ISBN 978-3-658-40413-0 ISBN 978-3-658-40414-7  (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer VS imprint is published by the registered company Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature. The registered company address is: Abraham-Lincoln-Str. 46, 65189 Wiesbaden, Germany

Contents

Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, Research Fields, Methods—An Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Olaf Kühne, Lara Koegst and Dennis Edler

1

Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Olaf Kühne, Lara Koegst and Dennis Edler The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes—An Update After Georg Simmel. . . . 31 Olaf Kühne Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception. . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Karsten Berr Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Robert Lämmchen Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations, Phenomenological Approaches and Historical Developments of the ‘Multivillage Metropolis’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Lara Koegst and Olaf Kühne The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer Adventure Game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 Olaf Kühne and Lara Koegst From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure to Landscapes of Fear. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Olaf Kühne, Karsten Berr, Florian Weber and Julia Dittel Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 Sven Endreß

v

vi

Contents

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged?—A Multisensory Walk Through the Wilhelma Zoo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 Sven Gerstlauer and Melanie Mahler Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place?—A Phenomenological Walk Through Altenahr After the Flood Disaster. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 Julia Deborah Fischer and Melanie Mahler Geospatial Data Literacy: Considering the Multisensory Perspective . . . . . . . . . 227 Dennis Edler and Frank Dickmann Street-Food and Multisensorial Construction of Cityscapes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 Nipesh Palat Narayanan Influence of Perceptual Experiences, Especially Sounds, on Forest Attractiveness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 K.Tessa Hegetschweiler, Elisabeth Maidl, Jean-Marc Wunderli, Christopher B. Stride, Christoph Fischer, Lea Wunderli, Hannes Weinbrenner, Jasmin Breithut and Marcel Hunziker Fleeting Beauty and Constant Noise—Perception of the Urban Landscape (Using the Example of the Eastern Edge of the Rhine-Main Agglomeration) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 Jörg Dettmar, Laura Henneke and Sandra Sieber

Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, Research Fields, Methods—An Introduction Olaf Kühne, Lara Koegst and Dennis Edler

Abstract

This anthology is dedicated to current developments in landscape research that is sensitive to multisensory stimuli. In a scientific tradition that was concerned with the generation of unambiguity and quantifiability, the rather qualitative characterization of non-visual stimuli ran counter to the logic of research. Only with the rise of constructivist and more-than-representational perspectives on landscape and the interweaving of humans in it, a facilitated access to non-visual parts of landscape became easier. Accordingly, non-visual aspects of landscape can hardly be brought to a standardized representation; accordingly, innovative and experimental (cartographic) forms of representation dominate. In this respect, research and representation of the multisensuality of landscape are suited to stimulate reflection on the contingency of the world and its representations.

O. Kühne (*) · L. Koegst  Geographisches Institut, Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] L. Koegst e-mail: [email protected] D. Edler  Geographisches Institut, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_1

1

2

O. Kühne et al. Keywords

Multisensory · Soundscapes · Smellscapes · More than representational theories ·  Landscape

With increasing transformation of material spaces, for instance through the physical manifestation of the energy transition, but also through transformations of urban development, the extraction of mineral or biotic raw materials, the increasingly perceptible consequences of anthropogenic global warming, etc., the topic of landscape is increasingly becoming the focus of public and scientific discussions. These increasing changes of the physical space—interpreted as landscape—are in turn coupled back with an increasing sensitivity of large parts of society for landscape (especially native, aesthetic and ecological) issues (among many: Berr et al. 2022; Gobster et al. 2007; Hunziker 1995; Kühne 2018a, b; Linke 2017, 2020; Schönwald 2017; Weber et al. 2018). At the same time, understandings of landscape are becoming increasingly differentiated; this does not only concern the already individual understanding of homeland references or the technically differentiated expert construction of landscape, but also commonsense understandings of landscape, which are increasingly almost autopoietically (in the sense of Luhmann 1984) regulated communication bubbles interpretations and evaluations are reproduced (Jenal et al. 2021; Kühne et al. 2021; Kühne and Koegst 2023a). The change in the social construction—especially the expert one—of landscape, however, takes place beyond that in an increasing consideration of non-visual stimuli. Georg Simmel in his ground-breaking essay on the “Philosophy of Landscape” in 1913 (Simmel 2019) was still able to understand the emergence of landscape in analogy to the emergence of a painting, namely that landscape is projected into a material space. In current landscape research, however, the approach is gaining importance that other senses, in short the sense of hearing, but also the sense of smell, are important components of the individual, but also social construction of landscape (Edler and Kühne 2022a; Kühne and Edler 2022). In other words: the also independently conceived smellscapes and soundscapes become integral parts of landscape, which can also be experienced tactilely and gustatorily (among many: Aletta et al. 2016; Cerwén 2016; Coensel et al. 2006; Henshaw 2014; Porteous 1985; Winkler 2005). Especially in the synesthetic experience of landscape, proprioceptive and vestibular systems are also important, namely in the form of being in physical space and moving in it (Endreß 2021, 2022b; Ljunge 2013; Rebay-Salisbury 2013; Wylie 2005). That non-visually perceptible aspects to landscape have been withdrawn from consideration in the course of modernizing science in general and landscape-related sciences in particular can be placed in the context of the transition from an essentialist to a positivist paradigm (see in this context, inter alia: Eisel 2001, 2009; Kühne 2019a, 2021; Winchester et al. 2003; Wylie 2007). The visually perceptible has the advantage that it can be easily quantified (to a large extent), something in wavelengths of light, it is transform-

Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, Research Fields, Methods …

3

able into (also) visual representations, such as maps, with comparatively little problem, finally, no translation effort from another sensory perception into visual representations is necessary, as in the case of representations of smells or sounds (see on this: Edler et al. 2019; McLean 2020; Siepmann et al. 2020). The quantifiability of non-visual stimuli is quite different: noise can be (partially) quantified with sound pressure and frequency, but this leads to a decomplexization of noise to noise, i.e. the quantitative element of noise is banished from the realm of the representable. This becomes even more obvious with odors, whose quantifiability is even lower, the subjective experience has an almost dominant influence (Bischoff 2005, 2007; Edler and Kühne 2019; Winkler 2006 [1995]). A first step towards the integration for the investigation of non-visually perceptible components of landscape was made with the gain of importance of constructivist, especially social constructivist approaches. Here, the focus is on questions about the relationship between individual sensory perceptions and social patterns of interpretation, categorization, and valuation; individual interpretations, categorizations, and valuations are even capable of altering socially shared patterns; and how different sensory perceptions relate to each other (see, for example: Endreß 2022a; Kaußen 2021; Kühne 2022; Münderlein 2021; Raab 1998, 2001). While positivist approaches are especially concerned with the material dimension of landscape, constructivist approaches are especially concerned with social processes or the influences of social constructions on individual ones (and to some extent vice versa). In this respect, constructivist approaches to landscape have been said to lack access to the material dimension of the world (substituting: Holmén 1995). The gain in importance of more-than-representational theories means the attempt to integrate the material, individual, and social dimensions, such as addressing the question of what social meaning material objects have (in assemblage theory; see e.g. Anderson and McFarlane 2011; Mattissek and Wiertz 2014; Miggelbrink 2014; Müller 2015) or actor-network theory (ANT), which describes the world in terms of networks of human and non-human actants. (Latour 1997; Passoth 2006; Ruming 2009). In this context, one can also interpret a renaissance of the phenomenological turn to spaces, in which the experience of the world again comes to the forefront of interest (Hasse 2017; Janich 1993; Kühne 2019b; Schmitz 1980; Tilley 1997, 2008; Wylie 2019). The neo-pragmatic approach to the world can also be placed in this context. Unlike the other more-thanrepresentational approaches, however, it does not attempt to integrate different aspects of the world into one theory, but rather combines theories (but also methods, data, researcher perspectives, forms of representation, and perspectives of people outside of scientific discourse) as a meta-theory, depending on the question and the addressee of the investigation. This is connected with the goal of producing a suitable re-description of the world (Baltzer 2001; Kühne 2018c; Kühne and Jenal 2020; Müller 2021; Rorty 1997, 1998). Especially with the more-than-representational theories of and about landscape, an access to multisensory perceptible dimensions of landscape is facilitated. They distance themselves from the attempt to capture, model and represent landscape solely quantitatively, or integrate it into a metatheoretical (neopragmatic) framework. If nothing else,

4

O. Kühne et al.

this signifies a renaissance of integrating non-visual aspects into spatial research in general, and landscape research in particular. The potential of more-than-representational theories for landscape research that is not limited to visual aspects is also evident in this anthology. The individual contributions of the anthology are roughly ordered according to the proportions of theoretical considerations and the presentation of empirically obtained results, in order to initially set a general theoretical framework that becomes increasingly concrete on the basis of empirical results. Following this logic, the anthology starts with an overview of ‘Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscape’ by Olaf Kühne et al. (2023b). This provides an overview of the development of landscape research and the changing importance of multisensory approaches to it, and which theories commonly used in landscape research show which different potentials for multisensory integration. In his essay ‘The multisensory Florentine landscapes—an update after Georg Simmel’, Olaf Kühne (2023) then illustrates the way in which the discussion of landscape theory has changed since Georg Simmel’s groundbreaking essay ‘Philosophie der Landschaft’ (Philosophy of Landscape) from 1913—using the example of Florence, which was also treated by Simmel, the importance of more-than-visual aspects of landscape is highlighted in particular. In his essay ‘Multisensuality versus visual primacy of landscape perception’ Karsten Berr (2023) points out the limits of multisensory landscape construction by emphasizing a primacy of the visual over the other senses in relation to landscape research—without, however, fundamentally denying their importance. Contrary to the general tendency in this anthology to theoretically rely on more-than-representational approaches, Robert Lämmchen’s (2023) contribution ‘Multisensory landscape—theories, research fields, methods’ is based on Niklas Luhmann’s autopoietic systems theory. He traces the three steps of processing environmental stimuli in the physical system, the construction of landscape in the mental system and the linguistic version of corresponding information. Following this, Lara Koegst and Olaf Kühne (2023) in their contribution ‘Moving Baton Rouge—from cinematic representations, phenomenological approaches and historical developments of the ‘multivillage metropolis’’ approach the capital of Louisiana using the meta-theoretical approach of neopragmatism as well as the three landscapes approach by relating results of research obtained from positivist, social constructivist and phenomenological perspectives. With recourse to the theory of the three landscapes, Olaf Kühne and Lara Koegst (2023b) deal with the question of the medial construction of landscape, here using the example of a computer game, by paying particular attention to the combination of visual and acoustic game elements (The multisensory construction of landscape—the computer adventure game ‘Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps’). Olaf Kühne et al. (2023) go beyond the sensory in their contribution ‘From multisensory to ex-sensory—from landscapes of displeasure to landscapes of fear’ when they compare—based on the theory of three landscapes—the differentiated social construction of landscape in relation to changes in physical spaces (such as the expansion of renewable energy generation and transmission facilities) with current empirical results on interpretations, valuations and categorizations in relation to the expansion of

Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, Research Fields, Methods …

5

the 5G network. In his contribution ‘Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes’, Sven Endreß (2023) deals with the history of smellscapes and their exploration in order to reflect on them against the background of a social constructivist theoretical framework. The following two essays are based on a phenomenological approach to landscape: First, Melanie Mahler and Sven Gerstlauer (2023) approach landscape in their contribution ‘To what extent are zoo landscapes staged?—A touristic walk through the Wilhelma Zoo’, they consciously approach landscape interpretations of staged material spaces. JuliaDeborah Fischer and Melanie Mahler (2023) devote themselves to the experience of a material space that was subjected to a material destructuring as a result of a ‘natural disaster’, but also to a re-connotation in relation to social ideas of landscape (‘Multisensory approaches to a disaster place?—A Phenomenological Walk through Altenahr after the Flood Disaster’). In the following text, ‘Geospatial Data Literacy: Considering the Multisensory Perspective’, Dennis Edler and Frank Dickmann (2023) critically examine the possibilities and challenges of using extensive geospatial data resources to create (especially virtual) cartographic representations. In his contribution ‘Street-food and multisensorial construction of cityscapes’, Nipesh Palat Narayanan (2023) addresses a dimension of landscape that is non-visual but otherwise has a marginal importance in this anthology as well: the gustatory dimension, which is here particularly associated with acoustic and olfactory. The article “Influence of perceptual experiences, especially sounds, on forest attractiveness” by K. Tessa Hegetschweiler et al. (2023) deals with soundscapes in Swiss forests based on a qualitative and quantitative social science approach. Jörg Dettmar et al. (2023) go beyond the recording of soundscapes—here in the context of atmospheres—in their contribution “Fleeting Beauty and Constant Noise—Perception of the Urban Landscape (using the Example of the Eastern Edge of the Rhine-Main Agglomeration)” when they deal with their planning relevance and plannability. The essays collected in this anthology show current trends of landscape research that are sensitive to multisensory approaches: With regard to theoretical attention, more-thanrepresentational approaches show an overrepresented importance for landscape research as a whole, although classical representational approaches are also represented. According to the accessibility to non-visually accessible contents of the world and the resulting theoretical basic orientation of the investigations, qualitative research strategies dominate, although attempts are also made to open up the field quantitatively. Regarding the sensory approach, smellscapes and soundscapes dominate, tactile and gustatory approaches are of rather marginal importance. It also becomes clear that access to landscape by means of the proprioceptive and vestibular systems is widespread, but explicitly not addressed. In multisensory landscape research, access to material objects and object constellations that are synthesized into ‘landscape’ is mostly done through movements in material space (such as phenomenological walks, smellwalks, go along interviews), but this movement seems to be considered so ‘normal’ that no reflexive attention is given to the sensory perceptions that constitutively underlie it. Compared to the representation of visually perceived contents of the world, the representation of non-visual stimuli usually involves a translation into visual representations. The dominance of little quantifiable

6

O. Kühne et al.

information further contributes to the difficulty of developing and enforcing standardized (especially) cartographic representations, which contributes to the dominance of innovative, often experimental cartographic representations (Dodt et al. 2017). It is precisely these experimental and innovative cartographic representations that clarify the contingency of the world on the one hand, but also its interpretation, by making clear how much (parts of) the world elude efforts at unification. Thus, they encourage reflection on the contingency of the world and its cartographic representability, which illustrates their socially productive potential with regard to the development of suitable world interpretations (Edler and Kühne 2022b; Kühne and Koegst 2022).

References Aletta, F., Kang, J., & Axelsson, Ö. (2016). Soundscape descriptors and a conceptual framework for developing predictive soundscape models. Landscape and Urban Planning, 149, (65–74). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.02.001. Anderson, B., & McFarlane, C. (2011). Assemblage and geography. Area, 43, (2, 124–127). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2011.01004.x. Baltzer, U. (2001). Rorty und die Erneuerung des Pragmatismus. In T. Tietz, & U. Schäfer (Eds.), Hinter den Spiegeln. Beiträge zur Philosophie Richard Rortys mit Erwiderungen von Richard Rorty (pp. 21–48). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Berr, K. (2023). Multisensuality versus visual primacy of landscape perception. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Berr, K., Jenal, C., Koegst, L., & Kühne, O. (2022). Noch mehr Sand im Getriebe? Kommunikations- und Interaktionsprozesse zwischen Landes- und Regionalplanung, Politik und Unternehmen der Gesteinsindustrie (RaumFragen – Stadt – Region – Landschaft). Wiesbaden: VS Springer. Bischoff, W. (2005). Nicht-visuelle Dimensionen des Städtischen: olfaktorische Wahrnehmung in Frankfurt am Main, dargestellt an zwei Einzelstudien zum Frankfurter Westend und Ostend. (Dissertation, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität). Frankfurt (Main). Bischoff, W. (2007). „Korrespondierende Orte“ – Zum Erscheinen olfaktorischer Stadtlandschaften. In C. Berndt, & R. Pütz (Eds.), Kulturelle Geographien. Zur Beschäftigung mit Raum und Ort nach dem Cultural Turn (pp. 189–212). Bielefeld: transcript. Cerwén, G. (2016). Urban soundscapes: a quasi-experiment in landscape architecture. Landscape Research, 41, (5, 481–494). https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2015.1117062. Coensel, B. de, Botteldooren, D., & Muer, T. de. (2006). The temporal structure of urban soundscapes. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 292, (1–2, 105–123). Dettmar, J., Henneke, L., & Sieber, S. (2023). Fleeting Beauty and Constant Noise – Perception of the Urban Landscape (using the Example of the Eastern Edge of the Rhine-Main Agglomeration). In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Dodt, J., Bestgen, A.-K., & Edler, D. (2017). Ansätze der Erfassung und kartographischen Präsentation der olfaktorischen Dimension. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 67, (5, 245–256). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03545321. Edler, D., & Dickmann, F. (2023). Geospatial Data Literacy: Considering the Multisensory Perspective. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories,

Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, Research Fields, Methods …

7

research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2019). Nicht-visuelle Landschaften. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 599–612). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2022a). Aesthetics and Cartography: Post-Critical Reflections on Deviance in and of Representations. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 11, (10). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi11100526. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2022b). Deviant Cartographies: A Contribution to Post-critical Cartography. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, (1–14). https://doi. org/10.1007/s42489-022-00110-w. Edler, D., Kühne, O., Keil, J., & Dickmann, F. (2019). Audiovisual Cartography: Established and New Multimedia Approaches to Represent Soundscapes. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 69, (5–17). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-019-00004-4. Eisel, U. (2001). Angst vor der Landschaft: Ein wissenschaftlicher Essay. Erdkunde, 55, (2, 159– 171). Eisel, U. (2009). Landschaft und Gesellschaft. Räumliches Denken im Visier (Raumproduktionen: Theorie und gesellschaftliche Praxis, Bd. 5). Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot. Endreß, S. (2021). Beton, Parfüm, Fastfood – Geruchslandschaften. Phänomenologische Forschungsergebnisse eines Smellwalkes. Stadt+Grün, (6, 25–31). Endreß, S. (2022a). Die soziale Konstruktion von Geruchslandschaften. Eine explorative Untersuchung der weihnachtlichen Geruchslandschaft. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Endreß, S. (2022b). Die soziale Konstruktion von Geruchslandschaften. Eine explorative Untersuchung der weihnachtlichen Geruchslandschaft (Springer eBook Collection, 1st ed. 2022). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden; Imprint Springer VS. Endreß, S. (2023). Multisensory Landscapes – Smellscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Fischer, J., & Mahler, M. (2023). Multisensory approaches to a disaster place? – A Phenomenological Walk through Altenahr after the Flood Disaster. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Gerstlauer, S., & Mahler, M. (2023). To what extent are zoo landscapes staged? – A multisensory walk through the Wilhelma Zoo. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Gobster, P. H., Nassauer, J. I., Daniel, T. C., & Fry, G. (2007). The shared landscape. What does aesthetics have to do with ecology? Landscape Ecology, 22, (7, 959–972). https://doi. org/10.1007/s10980-007-9110-x. Hasse, J. (2017). Die Abwesenheit der Phänomenologie in der deutschen Humangeographie. Geographica Helvetica, 72, (3, 351–360). https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-72-351-2017. Hegetschweiler, K. T., Maidl, E., Wunderli, J.-M., Stride, C. B., Fischer, C., Wunderli, L., et al. (2023). Influence of perceptual experiences, especially sounds, on forest attractiveness. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Henshaw, V. (2014). Urban Smellscapes. Understanding and designing city smell environments. New York: Routledge. Holmén, H. (1995). What’s new and What’s Regional in the ‘New Regional Geography’? Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 77, (1, 47–63). https://doi.org/10.1080/0435368 4.1995.11879680.

8

O. Kühne et al.

Hunziker, M. (1995). The spontaneous reafforestation in abandoned agricultural lands: perception and aesthetic assessment by locals and tourists. Landscape and Urban Planning, 31, (1–3, 399– 410). https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(95)93251-J. Janich, P. (1993). Gestaltung und Sensibilität. Zum Verhältnis von Konstruktivismus und Neuer Phänomenologie. In M. Großheim, & H.-J. Waschkies (Eds.), Rehabilitierung des Subjektiven. Bonn: Bouvier. Jenal, C., Endreß, S., Kühne, O., & Zylka, C. (2021). Technological Transformation Processes and Resistance – On the Conflict Potential of 5G Using the Example of 5G Network Expansion in Germany. Sustainability, 13, (24, 1–21). https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413550. Kaußen, L. (2021). Die Wahrnehmung von Landschaft in sozialen Medien. Eine Analyse von nutzergenerierten Inhalten. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Koegst, L., & Kühne, O. (2023). Moving Baton Rouge – from cinematic representations, phenomenological approaches and historical developments of the ‘multivillage Metropolis’. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O. (2018a). Landscape and Power in Geographical Space as a Social-Aesthetic Construct. Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing. Kühne, O. (2018b). Landschaft und Wandel. Zur Veränderlichkeit von Wahrnehmungen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2018c). Reboot „Regionale Geographie“ – Ansätze einer neopragmatischen Rekonfiguration „horizontaler Geographien“. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (2, 101–121). Kühne, O. (2019a). Landscape Theories. A Brief Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019b). Phänomenologische Landschaftsforschung. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 135–144). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2021). Landschaftstheorie und Landschaftspraxis. Eine Einführung aus sozialkonstruktivistischer Perspektive (3., aktualisierte und überarbeitete Auflage). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2022). Foodscapes – a Neopragmatic Redescription. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, (online first, 1–21). https://doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2022-0016. Kühne, O. (2023). The multisensory Florentine landscapes – an update after Georg Simmel. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., & Edler, D. (2022). Georg Simmel Goes Virtual. From ‘Philosophy of Landscape’ to the Possibilities of Virtual Reality in Landscape Research. Societies, 12, (5, 122). https://doi. org/10.3390/soc12050122. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2020). Baton Rouge – The Multivillage Metropolis. A Neopragmatic Landscape Biographical Approach on Spatial Pastiches, Hybridization, and Differentiation. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2022). Cartographic Representations of Coastal Land Loss in Louisiana. An Investigation Based on Deviant Cartographies. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 2022, (4, 1–12). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-022-00120-8. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023a). Land Loss in Louisiana. A Neopragmatic Redescription. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023b). The multisensory construction of landscape – the computer adventure game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps”. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., Zimmer, M.-L., & Schäffauer, G. (2021). “… Inconceivable, Unrealistic and Inhumane”. Internet Communication on the Flood Disaster in West Germany of July 2021

Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, Research Fields, Methods …

9

between Conspiracy Theories and Moralization – A Neopragmatic Explorative Study. Sustainability, 13, (20, 1–23). https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011427. Kühne, O., Berr, K., Weber, F., & Dittel, J. (2023). From multisensory to ex-sensory – from landscapes of displeasure to landscapes of fear. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Lämmchen, R. (2023). Observing landscape. A systems theoretical approach. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Latour, B. (1997). The Trouble with Actor-Network Theory. Soziale Welt – Zeitschrift für Sozialwissenschaftliche Forschung, 47, (369–381). Linke, S. (2017). Neue Landschaften und ästhetische Akzeptanzprobleme. In O. Kühne, H. Megerle, & F. Weber (Eds.), Landschaftsästhetik und Landschaftswandel (RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, pp. 87–104). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Linke, S. (2020). Der Wandel landschaftsästhetischer Vorstellungen. In R. Duttmann, O. Kühne, & F. Weber (Eds.), Landschaft als Prozess (pp. 135–153). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Ljunge, M. (2013). Beyond ‘the Phenomenological Walk’: Perspectives on the Experience of Images. Norwegian Archaeological Review, 46, (2, 139–158). https://doi.org/10.1080/0029365 2.2013.821160. Luhmann, N. (1984). Soziale Systeme. Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Mattissek, A., & Wiertz, T. (2014). Materialität und Macht im Spiegel der Assemblage-Theorie: Erkundungen am Beispiel der Waldpolitik in Thailand. Geographica Helvetica, 69, (3, 157– 169). McLean, K. (2020). Temporalities of the Smellscape: Creative Mapping as Visual Representation. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 27–245). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Miggelbrink, J. (2014). Diskurs, Machttechnik, Assemblage. Neue Impulse für eine regionalgeographische Forschung. Geographische Zeitschrift, 102, (1, 25–40). Müller, M. (2015). Assemblages and Actor-networks: Rethinking Socio-material Power, Politics and Space. Geography Compass, 9, (1, 27–41). https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12192. Müller, M. (2021). Rorty lesen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Münderlein, D. (2021). Macht Landschaft glücklich. Ermittlung von landschaftsbezogenem Wohlbefinden und Erholung für die räumliche Planung (Springer eBook Collection, 1st ed. 2021). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden; Imprint Springer VS. Palat Narayanan, N. (2023). Street-food and multisensorial construction of cityscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Passoth, J.-H. (2006). Moderne, Postmoderne, Amoderne – Natur und Gesellschaft bei Bruno Latour. In M. Voss, & B. Peuker (Eds.), Verschwindet die Natur? Die Akteur-Netzwerk-Theorie in der umweltsoziologischen Diskussion (pp. 37–52). Bielefeld: transcript. Porteous, J. D. (1985). Smellscape. Progress in Physical Geography, 9, (3, 356–378). https://doi. org/10.1177/030913338500900303. Raab, J. (1998). Die soziale Konstruktion olfaktorischer Wahrnehmung. Eine Soziologie des Geruchs. http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/handle/123456789/11429/260_1. pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed: 20 December 2018.

10

O. Kühne et al.

Raab, J. (2001). Soziologie des Geruchs. Über die soziale Konstruktion olfaktorischer Wahrnehmung. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft. Rebay-Salisbury, K. (2013). Phänomenologie und Landschaft: der menschliche Körper in Bewegung. In R. Karl, & J. Leskovar (Eds.), Interpretierte Eisenzeiten. Fallstudien, Methoden, Theorie: Tagungsbeträge der 5. Linzer Gespräche zur interpretativen Eisenzeitarchäologie (Studien zur Kulturgeschichte von Oberösterreich, Folge 37, pp. 61–70). Linz: Oberösterreichisches Landesmuseum. Rorty, R. (1997). Contingency, irony, and solidarity (Reprint). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rorty, R. (1998). The Contingency of Language. In M. F. Bernard-Donals, & R. R. Glejzer (Eds.), Rhetoric in an antifoundational World. Language, culture, and pedagogy (pp. 65–85). New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. Ruming, K. (2009). Following the Actors: mobilising an actor-network theory methodology in geography. Australian Geographer, 40, (4, 451–469). https://doi. org/10.1080/00049180903312653. Schmitz, H. (1980). Neue Phänomenologie. Bonn: Bouvier. Schönwald, A. (2017). Ästhetik des Hybriden. Mehr Bedeutungsoffenheit für Landschaften durch Hybridisierungen. In O. Kühne, H. Megerle, & F. Weber (Eds.), Landschaftsästhetik und Landschaftswandel (RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, pp. 161–175). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Siepmann, N., Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2020). Soundscapes in Cartographic Media. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 247– 263). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Simmel, G. (2019). Philosophie der Landschaft. In Andreas Mahler (Ed.), Philosophie der Landschaft. Ästhetik der Alpen, Rom, Florenz, Venedig (3rd ed., pp. 7–23). Stühlingen an der Wutach: Mahler Verlag. Tilley, C. (1997). A phenomenology of landscape. Places, paths and monuments (Explorations in anthropology). Oxford: Berg. Tilley, C. Y. (2008). Body and image. Explorations in landscape phenomenology 2 (Explorations in Landscape Phenomenology 2). Walnut Creek, Calif: Left Coast Press. Weber, F., Kühne, O., Jenal, C., Aschenbrand, E., & Artuković, A. (2018). Sand im Getriebe. Aushandlungsprozesse um die Gewinnung mineralischer Rohstoffe aus konflikttheoretischer Perspektive nach Ralf Dahrendorf. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Winchester, H. P. M., Kong, L., & Dunn, K. (2003). Landscapes. Ways of imagining the world. London: Routledge. Winkler, J. (2005). Raumzeitphänomen Klanglandschaften. In V. Denzer, J. Hasse, K.-D. Kleefeld, & U. Recker (Eds.), Kulturlandschaft. Wahrnehmung – Inventarisation – regionale Beispiele (Kulturlandschaft, vol. 14, pp. 77–88). Bonn: Habelt. Winkler, J. (2006 [1995]). Klanglandschaften. Untersuchungen zur Konstitution der klanglichen Umwelt in der Wahrnehmungskultur ländlicher Orte in der Schweiz. Basel: Akroama. Wylie, J. (2005). A single day’s walking: narrating self and landscape on the South West Coast Path. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 30, (2, 234–247). https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2005.00163.x. Wylie, J. (2007). Landscape. Abingdon: Routledge. Wylie, J. (2019). Landscape and phenomenology. In P. Howard, I. Thompson, E. Waterton, & M. Atha (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Landscape Studies (2nd ed., pp. 127–138). London: Routledge.

Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, Research Fields, Methods …

11

Dr. Dr. Olaf Kühne  is Professor of Urban and Regional Development at the Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen. MA Lara Koegst  is a research associate and doctoral candidate in the Urban and Regional Development Group at Eberhard Karls University in Tübingen. Dr. Dennis Edler  is Senior Lecturer in the Institute of Geography at Ruhr-University Bochum (RUB). His research and teaching activities refer to Multimedia Cartography, Cognitive Visualization and Geospatial Data Infrastructures. [email protected]

Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes Olaf Kühne, Lara Koegst and Dennis Edler

Abstract

The present contribution has two focal points: On the one hand it deals with landscape-theoretical basics, on the other hand with the capture and representation of non-visual stimuli. Starting from the theory of the three landscapes, different current landscape theories are addressed. In the wake of Karl Popper’s Three Worlds Theory, Landscape 3 encompasses the socially shared patterns of interpretation, valuation and categorization of landscape, Landscape 2 the individual conceptions and experiences of landscape, and Landscape 1 those objects and constellations of objects that can be synthesized into ‘landscape’ according to Landscape 3. Positivism, which is still widespread in landscape research, focuses strongly on landscape 1 and its measurable, weighable, and countable parts, which is why non-visual parts of landscapes are not very present within its framing. This is again the case in phenomenology, which demands a reference of landscape 2 and 1 with all senses. Between these poles, the other landscape theories settle. The acquisition of non-visual stimuli of landscape can—within positivist framing—be reduced to measurable quantities (such as sound

O. Kühne (*) · L. Koegst  Geographisches Institut, Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] L. Koegst e-mail: [email protected] D. Edler  Geographisches Institut, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_2

13

14

O. Kühne et al.

pressure). Within phenomenological framing, on the other hand, the focus is put on the individual experience. If classical cartographic forms of representation (such as isolines) are used in the representation of the former surveys, creative, artistic representations dominate in the latter. Keywords

Multisensory · Horizontal geographies · Regional theory · Three worlds theory · Landscape

geography · Three

landscapes

1 Introduction In landscape research, a long tradition of focusing on visual stimuli can be identified. The reasons for this are manifold; first, visual stimuli predominate in the perception of the world external to consciousness; second, visual stimuli are easier to quantify than, for example, sounds, which, in addition to their quantitative aspects such as sound frequency and loudness, also contain qualitative aspects; third, the construction of material spaces as landscapes springs not least from a transfer of aesthetic patterns from painting, as not least Georg Simmel pointed out in 1913 in his classic work of the “Philosophy of Landscape” (Simmel 2019). Accordingly, the preoccupation with non-visual stimuli in geography became a marginal phenomenon in the course of efforts to quantify (e.g., by Granö 1997 [1929]; Lehmann 1973). Despite this optical fixation in the individual and social construction of landscape, non-visual stimuli have—especially for people without expert-like special knowledge acquired in a relevant specialized study—definitely a greater importance, especially in the emergence of homeland references olfactory and acoustic stimuli are part of the emergence of landscape, but also gustatory (Kühne 2018c; Kühne and Spellerberg 2010). Also the bodily experience of spaces in the form of atmospheres can hardly be reduced to optical stimuli alone (Böhme 1995; Hasse 2012; Kazig 2007; Thibaud 2003). In his foundational monograph on “Sensuous Geographies. Body, Sense and Place” Rodaway (1994) points out that all senses or their interaction contribute to an orientation in space as well as to the development of an awareness of spatial relationships, which is supported not least by findings from studies of spatial cognition research (e.g., Lammert-Siepmann et al. 2017). Multisensory spatial information also enables a more comprehensive interpretation and evaluation of concrete places and physical spaces. This offers the possibility of a more complete geographic synthesis and experience of landscapes (Edler and Kühne 2019). Especially for the synaesthetic as well as emotional experience of places and spaces, non-visual stimuli have an outstanding relevance (Tuan 1974; Tuan 1989; Winkler 2006 [1995]; in this volume: Berr 2023). From this it becomes clear that the relationship between human beings and space understood as landscape is very complex. It arises, first, in the different relations between individual consciousness (according to Karl Popper: World 2) and the material world (as

Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes

15

World 1), between individual consciousness (as World 2) and social and cultural contents (World 3; Kühne 2018a; Popper 1979; Popper and Eccles 1977). Secondly, it also grasps the human being as a bodily being in the world, which has a share in the material world, but also in the world of social and cultural contents, connected in an individual consciousness. Thirdly, landscape—especially in the German-speaking world—is a concept which, in its history of development reaching back to the Middle Ages, has created a large “semantic court” (Hard 1969, p. 10) of “associations, emotions, evocations” (Hard 2002, p. 178). Fourth, landscape is ascribed very different aesthetic qualities. The consequence of these aesthetic and ontological complexities are epistemological complexities, because landscape, fifthly, cannot be framed in its differentiatedness by a single theoretical access. After this introduction, we will first deal with the differentiated nature of theoretical framings before going into more detail about multisensory landscapes and their representations. Following this, in the conclusion, we will synthesize what has been presented and relate it to current research questions.

2 Landscape Theory Basics Recent decades have seen an increase in the development of theoretical approaches to landscape and meta-theoretical reflection on different landscape theories, including their relationships to each other. This is also documented in numerous survey works, also in different languages (see e.g. Bourassa 1991; D’Angelo 2021; Howard et al. 2019; Kühne et al. 2019; Kühne 2019, 2021b; Roger 1995; Winchester et al. 2003; Wylie 2007; in this volume also: Kühne et al. 2023), insofar we leave it at this point with a brief introduction to the different theoretical approaches, which serves to clarify their relevance for the topic of multisensory and to be able to place the contributions of the anthology in the theoretical discussion. Before we address each of the basic landscape theoretical positions, we will lay out an analytical framework to help us classify each theory. We do this by following Karl Popper’s aforementioned theory of the Three Worlds (Popper and Eccles 1977) by referring to the landscape-related contents of World 3 as Landscape 3, those of World 2 as Landscape 2, and those of World 1 as Landscape 1 (more detail: Koegst 2022; Kühne 2018a, 2020). Landscapes are distinguished from more general spaces, on the one hand, by their normative aesthetic and increasingly ecological charge, and, on the other hand, by the constitutive level that is not to be found in World 1, but in World 3. Without having learned specific patterns of interpretation, categorization, and interpretation, the individual is not able to synthesize Landscape 1 into Space 1 (Kühne 2018b; Kühne and Berr 2021). The three landscapes are connected through Landscape 2 (which is also true for the worlds or the spaces). Landscape 2 is formed by taking over and actualizing contents of landscape 3 in socialization, confirms the contents of landscape 3 or innovatively acts on them, observes landscape 1 and is structured by it (Fig. 1). Different modes of

16

O. Kühne et al.

Fig. 1   The connections between the three worlds, spaces and landscapes. Note that landscape can also be used metaphorically at the level of Worlds 3 and 2, which is why landscape is not exclusively a subset of space here. (Own representation after: Kühne 2020)

l­andscape construction can be found: In the a-mode, the individual forms the ‘native normal landscape’, the familiar landscape of ones childhood, which is directly experienced and occupied with the norm of stability. The b-mode describes the landscape of the common sense, with aesthetic and increasingly ecological patterns of interpretation, categorization and evaluation, with the normative charge that landscape 1 has to correspond to these patterns, which are created by school, television, internet, social media, etc. The b-mode describes the landscape of the common sense. In the c-mode, expert-like—subject-matter strongly differentiated—special knowledge stocks are created, which in turn are charged with subject-specific norms on Landscape 1 (Kühne 2008b, 2013; Winkler 2005, 2006 [1995]; Wojtkiewicz and Heiland 2012). Equipped with this analytical categorization, we turn to currently discussed landscape theoretical approaches. We begin with the historically oldest, the essentialist (from Latin ‘essentia’ = ‘essence’). This understanding of landscape assumes that “things possess necessary properties that constitute their essence” (Chilla et al. 2015, p. 15). The essentialism goes back to antiquity to Plato, who understood a thing as beautiful, if it was formed according to its essence. In landscape research, ‘essential’ is operationalized as the ‘historically grown’ or ‘natural’ (historical landforms, farmhouses, untouched nature, etc.). Landscape 1 is thus, according to this conception, the material expression of a specific ‘landscape-ness’ that has emerged through centuries of reciprocal imprinting of a local to regional nature and culture. The ‘accidental’, which can only be found by chance and not specifically, is rejected accordingly (such as neophytes, neozoa, bungalows, shopping malls, cleared agricultural areas, etc.). Correspondingly, for Landscape 1, preservation norms are derived for certain (essential) materialities, since these had “an immovable intrinsic value and identity of their own” (Gailing and Leibenath 2012,

Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes

17

p. 97). Since according to the essentialist understanding of landscape it represents a ‘totality’, it is also to be experienced with all senses, whereby again only the ‘essential’, i.e. ‘authentic’, stimuli are desired. Positivist landscape research rejects the notion of an ‘essence’ lying behind the phenomena of Landscape 1. For them, Landscape 1 is a real object. Landscape 1 as a ‘real reality’ (Schultze 1973, p. 203) is thought as a container filled with different objects. These objects behaved in a certain—mathematically determinable—way to each other, accordingly Landscape 1 can be measured with empirical methods, weighed and counted, in short recorded. Landscape 1 is analytically decomposed into different layers for this purpose (common today in GIS layers): Climate, vegetation, orography, settlements, traffic routes are recorded and then often fed into a computer-aided modeling (see Tilley 1997). The focus of positivist landscape research is on analysis, not the formulation of norms, as is the case with essentialist landscape research. The designation ‘landscape’ in positivist research is thereby based on tradition rather than content, for the reference is to value-neutral space rather than the landscape charged with norms (Weber and Kühne 2019). The positivist approach reaches its limits when things are not precisely determinable, i.e. hybrid, qualitatively charged, indifferent, etc. In this respect, as mentioned at the beginning, it has a special affinity to the visual, since these stimuli can be clearly quantified based on wavelengths and brightness. This is different from noise, for example, which is quantified by means of sound pressure data, deprived of its qualitative content, or smell, which in large parts eludes a generally binding quantification and standardization just like taste or tactile stimuli (Bischoff 2005; Raab 2001). If essentialist and especially positivist landscape research focus on Landscape 1, constructivist approaches have their focus on the study of landscape 3 or the relationship between Landscape 2 and 3. According to constructivist approaches, the constitutive level of landscape is thus Landscape 3 or the interaction of Landscape 2 and 3. Landscape 1 emerges through the projection of landscape ideas into Space 1. Based on social patterns of interpretation, evaluation, and categorization, certain elements of Space 1 are selected and synthesized into landscape 1. The various constructivist approaches to landscape research differ in their emphasis on levels and interaction. The social constructivist landscape theory focuses on how landscape-related interpretation, valuation and categorization patterns emerge in the interaction of Landscape 2 and 3, which of these patterns apply unquestioned and why, as well as in which form then Landscape 1 is symbolically charged (Cosgrove 1984; Greider and Garkovich 1994; Kühne 2008a). The radical constructivist landscape research, following the sociology of Niklas Luhmann’s (1986) sociology, focuses on how social subsystems (such as politics, economy, mass media, science, etc.) construct landscape 3 according to their specific logic. Thus, Landscape 1 becomes a medium for the economy to make money, for politics to generate power, for the mass media to generate topicality, for science to generate knowledge, etc. (Kühne 2014; Kühne and Duttmann 2019; in this volume: Lämmchen 2023). Discourse-theoretical landscape research, on the other hand, is focused on the question in which incommensurable discourses Landscape 3 is generated (for instance, as ‘historically grown’

18

O. Kühne et al.

vs. ‘modern’) and how these discourses strive for hegemoniality (see e.g. Leibenath and Otto 2013; Weber 2019). As a result of the phenomenological underpinnings, different sensory impressions in the constructivist approaches have the greatest significance in social constructivist landscape theory, not least because the construction of Landscape 2 and 3 in the a and b modes have distinct orientations toward olfactory and auditory stimuli. In discourse theory, sensory impressions become relevant when they serve as a medium for demarcating one’s own discourse from other discourses; in autopoietic-systems-theoretical landscape research, they can be considered when they are able to resonate with individual social subsystems (for example, when odors that are considered bad hinder an economic valorization of a landscape 1 through tourism). In general, positivist and constructivist understandings of landscape separate quite clearly between Landscape 2 and 3 on the one hand, and the external world of objects, here conceived in terms of Landscape 1. This applies with less clarity to the social constructivist approach; after all, it is concerned—not least because of its phenomenological roots (for more detail, see: Kühne 2019)—also deals with the connection of Landscape 2 with Landscape 1. ‘More-than-representational theories’ (Lorimer 2005; Waterton 2013) aim to dissolve the subject-object split. Phenomenological landscape research is devoted to entities, understood as things and events that present themselves to the world, in short: phenomena (Tilley 1997). This research does not want to produce an objective analysis of a space, like the positivism it criticizes, but practices subjective description and understanding, a particular importance has the concern with one’s own experience of phenomena, in this case of Landscape 1 (Tilley 1997). Thus, phenomenological landscape researcher becomes the narrator of his experience of a space 1 as Landscape 1 (Tuan 1989), phenomenological landscape research thus deals with the interaction of Landscape 1 and 2, whereby they enter into a close connection with each other by means of the experience of atmosphere (Kazig 2019). The central function of experiencing atmospheres makes phenomenological landscape research the theoretical basis for a multisensory perspective on landscape, after all, its claim is not least to get to the bottom of phenomena mediated by all the senses (Endreß 2021; Kazig 2013; Rebay-Salisbury 2013). The Actor-Network-Theory (ANT; Latour and Roßler 2007 [2005]) has a broader frame of reference compared to phenomenology, which is very much focused on individual experience, in that it places social, technical, and natural entities and factors on an equal footing. These entities and factors are treated by “actor-network theory not as explanans but as explananda” (Schulz-Schaeffer 2000, p. 188). ANT uses its own terminology, Landscape 1, 2, and 3 dissolved into mutable networks of ‘actants’ (Allen 2011), in which the different senses can be actualized as they become relevant to the actants. Relevances are also central for the assemblage theory, it starts from a constructivist basic attitude, constitutive for landscape here is therefore also Landscape 3, materialities of Space 1 become significant when they show social relevance, whereby these relevances are not stable, but due to their fluidity require updating if they are not to disappear (Anderson 2015; Mattissek and Wiertz 2014; Miggelbrink 2014). For landscape

Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes

19

research this means: Landscapes 3, 2 and 1 and their relations are in constant change and are de- and re-structured by articulations, whereby different sensory approaches can become significant. Critical landscape research can be differentiated into two streams, one that draws directly on Marxist thought, another that grows out of the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (whose conception of society is considerably more differentiated than Marx’s). (Neo) Marxist landscape research starts from the notion of the ‘duplicity of landscape’ (Daniels 1989) as a starting point. Landscape 3 is understood here as a power-determined conception of landscape that serves to secure existing relations of domination. Landscape 1 is the result of the unequal power of disposal that arises from Landscape 3. The object of critique is in particular the ‘capitalist logic of exploitation of space’ (Schein 1997). This dominates over other spatial claims, especially those of the community. Following the primacy of the economic, the political treatment of Landscape 1 ultimately also serves the preservation of economic interests, which in turn ensures its own preservation of power. Aesthetic ideas in Landscape 3 and 2 serve to legitimize the physical manifestations of unequal distribution of power, from which not only domination of external nature (Landscape 1), but also the “defamation of nature in man” (Horkheimer and Adorno 1969, p. 61), in the sense of Landscape 2, but also 3, arises. Man has moved away from his original needs and is corrupted by the norm of consumption. With a landscape research based on the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (1987 [1979]), the questions of power between Landscape 3, 2, and 1 can be further differentiated. For instance, how landscape aesthetic standards emerge, by which parts of society they are formed (the legitimate taste of the ruling class), how they are socially disseminated (through incomplete adoption of the standards by the middle taste), and what inscription they find in Landscape 1, whereby Landscape 1 represents an objectification of social power distribution patterns and their aesthetic charges (Kühne 2008c). These aesthetic charges are not only visually mediated, precisely processes of distinction in society (and in relation to landscape) are based on acoustic and olfactory stimuli (odor classified as bad in disadvantaged residential areas). Also, the critique of positivism and generally instrumental thinking offers a precondition of critical approaches for a further consideration of not only visual stimuli. Especially (neo)Marxist critical approaches are characterized by a skepticism towards c-modal space and landscape construction (although this does not refer to their own discourse, as Kühne 2021a, also Edler and Kühne 2022), which at least offers the prerequisite to do justice to a- and b-modal relevances in relation to landscape constructions including non-visual stimuli. As will become clear, the integration of multisensory stimuli takes different forms and intensities according to the currently intensively used landscape theories. In the following we will deal with the meaning of the non-visual components of Landscape 1 in the geographical c-modal construction against the background of the different theoretical approaches.

20

O. Kühne et al.

3 Acquisition of Multisensory Landscapes and Their Representations The reappraisal of non-visual components of Landscape 1 experienced a renaissance in spatial studies from the 1960s onwards, with the monograph ‘The Soundscape. Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World’ by R. Murray Schafer, first published in 1977, became the foundational work (Schafer 1994). This book also contained a classification of soundscapes. The central feature of these soundscapes is their changeability in different temporal scales, from moments to historical epochs (thus the soundscapes of the pre-industrial to the industrial era differed significantly). However, soundscapes are also tied to topographic features of Space/Landscape 1 (urban, suburban, and rural space 1; cf. Dodt et al. 2017). In the 1980s and 1990s, geography began to turn to the olfactory dimension of Landscape 1. In English-language human geography, the concept of synthesis into ‘smellscapes’ was developed (Porteous 1985). In developing ‘sensuous geographies’, examples of ‘olfactory geographies’ were discussed (Rodaway 1994) and further differentiated, e.g. tourism smellscapes and urban smellscapes (Bischoff 2007; Henshaw 2014; in this volume: Endreß 2023; Fischer and Mahler 2023; Gerstlauer and Mahler 2023; Kühne 2023). The increasing geographical research interest in multisensory landscapes 1 conditions methodological considerations in three ways: First, the methodology of data collection, second, that of processing, and, third, of representation. This leads to a thematic cartographic processing and presentation of collected (geo)data, quantitative and qualitative in nature (Dickmann 2018; in this volume: Edler and Dickmann 2023). In (spatial) research on non-visual components of landscape 1, in the following with a focus on acoustic and olfactory components, since here the state of research is most advanced, a distinction is made between direct and indirect data collection (cf. Dodt et al. 2017). • Indirect methods are those methods that refer—without field surveys—in particular to written sources, but also to other representations, such as videos, maps, statistics, etc. Two categories can be distinguished: First, descriptive (such as travel and country descriptions) and fictional texts (from poems to novels); second, contributions in various manifestations of social media that increasingly leave the written form. Constructivist approaches dominate here. • Direct recording of acoustic and olfactory components of Landscape 1 also falls into two categories: First, standardized procedures; second, procedures that focus on human experience. The former approaches are based on the positivist or empiricist understanding of the world in the natural sciences and engineering. Thus, since the 1980s, the Association of German Engineers (VDI) has developed the first guidelines for the methodology and technology of recording air pollution by odors (see VDI Guideline 3881 Sheet 1 to Sheet 4) as well as for evaluating the odors or odor

Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes

21

n­ uisances determined (VDI Guideline 3882 Sheet 1 and 2; VDI Guideline 3883 Sheet 1). The second-mentioned approaches are based on field inspections and human-sensory data acquisition, which is summarized under the term ‘sensewalking’ (Adams and Askins 2009; Henshaw 2014). Here, the focus is on the individual or collective experience of sensory perceptions, a method thus strongly grounded in phenomenological theory, but also providing a basis for investigating the social constructedness of perceptions. The methodology in this regard is comparatively young and can be interpreted as an expression of the (postmodern) critique of the attempt at an all-encompassing quantifiability of the world. Thus, Smellwalking was established only from about the end of the 1990s with the aim of capturing Smellscapes (e.g. Bischoff 2007; Cooper et al. 2009; Endreß and Jutz 2022; Henshaw 2014; McLean 2020). Not only the acquisition, but also the (cartographic) representation of quantitative and qualitative acoustic and olfactory data in spatial relation, poses a challenge. In the cartographic processing of acoustic and olfactory spatial information, different design tools of thematic cartography are used (detailed overviews can be found at: Dodt et al. 2017; Edler et al. 2012). Noise pollution or sound intensities are—as defined in the EU Environmental Noise Directive (END, RL 2002/49/EC)—graphically represented in particular by means of isophones, which characterize noise intensities in terms of areas (see for example Weninger 2015). Alternative multimedia cartographic representations of spatial continua, such as noise (Scharlach 2002), terrain elevations (Schito and Fabrikant 2018), precipitation, and drought probability (Edler et al. 2014) can be integrated audio-visually. In these cartographic representations, the integration of sound sequences, captured in space 1 or also computer-generated, served to convey a thematically oriented audiorealistic impression of the captured space 1. Audiorealistic sound sequences of a section of Landscape 1 can also serve punctiliously to illustrate local specifics, which has a particular appeal for tourism marketing or also for preparing stays in the terrain (Edler et al. 2015; Laakso and Sarjakoski 2010). The use of three-dimensional virtual reality makes it possible to combine acoustic and visual stimuli, as is already the case in landscapes from (Edler, Husar et al. 2018; Edler, Kühne et al. 2018; Keil et al. 2021) as it has already been applied in landscapes of video and computer games (Edler and Dickmann 2016, 2017; Kühne et al. 2020; Kühne 2022; in this volume: Kühne and Koegst 2023b). Here, 3D sound can also be coupled to dynamic or animated objects to simulate an audiorealistic impression in real time, as for example in the VR representation of an urban traffic system (see Fig. 2). Modern hardware (VR goggles and sensor technologies) make it possible to control these audiovisual 3D landscapes with transferred body movements from a first-person perspective, combined with an increase of the immersive effect. If the integration of acoustic stimuli into computer-mapped representations is technically hardly challenging today, these are high for the production of olfactory stimuli. The direct presentation of olfactory stimuli in—mostly artistically designed—cartographic representations is sporadically done by means of scent signatures (Henshaw 2014, p. 56; McLean 2017, p. 146). Thus, thematic cartographic representations of olfactory

22

O. Kühne et al.

Fig. 2   3D sound in a suggested urban traffic situation. Taking into account the movement and position of a VR object (car), the 3D soundscape is influenced. (Figure: Marco Weißmann & Dennis Edler)

­ henomena of space 1 focus largely on their graphic transformation (Dodt et al. 2017; p Lauriault and Lindgaard 2006). However, again, the volatility as well as strong subjective influences in the perception of odors are challenging for thematic cartographic transformation. This strong attachment to individual experience is also evident in the dominance of creative signature design (Endreß 2021, 2022; Endreß and Jutz 2022; McLean 2020).

4 Conclusion In the understanding of landscape presented here of a consciousness-internal synthesis of especially emotional, aesthetic and ecological aspects on the basis of social patterns of interpretation, categorization and evaluation, the importance of non-visual stimuli becomes clear: Especially in the case of an emotional and aesthetic affection, stimuli beyond the visual are often of outstanding importance, after all, aesthetic perception of Spaces 1 as Landscapes 1 is synesthetic, without sounds or smells, without a breeze on the skin, Landscape 1 quickly appears sterile (for further reading in this volume: Kühne, Berr et al. 2023). And without sounds and smells, it is hard to imagine an a-modal affection for Landscape 1. In addition, the appropriation of Landscape 1 is not least based on movement, it is thus bound to overcoming distance, which in turn challenges the sense of balance and brings tactile stimuli with it. Especially landscapes in the a- and b-mode can be understood—in the understanding represented here—constitutively as results of mul-

Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes

23

tisensory emotional or synaesthetic attention to Spaces 1. Even the long dominant efforts to capture and represent Landscape 1 as comprehensively as possible quantitatively by means of c-modal logics, to exclude qualitative components as irrelevant, hardly changed anything about the patterns of a- and b-modal landscape production. From the present contribution of short outlines of currently discussed theoretical approaches to landscape research, the diversity of current perspectives on it became clear. This diversity is due in no small part to the complexity of the three levels of landscape as well as the feedbacks between Landscape 1 and 2 as well as 2 and 3. This complexity also makes the development of a single unified landscape theory unlikely. Especially in an inter- and transdisciplinary approach to landscape, a claim to unity of theories does not seem appropriate, because different disciplinary traditions have to be integrated (in natural science landscape research a positivistic understanding dominates, in the social sciences a constructivistic one). In a transdisciplinary approach to the complex object ‘landscape’, whether in planning, politics or garden design, the importance of a theoretical derivation from principles takes a back seat to considerations of practicability (Berr et al. 2019). An alternative way of dealing with the complexity of the subject is a meta-theoretical integration of even (partially) contradictory theories, if this is suggested by the topic and the questions. This can be done by a ‘neo-pragmatic’ approach to the meta-theoretical treatment of landscape, which, however, requires a comparison and consideration of different theoretical approaches (Eckardt 2014; Kühne and Jenal 2020, 2021; Kühne and Koegst 2023a). The diversity of different theoretical frameworks also becomes clear in the recording and (cartographic) representation of olfactory and acoustic stimuli: If acoustic stimuli— in positivist tradition—can be recorded quantitatively in the form of sound pressure and frequency and represented by means of traditional cartographic signatures, this is much less successful for the qualitative components, of sound. The dominance of qualitative contents is even more evident in olfactory stimuli. The widespread phenomenological approach suggests here the use of an individualized, creative formal language.

References Adams, M., & Askins, K. (2009). Sensewalking: Sensory Walking Methods for Social Scientists. In RGSIBG (Ed.), Proceeding of the RGSIBG Annual Conference 2009 (in this anthology). Allen, C. D. (2011). On Actor-Network Theory and landscape. Area, 43, (3, 274–280). https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2011.01026.x. Anderson, J. (2015). Towards an Assemblage Approach to Literary Geography. Literary Geographies, 1, (2, 120–137). Berr, K. (2023). Multisensuality versus visual primacy of landscape perception. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Berr, K., Jenal, C., Kühne, O., & Weber, F. (2019). Inter- und transdisziplinäre Landschaftsforschung. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 165– 180). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

24

O. Kühne et al.

Bischoff, W. (2005). Nicht-visuelle Dimensionen des Städtischen: olfaktorische Wahrnehmung in Frankfurt am Main, dargestellt an zwei Einzelstudien zum Frankfurter Westend und Ostend. (Dissertation, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität). Frankfurt (Main). Bischoff, W. (2007). „Korrespondierende Orte“ – Zum Erscheinen olfaktorischer Stadtlandschaften. In C. Berndt, & R. Pütz (Eds.), Kulturelle Geographien. Zur Beschäftigung mit Raum und Ort nach dem Cultural Turn (pp. 189–212). Bielefeld: transcript. Böhme, G. (1995). Atmosphäre. Essays zur neuen Ästhetik (Edition Suhrkamp). Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Bourassa, S. C. (1991). The Aesthetics of Landscape. London: Belhaven Press. Bourdieu, P. (1987 [1979]). Die feinen Unterschiede. Kritik der gesellschaftlichen Urteilskraft. Frankfurt (Main). Chilla, T., Kühne, O., Weber, F., & Weber, F. (2015). „Neopragmatische“ Argumente zur Vereinbarkeit von konzeptioneller Diskussion und Praxis der Regionalentwicklung. In O. Kühne, & F. Weber (Eds.), Bausteine der Regionalentwicklung (pp. 13–24). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Cooper, R., Evans, G., & Boyko, C. (Eds.). (2009). Designing sustainable cities. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Cosgrove, D. (1984). Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape. London: University of Wisconsin Press. D’Angelo, P. (2021). Il paesaggio. Teorie, storie, luoghi. Bari: GLF editori Laterza. Daniels, S. (1989). Marxism, Culture, and the Duplicity of Landscape. In R. Peet, & N. Thrift (Eds.), New models in geography Vol. 2. The political-economy perspective (pp. 196–220). London: Unwin Hyman. Dickmann, F. (2018). Kartographie (Das Geographische Seminar). Braunschweig: Westermann. Dodt, J., Bestgen, A.-K., & Edler, D. (2017). Ansätze der Erfassung und kartographischen Präsentation der olfaktorischen Dimension. Kartographische Nachrichten, 67, (5, 245–256). Eckardt, F. (2014). Stadtforschung. Gegenstand und Methoden. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Edler, D., & Dickmann, F. (2016). Interaktive Multimediakartographie in frühen Videospielwelten – Das Beispiel „Super Mario World”. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 66, (2, 51–58). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03545205. Edler, D., & Dickmann, F. (2017). The Impact of 1980s and 1990s Video Games on Multimedia Cartography. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 52, (2, 168–177). https://doi.org/10.3138/cart.52.2.3823. Edler, D., & Dickmann, F. (2023). Geospatial Data Literacy: Considering the Multisensory Perspective. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2019). Nicht-visuelle Landschaften. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 599–612). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2022). Deviant Cartographies: A Contribution to Post-critical Cartography. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, (1–14). https://doi. org/10.1007/s42489-022-00110-w. Edler, D., Lammert-Siepmann, N., & Dodt, J. (2012). Die akustische Dimension in der Kartographie – eine Übersicht. Kartographische Nachrichten, 63, (4, 185–195). Edler, D., Lammert–Siepmann, N., Diekmann–Boubaker, N., & Dickmann, F. (2014). Audio– visuelle Karten auf dem Weg in die Schulkartographie? In E. Seyfert, E. Gülch, C. Heipke, J. Schiewe, & M. Sester (Eds.), Geoinformationen öffnen das Tor zur Welt (vol. 23, in this anthology). Deutsche Gesellschaft für Photogrammetrie, Fernerkundung und Geoinformation (DGPF) e. V.

Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes

25

Edler, D., Jebbink, K., & Dickmann, F. (2015). Einsatz audio-visueller Karten in der Schule – Eine Unterrichtsidee zum Strukturwandel im Ruhrgebiet. Kartographische Nachrichten, 65, (5, 259– 265). Edler, D., Kühne, O., Jenal, C., Vetter, M., & Dickmann, F. (2018). Potenziale der Raumvisualisierung in Virtual Reality (VR) für die sozialkonstruktivistische Landschaftsforschung. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 68, (5, 245–254). https://doi. org/10.1007/BF03545421. Edler, D., Husar, A., Keil, J., Vetter, M., & Dickmann, F. (2018). Virtual Reality (VR) and Open Source Software: A Workflow for Constructing an Interactive Cartographic VR Environment to Explore Urban Landscapes. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 68, (1, 5–13). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03545339. Endreß, S. (2021). Beton, Parfüm, Fastfood – Geruchslandschaften. Phänomenologische Forschungsergebnisse eines Smellwalkes. Stadt+Grün, (6, 25–31). Endreß, S. (2022). Die soziale Konstruktion von Geruchslandschaften. Eine explorative Untersuchung der weihnachtlichen Geruchslandschaft. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Endreß, S. (2023). Multisensory Landscapes – Smellscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Endreß, S., & Jutz, P. (2022). Gerüche Tübingens. In O. Kühne, C. Jenal, & T. Sedelmeier (Eds.), Cultural Atlas of TÜbingenness. Kleine Karten aus dem großen TÜbiversum (pp. 185–187). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH; Springer VS. Fischer, J., & Mahler, M. (2023). Multisensory approaches to a disaster place? – A Phenomenological Walk through Altenahr after the Flood Disaster. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Gailing, L., & Leibenath, M. (2012). Von der Schwierigkeit, „Landschaft“ oder „Kulturlandschaft“ allgemeingültig zu definieren. Raumforschung und Raumordnung – Spatial Research and Planning, 70, (2, 95–106). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13147-011-0129-8. Gerstlauer, S., & Mahler, M. (2023). To what extent are zoo landscapes staged? – A multisensory walk through the Wilhelma Zoo. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Granö, J. G. (1997 [1929]). Pure geography. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Greider, T., & Garkovich, L. (1994). Landscapes: The Social Construction of Nature and the Environment. Rural Sociology, 59, (1, 1–24). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.1994.tb00519.x. Hard, G. (1969). Das Wort Landschaft und sein semantischer Hof. Zu Methode und Ergebnis eines linguistischen Tests. Wirkendes Wort, 19, (3–14). Hard, G. (2002). Zu Begriff und Geschichte von „Natur“ und „Landschaft“ in der Geographie des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts [1983 erstveröffentlicht]. In G. Hard (Ed.), Landschaft und Raum. Aufsätze zur Theorie der Geographie (Osnabrücker Studien zur Geographie, vol. 22, pp. 171– 210). Osnabrück: Universitätsverlag Rasch. Hasse, J. (2012). Atmosphären der Stadt. Aufgespürte Räume. Berlin: Jovis-Verlag. Henshaw, V. (2014). Urban Smellscapes. Understanding and designing city smell environments. New York: Routledge. Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. W. (1969). Dialektik der Aufklärung. Philosophische Fragmente. Frankfurt (Main): Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag. Howard, P., Thompson, I., Waterton, E., & Atha, M. (Eds.). (2019). The Routledge Companion to Landscape Studies (2. Auflage). London: Routledge.

26

O. Kühne et al.

Kazig, R. (2007). Atmosphären – Konzept für einen nicht repräsentationellen Zugang zum Raum. In C. Berndt, & R. Pütz (Eds.), Kulturelle Geographien. Zur Beschäftigung mit Raum und Ort nach dem Cultural Turn (pp. 167–187). Bielefeld: transcript. Kazig, R. (2013). Landschaft mit allen Sinnen – Zum Wert des Atmosphärenbegriffs für die Landschaftsforschung. In D. Bruns, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Landschaften: Theorie, Praxis und internationale Bezüge. Impulse zum Landschaftsbegriff mit seinen ästhetischen, ökonomischen, sozialen und philosophischen Bezügen mit dem Ziel, die Verbindung von Theorie und Planungspraxis zu stärken (pp. 221–232). Schwerin: Oceano Verlag. Kazig, R. (2019). Atmosphären und Landschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 453–460). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Keil, J., Edler, D., Schmitt, T., & Dickmann, F. (2021). Creating Immersive Virtual Environments Based on Open Geospatial Data and Game Engines. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 71, (53–65). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-020-00069-6. Koegst, L. (2022). Über drei Welten, Räume und Landschaften. Digital geführte Exkursionen an Hochschulen aus der Perspektive der drei Welten Theorie im Allgemeinen und der Theorie der drei Landschaften im Speziellen. Berichte Geographie und Landeskunde, 69, (3, 1–21). https:// doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2022-0012. Kühne, O. (2008a). Die Sozialisation von Landschaft – sozialkonstruktivistische Überlegungen, empirische Befunde und Konsequenzen für den Umgang mit dem Thema Landschaft in Geographie und räumlicher Planung. Geographische Zeitschrift, 96, (4, 189–206). Kühne, O. (2008b). Distinktion – Macht – Landschaft. Zur sozialen Definition von Landschaft. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Kühne, O. (2008c). Kritische Geographie der Machtbeziehungen – konzeptionelle Überlegungen auf der Grundlage der Soziologie Pierre Bourdieus. geographische revue, 10, (2, 40–50). Kühne, O. (2013). Macht und Landschaft: Annäherungen an die Konstruktion von Experten und Laien. In M. Leibenath, S. Heiland, H. Kilper, & S. Tzschaschel (Eds.), Wie werden Landschaften gemacht? Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf die Konstituierung von Kulturlandschaften (pp. 237–271). Bielefeld: transcript. Kühne, O. (2014). Das Konzept der Ökosystemdienstleistungen als Ausdruck ökologischer Kommunikation. Betrachtungen aus der Perspektive Luhmannscher Systemtheorie. Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung, 46, (1, 17–22). Kühne, O. (2018a). Die Landschaften 1, 2 und 3 und ihr Wandel. Perspektiven für die Landschaftsforschung in der Geographie – 50 Jahre nach Kiel. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (3–4, 217 – 231). Kühne, O. (2018b). Landscape and Power in Geographical Space as a Social-Aesthetic Construct. Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing. Kühne, O. (2018c). Landschaft und Wandel. Zur Veränderlichkeit von Wahrnehmungen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019). Landscape Theories. A Brief Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2020). Landscape Conflicts. A Theoretical Approach Based on the Three Worlds Theory of Karl Popper and the Conflict Theory of Ralf Dahrendorf, Illustrated by the Example of the Energy System Transformation in Germany. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 12, (17, 1–20). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176772. Kühne, O. (2021a). Contours of a ‘Post-Critical’ Cartography – A Contribution to the Dissemination of Sociological Cartographic Research. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, (1–9). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-021-00080-5. Kühne, O. (2021b). Landschaftstheorie und Landschaftspraxis. Eine Einführung aus sozialkonstruktivistischer Perspektive (3., aktualisierte und überarbeitete Auflage). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes

27

Kühne, O. (2022). Representations of landscape in the strategy game Civilization. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (261–272). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O. (2023). The multisensory Florentine landscapes – an update after Georg Simmel. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., & Berr, K. (2021). Wissenschaft, Raum, Gesellschaft. Eine Einführung zur sozialen Erzeugung von Wissen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Duttmann, R. (2019). Recent Challenges of the Ecosystems Services Approach from an Interdisciplinary Point of View. Raumforschung und Raumordnung – Spatial Research and Planning, online first. https://doi.org/10.2478/rara-2019-0055. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2020). Baton Rouge – The Multivillage Metropolis. A Neopragmatic Landscape Biographical Approach on Spatial Pastiches, Hybridization, and Differentiation. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2021). Baton Rouge – A Neopragmatic Regional Geographic Approach. Urban Science, 5, (1, 1–17). https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci5010017. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023a). Land Loss in Louisiana. A Neopragmatic Redescription. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023b). The multisensory construction of landscape – the computer adventure game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps”. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., & Spellerberg, A. (2010). Heimat in Zeiten erhöhter Flexibilitätsanforderungen. Empirische Studien im Saarland. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Kühne, O., Weber, F., Berr, K., & Jenal, C. (Eds.). (2019). Handbuch Landschaft. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., Jenal, C., & Edler, D. (2020). Functions of Landscape in Games – A Theoretical Approach with Case Examples. Arts, 9, (4). https://doi.org/10.3390/arts9040123. Kühne, O., Berr, K., Weber, F., & Dittel, J. (2023). From multisensory to ex–sensory – from landscapes of displeasure to landscapes of fear. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Laakso, M., & Sarjakoski, T. L. (2010). Sonic Maps for Hiking –Use of Sound in Enhancing the Map Use Experience. The Cartographic Journal, 47, (4, 300–307). https://doi.org/10.1179/000 870410X12911298276237. Lämmchen, R. (2023). Observing landscape. A systems theoretical approach. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Lammert-Siepmann, N., Bestgen, A.-K., Edler, D., Kuchinke, L., & Dickmann, F. (2017). Audiovisual communication of object-names improves the spatial accuracy of recalled object-locations in topographic maps. PloS one, 12, (10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186065. Latour, B., & Roßler, G. (2007 [2005]). Eine neue Soziologie für eine neue Gesellschaft. Einführung in die Akteur-Netzwerk-Theorie. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Lauriault, T. P., & Lindgaard, G. (2006). Scented Cybercartography: Exploring Possibilities. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 41, (1, 73–91). https://doi.org/10.3138/W432-713U-3621-04N3.

28

O. Kühne et al.

Lehmann, H. (1973). Die Physiognomie der Landschaft (1950). In K. Paffen (Ed.), Das Wesen der Landschaft (Wege der Forschung, vol. 39, pp. 39–71). Darmstadt: WBG. Leibenath, M., & Otto, A. (2013). Windräder in Wolfhagen – eine Fallstudie zur diskursiven Konstituierung von Landschaften. In M. Leibenath, S. Heiland, H. Kilper, & S. Tzschaschel (Eds.), Wie werden Landschaften gemacht? Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf die Konstituierung von Kulturlandschaften (pp. 205–236). Bielefeld: transcript. Lorimer, H. (2005). Cultural geography: the busyness of being ‘more-than-representational’. Progress in Human Geography, 29, (1, 83–94). https://doi.org/10.1191/0309132505ph531pr. Luhmann, N. (1986). Ökologische Kommunikation. Kann die moderne Gesellschaft sich auf ökologische Gefährdungen einstellen? Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Mattissek, A., & Wiertz, T. (2014). Materialität und Macht im Spiegel der Assemblage-Theorie: Erkundungen am Beispiel der Waldpolitik in Thailand. Geographica Helvetica, 69, (3, 157–169). McLean, K. (2017). Mapping the City’s Smellscapes. In K. A. Harmon (Ed.), You are here NYC. Mapping the soul of the city (pp. 144–147). New York: Princeton Architectural Press. McLean, K. (2020). Temporalities of the Smellscape: Creative Mapping as Visual Representation. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 27–245). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Miggelbrink, J. (2014). Diskurs, Machttechnik, Assemblage. Neue Impulse für eine regionalgeographische Forschung. Geographische Zeitschrift, 102, (1, 25–40). Popper, K. R. (1979). Three Worlds. Tanner Lecture, Michigan, April 7, 1978. Michigan Quarterly Review, (1, 141–167). https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/p/popper80.pdf. Accessed: 12 May 2020. Popper, K. R., & Eccles, J. C. (1977). Das Ich und sein Gehirn. München: Piper. Porteous, J. D. (1985). Smellscape. Progress in Physical Geography, 9, (3, 356–378). https://doi. org/10.1177/030913338500900303. Raab, J. (2001). Soziologie des Geruchs. Über die soziale Konstruktion olfaktorischer Wahrnehmung. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft. Rebay-Salisbury, K. (2013). Phänomenologie und Landschaft: der menschliche Körper in Bewegung. In R. Karl, & J. Leskovar (Eds.), Interpretierte Eisenzeiten. Fallstudien, Methoden, Theorie: Tagungsbeträge der 5. Linzer Gespräche zur interpretativen Eisenzeitarchäologie (Studien zur Kulturgeschichte von Oberösterreich, Folge 37, pp. 61–70). Linz: Oberösterreichisches Landesmuseum. Rodaway, P. (1994). Sensuous Geographies. Body, Sense, and Place. London: Routledge. Roger, A. (Ed.). (1995). La théorie du paysage en France. 1974–1994. Seyssel: Champ Vallon. Schafer, R. M. (1994). The Soundscape. Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World. Rochester: Destiny Books. Scharlach, H. (2002). Lärmkarten. Kartographische Grundlagen und audiovisuelle Realisierung. (Ruhr-Universität Bochum). Bochum. https://hss-opus.ub.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/opus4/frontdoor/ deliver/index/docId/1157/file/diss.pdf. Accessed: 8 November 2022. Schein, R. H. (1997). The Place of Landscape. A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting an American Scene. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 87, (4, 660–680). https://doi. org/10.1111/1467-8306.00072. Schito, J., & Fabrikant, S. I. (2018). Exploring maps by sounds: using parameter mapping sonification to make digital elevation models audible. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 32, (5, 874–906). https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2017.1420192. Schultze, J. H. (1973). Landschaft (1966/70). In K. Paffen (Ed.), Das Wesen der Landschaft (Wege der Forschung, vol. 39, pp. 202–222). Darmstadt: WBG. Schulz-Schaeffer, I. (2000). Akteur-Netzwerk-Theorie: Zur Koevolution von Gesellschaft, Natur und Technik. In J. Weyer, & J. Abel (Eds.), Soziale Netzwerke. Konzepte und Methoden der sozialwissenschaftlichen Netzwerkforschung (Lehr- und Handbücher der Soziologie, pp. 187–210). München: Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag.

Theory and Meaning of Multisensory Landscapes

29

Simmel, G. (2019). Philosophie der Landschaft. In Andreas Mahler (Ed.), Philosophie der Landschaft. Ästhetik der Alpen, Rom, Florenz, Venedig (3rd ed., pp. 7–23). Stühlingen an der Wutach: Mahler Verlag. Thibaud, J.-P. (2003). Die sinnliche Umwelt von Städten. Zum Verständnis urbaner Atmosphären. In M. Hauskeller (Ed.), Die Kunst der Wahrnehmung. Beiträge zu einer Philosophie der sinnlichen Erkenntnis (pp. 280–297). Kusterdingen: SFG-Servicecenter Fachverlage. Tilley, C. (1997). A phenomenology of landscape. Places, paths and monuments (Explorations in anthropology). Oxford: Berg. Tuan, Y.-F. (1974). Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes and Values. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Tuan, Y.-F. (1989). Surface Phenomena and Aesthetic Experience. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 79, (2, 233–241). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1989.tb00260.x. Waterton, E. (2013). Landscape and non-representational theories. In P. Howard, I. Thompson, & E. Waterton (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Landscape Studies (pp. 66–75). London: Routledge. Weber, F. (2019). ‚Landschaftskonflikte‘ aus poststrukturalistisch-diskurstheoretischer Perspektive. In K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Landschaftskonflikte (pp. 51–64). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Weber, F., & Kühne, O. (2019). Essentialistische Landschafts- und positivistische Raumforschung. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 57–68). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Weninger, B. (2015). Lärmkarten zur Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung. Analyse und Verbesserung ausgewählter Aspekte der kartografischen Gestaltung. Winchester, H. P. M., Kong, L., & Dunn, K. (2003). Landscapes. Ways of imagining the world. London: Routledge. Winkler, J. (2005). Raumzeitphänomen Klanglandschaften. In V. Denzer, J. Hasse, K.-D. Kleefeld, & U. Recker (Eds.), Kulturlandschaft. Wahrnehmung – Inventarisation – regionale Beispiele (Kulturlandschaft, vol. 14, pp. 77–88). Bonn: Habelt. Winkler, J. (2006 [1995]). Klanglandschaften. Untersuchungen zur Konstitution der klanglichen Umwelt in der Wahrnehmungskultur ländlicher Orte in der Schweiz. Basel: Akroama. Wojtkiewicz, W., & Heiland, S. (2012). Landschaftsverständnisse in der Landschaftsplanung. Eine semantische Analyse der Verwendung des Wortes „Landschaft“ in kommunalen Landschaftsplänen. Raumforschung und Raumordnung – Spatial Research and Planning, 70, (2, 133– 145). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13147-011-0138-7. Wylie, J. (2007). Landscape. Abingdon: Routledge.

Dr. Dr. Olaf Kühne is Professor of Urban and Regional Development at the Eberhard Karls ­University of Tübingen. MA Lara Koegst is a research associate and doctoral candidate in the Urban and Regional ­Development Group at Eberhard Karls University in Tübingen. Dr. Dennis Edler is Senior Lecturer in the Institute of Geography at Ruhr-University Bochum (RUB). His research and teaching activities refer to Multimedia Cartography, Cognitive Visualization and Geospatial Data Infrastructures. [email protected]

The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes—An Update After Georg Simmel Olaf Kühne

Abstract

More than a century ago, Georg Simmel wrote his classic “Philosophy of Landscape,” and seven years earlier he published a text on Florence. In between, he dealt extensively with the significance of the senses for man and his social life. The present article is devoted to a comparison of these relevant texts in terms of landscape theory, to a discussion of the topicality of Simmel’s concept of landscape, and also to a comparison derived from it of statements about Florence and the experience of the Florence of the present. Compared to the earlier texts, which still shows an essentializing-conservative understanding of world in general and landscape in particular, “the philosophy of landscape” can be understood as a precursor of a social constructivist understanding of landscape, but without showing its relation to the reflection of power distributions. Also, non-visual stimuli remain unconsidered. Both are central elements of current landscape-theoretical discussions. The Florence, as a constellation of material objects, of Simmel’s perception in turn, is still recognizable today. This is the case not least because of the lack of political and economic pressure to modernize, which in turn has facilitated tourist valorization and generated a specific ‘touristscape’.

The essay is a revised and supplemented version, with regard to the topic of multisensory, of the contribution published in German: Florentinische Landschaften – eine Aktualisierung nach Georg Simmel zu ‘touristscape’ und ‘trafficscape’ Kühne (2022a). O. Kühne (*)  Geographisches Institut, Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_3

31

32

O. Kühne Keywords

Landscape theory · Florence · Georg Simmel · Social constructivism · Social constructivist landscape theory · Urban landscape hybrids · Landscape painting · Touristscape ·  Trafficscape · Smellscape · Soundscape

1 Introduction Philosopher Georg Simmel (1858–1918) is considered one of the founders of (Germanlanguage) sociology. His extensive body of writings includes a detailed discussion • of the topic senses (Simmel 1907, 1908), • with the theme of landscape in his “Philosophy of Landscape” (German original: “Philosophie der Landschaft”) from 1913 (Simmel 2019c), • in his essay “Florence” (German original: “Florenz”) (Simmel 2019b) from 1906 also with the city in Tuscany constitutively associated with the Renaissance. Addressing these three topics provides a suitable basis for taking a ‘comparative look’ against the background of current scientific discussions on the aforementioned topics. Especially his powerful essay on landscape can be used to work out its significance for landscape research up to the present day on the one hand, but also current expansions of this landscape research on the other hand. Georg Simmel’s starting point in relation to landscape can be described as a milestone in landscape-related ideas with a high degree of topicality, however, it also exhibits a classical sensory focus. The preoccupation with multisensory landscapes takes place on the example of the city of Florence, which—not least because of its presence in particular and Tuscany in general in landscape research— seems almost predestined as an example of changed perspectives on landscape (for instance at: Dörrenhaus 1976; Lehmann 1976; Loda et al. 2020). As a result of its specific social developments with their material inscriptions, it exhibits a special attractiveness for tourist purposes This in turn can serve as a basis for a landscape synopsis of tourist activities and their material consequences and side-effects. In studying Florence of the present, the Simmelian phenomenological approach was followed (for more detail: Ahrens 2008). A visiting professorship at the University of Florence in February and March 2022 allowed me to walk the only city and surroundings. It also enabled to reflect on experiences and impressions with colleagues as well as (long-established as well as incoming) students. The basis were systematically conducted phenomenological walks, which included all public streets and squares of the former walled area as well as star-shaped streets leading beyond. These walks led in particular to those viewpoints mentioned by Simmel. Thus, an impression in and on the city was developed (for further methodology and evaluation of phenomenological walks, cf: Kühne and Jenal 2020; Ljunge 2013; Tilley 2008; Wylie 2005; in this volume, see also:

The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes …

33

Berr 2023; Endreß 2023; Fischer and Mahler 2023; Gerstlauer and Mahler 2023; Kühne, Berr et al. 2023; Kühne et al. 2023a, b). In this article, the essay “Philosophy of Landscape” by Georg Simmel is first placed in relation to the current state of landscape research, but also to Simmel’s publications on the subject of the senses. Based on this, a discussion of Florence and its surroundings follows. Basis for this is Simmel’s essay “Florence”. With reference to the works of Simmel, not only what they contain will be discussed, but—following Gerhard Hard’s (2008) request in this regard—also what they do not contain, although they could contain it. This examination of contingency in relation to the contemporary context is contrasted with a consideration of the current state of research and current experiences of Florence. The article is concluded with reflections on the classification of Simmel’s understanding of landscape, also in the context of current research on Florence.

2 Simmel’s “Philosophy of Landscape” and Beyond Georg Simmel’s understanding of landscape will be contoured below against current debates about understandings of landscape. This contouring is done especially in light of the theme of the anthology on multisensory landscapes. Following this idea, there will be no comprehensive presentation of the current state of landscape-theoretical research, which can be found in a multitude of survey works (e.g. in Howard et al. 2019; Kühne 2019a, 2021; Winchester et al. 2003; Wylie 2007; as well as in this volume at: Kühne et al. 2023a). Compared to the tradition of his time to ontologize landscape, that is, to consider it as a material object or to understand the material appearance of a part of the earth’s surface as an expression of an ‘essence’ of landscape, Simmel takes a different path (see for instance: Berr and Kühne 2020; Berr and Schenk 2019; Edler and Kühne 2022; Kühne and Edler 2022; Schenk 2013, 2017). Simmel understands landscape as an aestheticizing synopsis of objects, which he traces back to landscape as a pictorial work of art: “For the understanding of our whole problem hangs on the motif: the work of art landscape arises as the increasing continuation and purification of the process in which landscape—in the sense of ordinary language—arises for all of us from the mere impression of individual natural things. Exactly what the artist does: that he delimits a piece out of the chaotic flow and endlessness of the immediately given world, grasps and forms it as a unity, which now finds its meaning in itself and has cut off the world-connecting threads and tied them back into its own center—this is exactly what we do to a lower, less principled degree, in a fragmentary, boundary-uncertain way, as soon as we now look at a ‘landscape’ instead of a meadow and a house and a brook and a train of clouds” (Simmel 2019c, p. 12). Landscape is defined in Simmel—according to Hoppe-Sailer (2007, p. 136)—“as a fundamentally aesthetic category, since it owes its constitution to a visual operation that itself carries aesthetic qualities”.

34

O. Kühne

As is typical of current approaches to constructivist landscape research (among many: Aschenbrand 2017; Fontaine 2017; Gailing and Leibenath 2015; Kühne 2018a), Simmel thus does not assign a constitutive meaning for landscape to physical space, but to the socially mediated synoptic gaze, whose foundation he sees in landscape painting. Constitutive for landscape are for him—in social constructivist terminology following Berger and Luckmann (Berger and Luckmann 1966; Greider and Garkovich 1994; Kühne 2019b)—the culturally sedimented patterns of categorization, interpretation, and evaluation that are individually projected onto physical objects as landscape. Simmel also refers to the social differentiation of individual views of “landscape” in his essay when he emphasizes: “Landscape, we say, comes into being in that a juxtaposition of natural phenomena spread out on the ground is combined into a special kind of unity, one other than that to which the causally thinking scholar, the religiously feeling nature worshipper, the teleologically directed arable farmer or strategist embraces this very field of vision” (Simmel 2019c, p. 18). With this statement of the social boundedness and differentiation a central motive of current constructivist landscape research is recognizable in Simmel, but the processes of the mutual influence of individual and social landscape constructions remain not further thematized. Accordingly, Simmel is also hindered in accessing questions of power in relation to the construction of landscape. This powerboundedness is present (at least) in four relations (among many see: Cosgrove 1984, 1993; Czepczyński 2008; Kühne 2008; Mitchell 2002; Olwig 2008; Weber 2015; Zukin 2009): 1. Power is expressed in the mediation of social conceptions of landscape inherent in socialization processes. 2. Power relations are inherent in different socially granted possibilities of influencing social patterns of interpretation, categorization and evaluation by the individual. 3. Power underlies socially different granted possibilities of influencing physical spaces by individuals. 4. Power relations underlie different relations of dependence of individuals on physical spaces. Another aspect that is narrower in Simmel compared to current social and cultural landscape research, is his focus on the synopsis of objects described as ‘natural h’. This understanding of ‘nature’ in turn is quite broad in Simmel. He integrates besides trees, hills and waters also meadows and grain fields (which without the intervention of man would not exist or only of short duration) as well as houses into his understanding of ‘free nature’ (Simmel 2019c). This integration into his broad concept of nature and landscape is not infinite, however, so he excludes “streets with department stores and automobiles” (Simmel 2019c, p. 7). At the level of objects, this points to a ‘narrow understanding of landscape’ that excludes modern and metropolitan objects and constellations of objects (for a summary of this discussion, see: Hokema 2013). This in turn can be interpreted as the influence of the landscape-related conservative-romanticizing

The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes …

35

zeitgeist of that epoch, which allowed the ‘original’ and ‘pre-modern’ to become the landscape-related normative conception. This is also indicated by his critical remarks regarding the tourist development of the Alps in his time (Simmel 2019a). In this respect, Simmel’s understanding of landscape on the level of theoretical reference can be described as very progressive, on the level of the objects that can be viewed together to form landscape, definitely as conservative (on this: Eisel 1982; Ellmers 2020; Kirchhoff 2019; Kühne 2011; Vicenzotti 2011). Today, an understanding that also subjects contemporary material objects, including those in metropolitan and metropolitan contexts, to landscape synthesis dominates landscape research in the social and cultural sciences (for example: Höfer and Vicenzotti 2013; Hofmeister and Kühne 2016; Hofmeister and Mölders 2019; Kühne et al. 2016; Roßmeier 2020). Constitutive for Simmel’s concept of landscape is its derivation from painting. His understanding of landscape thus remains bound to the visually perceptible, both on a metaphorical level (‘synopsis’; German: ‘Zusammenschau’) and in terms of content. This is also remarkable in light of the fact that Simmel, in his “Sociology. On the Forms of Socialization” (Simmel 1908) and the essay “Sociology of the Senses” published in 1907 (Simmel 1907) Simmel dealt extensively with the senses of smell and hearing. Although Simmel (1907) concedes the eye, also as a result of its reciprocity as an organ of reception and expression, in the sensual perception of the world, he also refers to the “interaction […] of eye and ear; for even if neither is completely closed to the perceptions of both categories, they are on the whole designed to complement each other, to establish the permanent plastic essence of man through the eye, to that of his emerging and sinking expressions through the ear”. (Simmel 1907, w.p.). Simmel, in turn, distinguishes smell from the two senses mentioned above, since it “does not form an object of its own accord, as face and hearing do, but remains, as it were, imprisoned in the subject; which is symbolized by the fact that there are no independent, objectively signifying expressions for its differences” (Simmel 1907, w.p.). To smell, in turn, he assigns a special—in current terminology (Bourdieu 2016)—social-distinctive meaning: “The social question is not only an ethical question, but also a question of the nose” (Simmel 1907, w.p.). In the sense that the smell of sweat is connoted with hard physical work and inadequate physical hygiene, i.e., with persons in the lower part of the social hierarchy, while persons with a higher endowment of ‘symbolic capital’ (Bourdieu 2016), are able to perceive its odor as unpleasant. They are able to remove his body odor, which is considered unpleasant, or to cover it up by means of perfume. Remarkable with regard to his understanding of landscape, which was focused on visual stimuli, is also the description, especially of acoustic and olfactory stimuli in spatial synthesis representations, which was widespread at the time (Faure 1993; Payer 2004). This shows how effective the painting analogy of landscape syntheses is in Simmel, although his phenomenological approach suggested a synesthetic approach. In contrast, preference for the easily quantifiable visual suggests rather a positivist approach (Bischoff 2007). In this respect, also with regard to space in general and landscape in particular, Lichtblau’s assessment can be followed that Simmel (1997) did not so much develop a

36

O. Kühne

closed theory as an approach that resembles that of a collector. Collections make it easier to deal with inconsistencies, closed theories make them more difficult. Simmel shares the dominance of the visual with many scholars, for example, in the 1980s Denis Cosgrove (1984) also understands Landscape less as a world that is seen than as a way of seeing. In recent decades, however, there has been an increasing sensitivity to the non-visual sensory parts of construction (for example, at: Brady 2005; Edler et al. 2019; Endreß 2021; McLean 2020; Porteous 1985; Schafer 1977, 1994; Sedelmeier et al. 2022), after all, the non-visual components are of great importance in the experience of physical spaces even among people without professional training in landscape (Kühne 2018b). Following the multisensory diversity due to which landscape emerges, the ‘urban–rural hybrid’ (Kühne 2012, 2016) Florence in recourse, actualization and extension of Georg Simmel’s text on Florence is subjected to an attention (see more on the contemporary nature of Simmel’s understanding of landscape: Kühne and Edler 2022).

3 Florentine Landscapes The text “Florence”, published seven years before the “Philosophy of Landscape”, deals with landscape synthesis, although the later innovativeness of Simmel’s understanding of landscape is merely laid out here. The text “Florence” is rather an expression of phenomenological experience of a space as landscape. The starting point of his explanations is the statement that the “unified feeling for life of antiquity” had “broken apart into the poles of nature and spirit” and that only in the work of art could it be understood by the viewer (Simmel 2019b, p. 68) and only in the work of art was it possible to “regain this lost unity” (Simmel 2019b, p. 68). This separation—here the motif that characterizes the later text is hinted at—is abolished in the experience of Florence: “But if one looks down on Florence from the heights of S. Miniato, when you look down on Florence, framed by its mountains and flowed through by its Arno like a lifeline, when, your soul filled with the art of its galleries and palaces and churches, you wander in the afternoon through its hills, with their vines, olives, cypresses, where every foot of the paths, the villas, the fields is saturated with culture and great pasts, where a layer of spirit wraps itself around them like an astral body of this earth—there arises a feeling as if here the opposition of nature and spirit has become void” (Simmel 2019b, p. 68). For Simmel, this becomes clear in Renaissance art, in which nature—even “the most sovereign stylization” (Simmel 2019b, p. 69)—was copied. Thus the landscape appears as a garden “divided, with beds, hedges, well-arranged trees; nature is not at all ideally conceivable to them [the Renaissance artists; note O.K.] other than in the shaping by spirit” (Simmel 2019b, p. 69). Here a longing for a synthesis of nature and culture resonates, an artistic synthesis, as he saw it in the physical space interpreted as landscape in and around Florence. Thus, he saw in the bare mountains behind Fiesole (located north-northeast of Florence), which, in contrast to the hills closer to the city that “bear signs of human activity” (Simmel 2019b, p. 70) a “frame of the image characterized by the spirit and the

The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes …

37

culture” (Simmel 2019b, p. 70). They would thus be “drawn into its overall character” (Simmel 2019b, p. 70) and thus form a frame of the “self-sufficient organism” (Simmel 2019b, p. 70) of Florence. In these remarks, the still effective understanding of landscape ascribed to Alexander von Humboldt of a ‘total character of an earth region’ is actualized; with his metaphor of organism, Simmel also moves in the conservative-essentialist zeitgeist of landscape research at the time. At the same time, his remarks refer to his broad understanding of nature, which underlies his (later) understanding of landscape, in that he includes an integration of (admittedly pre-modern) objects of human activity in his synthesis. The structure described by Simmel of the mutual interlocking of elements described as more rural, such as vineyards, gardens, and olive groves, and areas described as more urban, such as urban residential buildings, squares, and buildings for religious purposes, still dominates the urban-land hybrid of Florence today (Figs. 1, 2 and 3). This interlocking, which corresponds to widespread landscape-aesthetic norm concepts, goes back not least to the practice, going back to the Middle Ages and handed down in the Renaissance, of not separating city and countryside into largely separate political, legal, economic, and social spheres of being, as in Central Europe, but of promoting a mutual integration of city and countryside, for example, through economic processes (including

Fig. 1   The view over Florence from the south, from S. Miniato, mentioned by Georg Simmel. The interlocking of material object constellations commonly classified as urban and rural, which is still pronounced today, can be seen. (Photo: Olaf Kühne 2022)

38

O. Kühne

Fig. 2   The view from Michelangelo Square over Florence; visible here (in comparison with the view from S. Miniato) are Fiesole with its mountains in the background and the Arno, here at dusk. (Photo: Olaf Kühne 2022)

craft production in the countryside), horticulture in the city, the presence of nobles in urban residences and rural villas etc. (Reinhardt 2013). The accompanying dependencies, i.e. social processes of superordination and subordination, networks of power relations, which manifest themselves in physical spaces as well as in the aesthetic exaggeration of the “Renaissance landscape”, as it is also pursued by Simmel, remain accordingly excluded in Simmel’s aestheticized view, which he casts on an essentialized constructed landscape. Power is understood here—if at all—as (in Florence largely absent) pressure of modernization in the form of its physical manifestations. Constitutive elements central to Simmel’s synopsis of material objects and object constellations to form Tuscan landscape have remained persistent to this day, not only the hills and mountains or the Arno River (although its function today should be understood as a backdrop rather than that of a ‘lifeline’; Fig. 4), but also the villas, gardens, olive groves, squares, parks, and the vast majority of historic buildings. This is not least due to the low level of destruction (compared to Central European cities), especially during the Second World War, but also to the careful modernization of Florence. This expressed itself primarily through horizontal growth, not in an urge to go vertical. A settlement development, which is not least also justified in the fact that Florence could not carry its economic prosperity of the Renaissance into the twentieth and beginning ­twenty-first

The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes …

39

Fig. 3   The view seen from the north, from Fiesole, over Florence, compared to the other two photos. To be guessed here the olfactory stimulus emanating from the burning of fresh olive tree cuttings, an olfactory side effect of a land use that enables the visually dominated Simmelian landscape-aesthetic synopsis. (Photo: Olaf Kühne 2022)

century. This prevented a forced overhaul by modern and postmodern architecture, as can be found in Milan, for example (Cutini et al. 2018; Reinhardt 2013; Rother and Tichy 2008). Such a development of Florence, in the sense of an arrangement of material objects, facilitates the connection to the understanding of the Renaissance made popular by Jacob Burckhardt (1976 [1859]) popularized understanding of the Renaissance as a historical epoch, of which Florence became the epitome (Reinhardt 2013). The correspondingly increased popularity of Florence as a destination for travelers, up to a farreaching dressing of especially central areas of the city for tourist use, would—in view of his remarks on the tourist use of the Alps—certainly hardly have justified an approving attitude on Simmel’s part (See Fig. 5). The tailoring of Florence’s city center to the demands of tourism has led not only to the widespread displacement of non-tourism-related economic activities and the expansion of the lodging industry (not least the share economy), but also to a dominance of restaurants and specialty stores that can be described as ‘foodification’ (Bourlessas et al. 2021; Loda et al. 2020). This area can also be described as a condensed foodscape in relation to consume, with few other uses interwoven (see in this context: Kühne 2022b; Sedelmeier et al. 2022; Yasmeen 1996). This ‘foodification’ of the historical center of Florence also finds expression in a pronounced ‘smellscape’, especially of meat grilled

40

O. Kühne

Fig. 4   The Arno in Florence, today more a backdrop than a lifeline, here photographed from the ‘classic’ perspective of Michelangelo Square at nightfall. (Photo: Olaf Kühne 2022)

on open fires, in more peripheral places, also of kebap and old frying fat, dominated again and again by perfume applied in optimistic quantity, here again a form of the social-distinctive meaning of the sense of smell mentioned above becomes clear, here in the context of a spatial synthesis. This ‘smellscape’ is supplemented by acoustic stimuli: from a basic level of human vocalizations in different languages, the sounds of accelerating motor scooters and mostly enthusiastically ringing bicyclists stand out for a limited time and depending on the context. The ‘smellscape’ of Florence along busy roads takes on a different character, here the smell of two-cycle motorcycles is of outstanding presence, which becomes gustatory effective through a slightly metallic taste on the tongue when inhaled through the mouth. The motorized two-wheelers also give the ‘soundscape’ of Florence a rhythm that is in parts formative in the cohort-like start from the first rows after the red phase at streetlights. The respective dominance of tourist and traffic activities allows us to speak here of ‘tourist-’ and ‘trafficscapes’. These, however, form an olfactory and acoustic dipole in Florence, the interspaces remain peculiarly largely odorless and noiseless, interrupted by temporary stimuli of cigarette smoke. Also, the collateral consequences of dogrelated activities are an exception here: acoustically, in the form of specific vocalizations by dogs (barking) and dog-occupied humans (often frantic commands). Olfactorily, in the intermediate areas between ‘tourist-’ and ‘trafficscapes’ almost omnipresent solid,

The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes …

41

Fig. 5   A center of tourist activity: Florence Cathedral with Baptistery of San Giovanni (foreground). During the day, the possibility of contemplative contemplation hardly presents itself; the ‘touristscape’ potentially encompasses experiencers with a multitude of visual, auditory, olfactory, and (at least potentially) vestibular and tactile stimuli (or the threat of these very stimuli). (Photo: Olaf Kühne 2022)

s­ emi-solid and liquid excretions of dogs become effective. The significance of this presence, in turn, is relativized in combination with the vestibular perception of the moving body, since the sidewalk surfaces (in parts also of the streets) are pronounced in a form that in any case hardly permits directed attention to other objects and object constellations, provided that physical balance is to be maintained. The vestibular perception is challenged especially in the ‘touristscapes’ in combination with the tactile perception: Participation in tourist activities seems to lead to a current lowering of the awareness of one’s own bodily bondage. This acutely complicates the coordination of collision-free relocation not least in view of the high physical copresence. The presence of bicyclists struggling with the control of their own vehicle due to the road surface, but nevertheless sometimes moving forward with enormous speed, hears the own mental and physical tension. When assigning the ‘traffic-’ and ‘touristscape’ outlined here to Appadurai’s (1990) concept of -scapes the former could be understood as a spatial and social concretization of the ‘ethnospape’, the spaces of the mobile, while in the latter a similar concretization of the ‘technoscape’, the global distribution and use of technologies, could be assigned.

42

O. Kühne

4 Conclusion Although such a multisensory approach to landscape can be reconciled with Georg Simmel’s aesthetic understanding of landscape, it did not take place in his work due to his strong focus on deriving his theory from painting. Nevertheless, his approach of synthesizing objects and object constellations is also compatible with the integration of nonvisual perceptions. From today’s perspective of landscape theory research, Simmel’s understanding of landscape presents itself in a peculiar contradiction: On the one hand, his concept of landscape emphasizes the socially constructed nature of landscape (in today’s parlance), which sets it apart from the ontologizing approaches that were dominant at the time, and thus continues to provide an impetus for landscape research in the social and cultural sciences to this day. On the other hand, the recourse to landscape painting, which is constitutive for his approach, implies a focus on the visual, combined with an exclusion of non-visual stimuli, as well as a preference for the rural, which in turn makes him connectable to the intellectual spirit of his time. These two aspects also illustrate the development of landscape research in the social and cultural sciences in the past century, as well as the greater sensitivity to questions of the power-bound nature of the relationships between society, the individual, and physical space. Whereas his critique was directed particularly at the physical-spatial side-effects of modernization, today the focus is more on questions of how aesthetic preferences emerge, how they contribute to the securing of power, and how these are inscribed in physical spaces and actualized through normative aesthetic conventions. The Simmelian understanding of landscape with its focus on an aestheticized synopsis of visually perceptible objects and groups of objects points an essential way to research the social constructedness of landscape, but it is also very reduced in its access to the complex research object “landscape”. This is remarkable insofar as Simmel dealt extensively with the sociology of the senses—beyond the sense of sight. The integration of non-visual sensory perceptions into his understanding of landscape, which seems obvious from today’s perspective, was in turn complicated by the powerful derivation of the ‘landscape gaze’ from painting. The considerations of Florence presented here, especially more recent developments, in turn also show the limits of the aesthetic synopsis of objects to landscape, not only in the exclusion of power processes: Landscape research based on positivist framing is also capable of providing essential aspects in the context of the complex relations of material bases, individual accesses and actualizations, and social constructions. A broadening of its phenomenological approach to landscape with regard to non-visual spatial contents allows—as already mentioned—a more differentiated (and to the current landscape research more connectable) access to physical spaces experienced as landscape. The section of physical space dealt with in this article is Florence together with its surroundings. Few cities in Europe can boast such a culturally formative (in terms of the

The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes …

43

Renaissance, for example) significance. This past, as well as the restrained modernization of the city, has produced a spatial structure—a specific spatial pastiche of different uses and intensities of use that can be assigned more to the rural or the urban pole of urban-rural hybridity. In turn, restrained modernization has also facilitated the persistence of physical structures that, on the one hand, offer high attractiveness for tourist reference, and on the other hand, offer few alternative employment opportunities beyond the public sector (especially regional administration and university). Thus, a specific ‘touristscape’ has developed, which, with its sensory challenges and economic and social side effects, is no longer perceived as unproblematic and part of normality by large segments of the resident population.

References Ahrens, D. (2008). Georg Simmel. Phänomenologische Vorarbeiten für eine Sozialraumforschung. In F. Kessl, & C. Reutlinger (Eds.), Schlüsselwerke der Sozialraumforschung (pp. 78–93). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-531-91159-5_6. Appadurai, A. (1990). Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy. Theory, Culture & Society, 7, (2–3, 295–310). https://doi.org/10.1177/026327690007002017. Aschenbrand, E. (2017). Die Landschaft des Tourismus. Wie Landschaft von Reiseveranstaltern inszeniert und von Touristen konsumiert wird. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Anchor Books. Berr, K. (2023). Multisensuality versus visual primacy of landscape perception. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Berr, K., & Kühne, O. (2020). „Und das ungeheure Bild der Landschaft …“. The Genesis of Landscape Understanding in the German-speaking Regions. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Berr, K., & Schenk, W. (2019). Begriffsgeschichte. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 23–38). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Bischoff, W. (2007). Nicht-visuelle Dimensionen des Städtischen. Olfaktorische Wahrnehmung in Frankfurt am Main, dargestellt an zwei Einzelstudien zum Frankfurter Westend und Ostend (Wahrnehmungsgeographische Studien, vol. 23). Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag. Bourdieu, P. (2016). La distinction: Critique sociale du jugement (Le Sens commun). Paris: Editions de Minuit. Bourlessas, P., Cenere, S., & Vanolo, A. (2021). The work of foodification: an analysis of food gentrification in Turin, Italy. Urban Geography, 42, (1–22). https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638. 2021.1927547. Brady, E. (2005). Sniffing and Savoring: The Aesthetics of Smells and Tastes. In A. Light, & J. M. Smith (Eds.), The Aesthetics of Everyday Life (pp. 177–193). New York: Columbia University Press. Burckhardt, J. (1976 [1859]). Die Kultur der Renaissance in Italien. Ein Versuch. Stuttgart: Kröner. Cosgrove, D. (1984). Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape. London: University of Wisconsin Press.

44

O. Kühne

Cosgrove, D. (1993). The Palladian Landscape. Geographical Change and its Cultural Representations in sixteenth-century Italy. University Park, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press. Cutini, V., Farese, D., & Rabino, G. (2018). Milan: The Configuration of a Metropolis. In R. Papa, R. Fistola, & C. Gargiulo (Eds.), Smart Planning: Sustainability and Mobility in the Age of Change (SpringerLink Bücher, pp. 343–357). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Czepczyński, M. (2008). Cultural Landscapes of Post-Socialist Cities. Representation of Powers and Needs. Hampshire: Ashgate. Dörrenhaus, F. (1976). Villa und Villegiatura in der Toskana. Eine italienische Institution und ihre gesellschaftsgeographische Bedeutung. Mit einer einleitenden Schilderung „Toskanische Landschaft“ von Herbert Lehmann (Erdkundliches Wissen, vol. 44). Wiesbaden: Steiner. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2022). Aesthetics and Cartography: Post-Critical Reflections on Deviance in and of Representations. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 11, (10). https:// doi.org/10.3390/ijgi11100526. Edler, D., Kühne, O., Keil, J., & Dickmann, F. (2019). Audiovisual Cartography: Established and New Multimedia Approaches to Represent Soundscapes. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 69, (5–17). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-019-00004-4. Eisel, U. (1982). Die schöne Landschaft als kritische Utopie oder als konservatives Relikt. Über die Kristallisation gegnerischer politischer Philosophien im Symbol „Landschaft“. Soziale Welt – Zeitschrift für Sozialwissenschaftliche Forschung, 33, (2, 157–168). Ellmers, L. (2020). Politische Entwicklungen als Treiber von Landschaftsprozessen. In R. Duttmann, O. Kühne, & F. Weber (Eds.), Landschaft als Prozess (pp. 557–572). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Endreß, S. (2021). Beton, Parfüm, Fastfood – Geruchslandschaften. Phänomenologische Forschungsergebnisse eines Smellwalkes. Stadt+Grün, (6, 25–31). Endreß, S. (2023). Multisensory Landscapes – Smellscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Faure, P. (1993). Magie der Düfte. Eine Kulturgeschichte der Wohlgerüche von den Pharaonen zu den Römern. München: Artemis & Winkler. Fischer, J., & Mahler, M. (2023). Multisensory approaches to a disaster place? – A Phenomenological Walk through Altenahr after the Flood Disaster. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Fontaine, D. (2017). Simulierte Landschaften in der Postmoderne. Reflexionen und Befunde zu Disneyland, Wolfersheim und GTA V. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Gailing, L., & Leibenath, M. (2015). The Social Construction of Landscapes: Two Theoretical Lenses and Their Empirical Applications. Landscape Research, 40, (2, 123–138). https://doi. org/10.1080/01426397.2013.775233. Gerstlauer, S., & Mahler, M. (2023). To what extent are zoo landscapes staged? – A multisensory walk through the Wilhelma Zoo. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Greider, T., & Garkovich, L. (1994). Landscapes: The Social Construction of Nature and the Environment. Rural Sociology, 59, (1, 1–24). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.1994.tb00519.x. Höfer, W., & Vicenzotti, V. (2013). From Brownfields to Postindustrial Landscapes. Evolving Concepts in North America and Europe. In P. Howard, I. Thompson, & E. Waterton (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Landscape Studies (pp. 405–416). London: Routledge.

The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes …

45

Hofmeister, S., & Kühne, O. (2016). StadtLandschaften: Die neue Hybridität von Stadt und Land. In S. Hofmeister, & O. Kühne (Eds.), StadtLandschaften. Die neue Hybridität von Stadt und Land (pp. 1–10). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Hofmeister, S., & Mölders, T. (2019). StadtLandschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 731–741). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Hokema, D. (2013). Landschaft im Wandel? Zeitgenössische Landschaftsbegriffe in Wissenschaft, Planung und Alltag. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Hoppe-Sailer, R. (2007). Simmels Begriff der Landschaft als Bildbegriff. In W. Busch, & O. Jehle (Eds.), Vermessen. Landschaft und Ungegenständlichkeit (pp. 131–142). Zürich, Berlin: Diaphanes. Howard, P., Thompson, I., Waterton, E., & Atha, M. (Eds.). (2019). The Routledge Companion to Landscape Studies (2. Auflage). London: Routledge. Kirchhoff, T. (2019). Politische Weltanschauungen und Landschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 383–396). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2008). Distinktion – Macht – Landschaft. Zur sozialen Definition von Landschaft. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Kühne, O. (2011). Die Konstruktion von Landschaft aus Perspektive des politischen Liberalismus. Zusammenhänge zwischen politischen Theorien und Umgang mit Landschaft. Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung, 43, (6, 171–176). Kühne, O. (2012). Stadt – Landschaft – Hybridität. Ästhetische Bezüge im postmodernen Los Angeles mit seinen modernen Persistenzen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2016). Transformation, Hybridisierung, Streben nach Eindeutigkeit und Urbanizing former Suburbs (URFSURBS): Entwicklungen postmoderner Stadtlandhybride in Südkalifornien und in Altindustrieräumen Mitteleuropas – Beobachtungen aus der Perspektive sozialkonstruktivistischer Landschaftsforschung. In S. Hofmeister, & O. Kühne (Eds.), StadtLandschaften. Die neue Hybridität von Stadt und Land (pp. 13–36). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2018a). Landscape and Power in Geographical Space as a Social-Aesthetic Construct. Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing. Kühne, O. (2018b). Landschaft und Wandel. Zur Veränderlichkeit von Wahrnehmungen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019a). Landscape Theories. A Brief Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019b). Sozialkonstruktivistische Landschaftstheorie. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 69–79). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2021). Landschaftstheorie und Landschaftspraxis. Eine Einführung aus sozialkonstruktivistischer Perspektive (3., aktualisierte und überarbeitete Auflage). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2022a). Florentinische Landschaften – eine Aktualisierung nach Georg Simmel zu ‚touristscape‘ und ‚trafficscape‘. In O. Kühne, T. Freytag, T. Sedelmeier, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Landschaft und Tourismus (RaumFragen, in diesem Band). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O. (2022b). Foodscapes – a Neopragmatic Redescription. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, (online first, 1–21). https://doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2022-0016. Kühne, O., & Edler, D. (2022). Georg Simmel Goes Virtual. From ‘Philosophy of Landscape’ to the Possibilities of Virtual Reality in Landscape Research. Societies, 12, (5, 122). https://doi. org/10.3390/soc12050122. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2020). Baton Rouge – The Multivillage Metropolis. A Neopragmatic Landscape Biographical Approach on Spatial Pastiches, Hybridization, and Differentiation. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., Schönwald, A., & Weber, F. (2016). Urban/Rural Hybrids: The Urbanisation of Former Suburbs (URFSURBS). Quaestiones Geographicae, 35, (4, 23–34). https://doi.org/10.1515/ quageo-2016-0032.

46

O. Kühne

Kühne, O., Berr, K., Weber, F., & Dittel, J. (2023). From multisensory to ex-sensory – from landscapes of displeasure to landscapes of fear. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Lehmann, H. (1976). Toskanische Landschaft. In Villa und Villegiatura in der Toskana. Eine italienische Institution und ihre gesellschaftsgeographische Bedeutung. Mit einer einleitenden Schilderung „Toskanische Landschaft“ von Herbert Lehmann (Erdkundliches Wissen, vol. 44, pp. 1–10). Wiesbaden: Steiner. Lichtblau, K. (1997). Georg Simmel (Reihe Campus Einführungen, vol. 1091). Frankfurt/Main: Campus-Verlag. Ljunge, M. (2013). Beyond ‘the Phenomenological Walk’: Perspectives on the Experience of Images. Norwegian Archaeological Review, 46, (2, 139–158). https://doi.org/10.1080/0029365 2.2013.821160. Loda, M., Bonati, S., & Puttilli, M. (2020a). History to eat. The foodification of the historic centre of Florence. Cities, (103, 1–11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102746. Loda, M., Kühne, O., & Puttilli, M. (2020). The Social Construction of Tuscany in the German and English Speaking World – Presented by the Analysis of Internet Images. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 157–171). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. McLean, K. (2020). Temporalities of the Smellscape: Creative Mapping as Visual Representation. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 27–245). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Mitchell, W. J. T. (Ed.). (2002). Landscape and Power (2. Auflage). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Olwig, K. R. (2008). The Jutland Ciper: Unlocking the Meaning and Power of a Contested Landscape. In M. Jones, & K. Olwig (Eds.), Nordic landscapes. Region and belonging on the northern edge of Europe (pp. 12–52). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press; Published in cooperation with the Center for American Places. Payer, P. (2004). Gerüche – zwischen Abfall und Stimulans. Ein olfaktorischer Streifzug durch Wiens Geschichte und Gegenwart. In I. Kossina (Ed.), Abfallwirtschaft von Wien (pp. 49–58). Neuruppin: TK Verlag Karl Thomé-Kozmiensky. Porteous, J. D. (1985). Smellscape. Progress in Physical Geography, 9, (3, 356–378). https://doi. org/10.1177/030913338500900303. Reinhardt, V. (2013). Geschichte von Florenz. München: Beck. Roßmeier, A. (2020). Urban /Rural Hybridity in Pictures – The Creation of Neighborhood Images Using the Example of San Diego’s Urbanizing Inner-Ring Suburbs East Village and Barrio Logan. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 477–496). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Rother, K., & Tichy, F. (2008). Italien. Geographie, Geschichte, Wirtschaft, Politik (WBGLänderkunden, 2., überarb. Aufl.). Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Schafer, R. M. (1977). The Turning of the World. Toward a Theory of Soundscape Design. New York: Random House.

The Multisensory Florentine Landscapes …

47

Schafer, R. M. (1994). The Soundscape. Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World. Rochester: Destiny Books. Schenk, W. (2013). Landschaft als zweifache sekundäre Bildung – historische Aspekte im aktuellen Gebrauch von Landschaft im deutschsprachigen Raum, namentlich in der Geographie. In D. Bruns, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Landschaften: Theorie, Praxis und internationale Bezüge. Impulse zum Landschaftsbegriff mit seinen ästhetischen, ökonomischen, sozialen und philosophischen Bezügen mit dem Ziel, die Verbindung von Theorie und Planungspraxis zu stärken (pp. 23–36). Schwerin: Oceano Verlag. Schenk, W. (2017). Landschaft. In L. Kühnhardt, & T. Mayer (Eds.), Bonner Enzyklopädie der Globalität. Band 1 und Band 2 (pp. 671–684). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Sedelmeier, T., Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2022). Foodscapes (Essentials). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Simmel, G. (1907). Soziologie der Sinne. Die neue Rundschau, 18, (9, 1025–1036). https://socio. ch/sim/verschiedenes/1907/sinne.htm. Accessed: 24 March 2022. Simmel, G. (1908). Soziologie. Untersuchungen über die Formen der Vergesellschaftung. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot. Simmel, G. (2019a). Alpenreisen. In Andreas Mahler (Ed.), Philosophie der Landschaft. Ästhetik der Alpen, Rom, Florenz, Venedig (3rd ed., 35–41). Stühlingen an der Wutach: Mahler Verlag. Simmel, G. (2019b). Florenz. In Andreas Mahler (Ed.), Philosophie der Landschaft. Ästhetik der Alpen, Rom, Florenz, Venedig (3rd ed., pp. 68–74). Stühlingen an der Wutach: Mahler Verlag. Simmel, G. (2019c). Philosophie der Landschaft. In Andreas Mahler (Ed.), Philosophie der Landschaft. Ästhetik der Alpen, Rom, Florenz, Venedig (3rd ed., pp. 7–23). Stühlingen an der Wutach: Mahler Verlag. Tilley, C. Y. (2008). Body and image. Explorations in landscape phenomenology 2 (Explorations in Landscape Phenomenology 2). Walnut Creek, Calif: Left Coast Press. Vicenzotti, V. (2011). Der »Zwischenstadt«-Diskurs. Eine Analyse zwischen Wildnis, Kulturlandschaft und Stadt. Bielefeld: transcript. Weber, F. (2015). Diskurs – Macht – Landschaft. Potenziale der Diskurs- und Hegemonietheorie von Ernesto Laclau und Chantal Mouffe für die Landschaftsforschung. In S. Kost, & A. Schönwald (Eds.), Landschaftswandel – Wandel von Machtstrukturen (pp. 97–112). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Winchester, H. P. M., Kong, L., & Dunn, K. (2003). Landscapes. Ways of imagining the world. London: Routledge. Wylie, J. (2005). A single day’s walking: narrating self and landscape on the South West Coast Path. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 30, (2, 234–247). https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2005.00163.x. Wylie, J. (2007). Landscape. Abingdon: Routledge. Yasmeen, G. (1996). Bangkok’s foodscape: public eating, gender relations and urban change. (Dissertation, University of British Columbia). Vancouver. https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/ collections/ubctheses/831/items/1.0088160. Accessed: 30 March 2021. Zukin, S. (2009). Changing Landscapes of Power: Opulence and the Urge for Authenticity. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33, (2, 543–553). https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1468-2427.2009.00867.x.

Dr. Dr. Olaf Kühne  is Professor of Urban and Regional Development at the University of Tübingen. At the time of writing, he was Visiting Professor of Geography at the University of Florence.

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception Karsten Berr

Abstract

It is shown that with regard to landscape perception the criticism of the visual primacy of a landscape perception is justified if this primacy leads to a low estimation of the other senses or if they are not or hardly taken into account in corresponding landscape research. The talk of multisensuality experiences an explanation of its functioning by the model of a ‘unity of the senses’ respectively of the ‘mind’. The defense of the visual primacy is put forward with regard to the integrating function of vision for the other senses, which makes it possible to assign a sense within perception to the specific perceptions and secondly to thematize and consider the thingness or materiality of the landscape and its synthesized ‘components’. These considerations offer a perspective on further research possibilities within social constructivist landscape research by relating phenomenological theorems to social constructivist theorems in order to be able to consider the thingness or materiality of landscape. Keywords

Multisensuality · Visual primacy · Social constructivism · Phenomenology ·  Thingness · Unity of the senses

K. Berr (*)  Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_4

49

50

K. Berr

1 Introduction Cultural-historical reconstruction of the genesis of the European concept of landscape and on the social, as well as individual, construction of landscape has been able to show that ‘landscape’ has been constructed and historically mediated as an image, and that contemporary landscape constructions and perceptions still contain large portions of aesthetic judgments. Although aesthetic patterns of interpretation and evaluation are not constitutive for all understandings of landscape (especially not for scientific ones), especially Western common-sense understandings of landscape are essentially based on aesthetic approaches (among many: Bruns et al. 2015; Burckhardt 2006b; Kirchhoff 2011; Kirchhoff and Trepl 2009; Kühne 2018b; Kühne and Jenal 2020; Linke 2019a, b; in this volume: Kühne et al. 2023a). Even if the individual construction and aesthetic evaluation of ‘landscape’ is based on social conventions as well as patterns of interpretation and evaluation, sensual perceptions are fundamentally required so that a spatial section of the physical world can be viewed or synthesized into ‘landscape’ or evaluated aesthetically (but also ethically and cognitively) at all. Although visual impressions still dominate landscape synthesis, olfactory and acoustic as well as gustatory and haptic stimuli are also involved (Bischoff 2007; Edler et al. 2019; Edler and Kühne 2019, 2022; Endreß 2021; Kühne 2018c; Kühne and Edler 2018; Payer 2004; Siepmann et al. 2020; in this volume espacially: Endreß 2023; Fischer and Mahler 2023; Gerstlauer and Mahler 2023; Kühne et al. 2023b; Palat Narayanan 2023). Against this background, it is not only scientifically understandable, but also welcome, if it is argued for the consideration of the multisensuality of landscape perception in the context of the consideration of non-visual sensory stimuli. In the following, the question is explored whether the traditional primacy of the visual, which is currently criticized with valid reasons while addressing the multisensuality of landscape perception, is nevertheless justified in a specific way. The scientific approach to this question and its answer are considerations following the philosophical tradition of phenomenological and (social)constructivist, more generally: constitutionaltheoretical tradition, from which an integration of sociological, geographical and anthropological research results will take place. The argumentation thus stands in a tension between a phenomenological approach, which considers ‘landscape’ as a given entity, and a social constructivist approach, which understands ‘landscape’ as a construct looked into physical spaces. In order not to misunderstand this oscillation between the two approaches as inconsistency, we refer to the theory of the ‘three landscapes’ as developed by Olaf Kühne and introduced into landscape research: In reference to the ‘3-world theory’ of Karl Popper (Popper 1973, 2018 [1984], 2019 [1987]; Popper and Eccles 1977), in which he distinguishes the world of material objects (world 1), the world of individual consciousness (world 2) (including “subconscious experiences” (Popper 2018 [1984], p. 82)), and the world of cultural contents (world 3) with “all planned or intended products of human mental activity” (Popper 2019 [1987], p. 17), the following differen-

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

51

tiations can be made (cf. Gryl 2022; Kühne 2018a, 2019a, 2020; Kühne and Berr 2021; Kühne and Jenal 2020; Sedelmeier et al. 2022): ‘Landscape 1’’ can be said to be those material or thing-like objects which in ‘Landscape 2’ are subjected to synthesis by individual consciousness. ‘Landscape 2’ is based on social conventions that include patterns of interpretation, evaluation, categorization (‘Landscape 3’). In this way, the three landscapes can be understood as subsets of Popper’s three worlds. The oscillation between phenomenology and social constructivism is thus an oscillation between a position that focuses on the effects of ‘landscape 1’ on a perceiving individual (‘landscape 2’) and a position that focuses on the relations between perceiving individual (‘landscape 2’) and social patterns of interpretation and evaluation (‘landscape 3’). In order to answer the question whether the traditional primacy of the visual is justified in a specific way, first the sense of the traditional hierarchy of the senses and that of the visual primacy are traced, in order to then present typical ways of criticizing the visual primacy (Sect. 2). In an intermediate step, senses are reconstructed as media, each with a specific function, in order to further define the concept of ‘multisensuality’ in its meaning (Sect. 3). Afterwards, arguments for the defense of the visual primacy in the sense of an understanding of vision as ‘primus inter pares’ in the ‘unity of the senses’ will be presented, which will first deal with the cultural-historical genesis of landscape synthesis as image, then explain the ‘unity of the senses’, and finally give some landscape-phenomenological hints for the plausibility of the visual primacy in landscape perception (Sect. 4). A conclusion including an outlook will summarize the results (Sect. 5).

2 Hierarchy of senses and visual primacy When arguing for attention to the multisensuality of landscape perception, the question arises of how to understand the relationship of the different senses to each other and in terms of landscape constitution. The expressions ‘(multi)sensuality’ and ‘landscape perception’ refer to ‘aesthetics’ as a philosophical theory of perception, since colloquially and from the ancient Greek word origin (‘aisthesis’) ‘aesthetics’ refers especially to ‘sensual perception’ and thus to ‘sensuality’ (cf. e.g. Hauskeller 2003; Liessmann 2009, p. 13; Majetschak 2016, p. 10; Reicher 2015, p. 9 etc.), which traditionally includes seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. Although the original colloquial meaning of ‘aisthesis’’ includes these sensory faculties in their multiplicity as well as the sum of all sensory impressions in their overall effect, the sense of sight, i.e. the faculty of seeing and thus the visual, often stands as pars pro toto for contemplation and sensory perception per se. The outstanding importance of vision already shows in the term ‘Anschauung’, but also in terms like ‘theory’ or ‘evidence’, in which the etymology of the visual ‘appears’ (Plessner 2022, p. 335; see also Diaconu 2013, p. 56). Also the term ‘phenomenon’, for example, can be etymologically traced back to seeing with Heidegger: ‘Phenomenon’ in Heidegger’s reading denotes “that which shows itself in itself, that which can be revealed”, and the phenomena form “the totality of that which lies in the light or

52

K. Berr

can be brought to light” (Heidegger 1993 [1927], p. 28) that is, that which shows itself in the sensual perception as appearing. The question is, however, whether the appearing actually ‘shows itself’ in the execution of an act of reception or whether it requires a performance of consciousness as a “performative practice” that makes it appear (Schürmann 2008, p. 51). Too fast the discussion gets “on epistemological or ontological deviations” by the paraphrase of ‘showing oneself’ and suggests “the idea of an activity from the seen, seeing, catching sight of from the seeing. The more insistently a thinking insists on the recovery of the immediately experienced—like phenomenology—the more closely it binds itself to the [Husserlian; author] model of seeing in the ideal of evidence” (Plessner 2022, p. 335). This tension between ‘showing oneself’ and ‘bringing to appearance’ will have to be returned to (“Vision as ‘Primus Inter Pares’ in the ‘Unity of the Senses’”). At this point, however, a brief note on the relationship between ‘construction’ and ‘perception’ is necessary: landscape construction and landscape perception are each composed both ‘constructively’ or ‘productively’ and ‘receptively’. Landscape construction always takes place in a specific socio-cultural context, so that this construction must always already receive this context in order to be able to take it into account. On the other hand, landscape perception is not only receptive in the sense of a supposedly presuppositionless or unmediated viewing of ‘landscape 1’, but at the same time productive, in that specific expectations of seeing or conventions of seeing (‘landscape 3’) must be applied to physical spaces and specific interpretations of what is seen (‘landscape 2’) must be produced. Such preconditions of landscape perception and experience have been explored in numerous studies by the geographer Gerhard Hard since the 1970s (Hard 1969, 1970, 1977; Hard and Gliedner 1977).

Hierarchization of the Senses Recently, with regard to the question and meaning of multisensuality, the primacy of the visual has been criticized as inadmissibly reducing the importance of the other senses. Instead, it must be a matter of breaking up the traditional ‘dominance of the visual’ and also taking into account ‘non-visual landscapes’ in the sense of the constitutional performances of non-visual sensory impressions (Edler and Kühne 2019; Kühne and Edler 2018). For the constitution of a physical space into a landscape also takes place with the senses of hearing, smell, touch or taste (cf. exemplarily Kazig 2013, 2019; Kühne 2019d). Within aesthetics, a hierarchization of the senses is often found, insofar as they are distinguished according to near and far senses, depending on whether a sense can have immediate contact with an object (touch, smell, taste) or establish distance from what is sensed (see, hear). Accordingly, these senses can also be distinguished into ‘theoretical’ and ‘practical senses’ depending on distance (distance) or contact (proximity). Among the theoretical senses, Hegel, for example, counts “face and hearing” (Hegel 2003 [1823], p. 206), i.e. seeing and hearing. These remote senses can be called theoretical

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

53

senses because the “objects [are] here in a free relation. They are only contemplated” (Hegel 2003 [1823], p. 206). The near senses, as practical senses, include “smell, taste, and the sense of touch”; they relate “to things as individual, resisting, inasmuch as the subject is also an individual and comes into relation with the individuals in such a way as to annihilate them” (Hegel 2003 [1823], p. 206). These remarks are relevant because they relate the question of the hierarchy of the senses to the question of the hierarchy of theory and practice. The primacy of vision as a theoretical sense over practical senses correlates with the traditional primacy of theory over practice that results from a ‘spectator theory’ of cognition fixated on the visual (Dewey 1998 [1929], pp. 25 ff.). The original colloquial meaning of the ancient Greek words theoría (i.e., look, contemplate) and theoreîn (i.e., look, contemplate, see) points to the etymological origin of the term ‘theory’, for the ancient Greek understood a ‘theorist’ to mean a spectator, viewer, and observer (cf. Mittelstraß 2004, p. 259; Lembeck 2011, p. 2180; Thiel 2004, p. 260)—first of all of sporting festivals or events (Janich 2015, p. 16). Characteristic is a specific situation of perception, which is characterized by disinterested distance to and by renunciation of active participation in what is observed. Generally speaking, the “theorist” is the “uninterested spectator” (Lembeck 2011, p. 2180). In the history of science, this understanding of disinterested, distanced observation was later regarded as the ideal of scientific methodology and met with a disdain for physical labor, especially manual labor, which was already anchored in Greek cultural history in the social order of the time. As free citizens (polítes) of the ancient Greek city-state (pólis), such work was “rather left to the women, the slaves, the periöks (peasant inhabitants of the surrounding countryside) and to the philistines, i.e. the craftsmen” (Janich 2015, p. 15). This is continued until Plato and Aristotle’s higher valuation of theory over practical activities and in their succession into modern times.

Criticism of Visual Primacy It is not possible at this point to even begin to address the differentiated nature of the long history of a (particularly philosophical) critique of the primacy of seeing (cf. exemplarily in overview: Schürmann 2008, pp. 31 ff.; Welsch 1996, pp. 236 ff.; Wild 2021; Wils 2011, pp. 2006 ff.). But criticism of the ‘visual primacy’ (Welsch 1996) resp. of an ‘oculocentrism’ (Schürmann 2008) is not new and was directed, for example, epistemologically “against the susceptibility of the sense of sight to deception”, powercritically against “its supposed or actual power-formedness” (Schürmann 2008, p. 31). In terms of constitutional theory, it is also questioned whether seeing is a pure act of reception or a performance of consciousness as a “performative practice” (Schürmann 2008, p. 51). Behind this is the metaphysical-historically repeated dispute in numerous variants between immediate contemplation and mediating concept, historically exemplary between empiricism and rationalism or presently paradigmatic between phenomenology and constructivism (cf. Kühne and Berr 2021, p. 192; Schürmann 2008, p. 39).

54

K. Berr

­ pistemologically, especially the connection of seeing with truth, established since E Plato, was criticized. As ‘true being’ was determined by Plato as an ‘idea’ (Gr. idea, that which is visible to the mind’s eye), these ideas are harnessed in a relation to the seeing of human beings, who must be able to behold the truth of the ideas. For this a ‘right look’ is necessary, that is, a “correctness of the look” (Heidegger 1975, p. 41). Truth becomes with it the correctness of the correct seeing and grasping of these ideas, to the homoíosis, thus to the “adjustment” of the correct looking to the idea visible to the spiritual eye (Heidegger 1975, p. 42). By the way, this is also the birth of the correspondence theories of truth as correspondence of cognition and object (s. Kühne and Berr 2021, p. 65f.). Still the modern metaphor of the Enlightenment of the ‘light of reason’ testifies to the primacy of seeing as ‘insight’ into truth. In contrast to this, Heidegger, for example, propagated a transition from seeing to hearing, i.e., to a ‘listening’ insertion into an unavailable beingfate, in order to ‘listen’ to the “claim of being” (Heidegger 1990 [1957], p. 22), to ‘listen’ to it to ‘listen’, to ‘pay attention’ to it and to turn to a ‘contemplative thinking’ as a realm of “thinking that leaves subjectivity” (Heidegger 1975, p. 72) (for the critique see Hubig 2006, pp. 99 ff.). Wittgenstein has rejected the traditional theory of meaning oriented to the paradigm of the imagination, according to which meanings conveyed in a languagefree way are “objects of a mental seeing” (cf. also Welsch 1996, p. 243; Borsche 1996), by a ‘use theory of meaning’, according to which the meaning of expressions lies in their use, and this is “inseparable from social forms of understanding and thus from hearing” (Welsch 1996, p. 243; cf. on Wittgenstein’s ‘use theory of meaning’ Kühne and Berr 2021, pp. 87 ff.; Leerhoff et al. 2010, pp. 50 ff.). Now the criticism of visual primacy and the favoring of hearing over seeing is one thing, but something else is the consideration of the other senses and the question of whether and how these senses interact or form a ‘unity’. This question can be discussed on the basis of three typical models: as competition, as equivalence, or as synergy (Diaconu 2013, p. 96): The hierarchization of the senses results in a competitive relationship, the possible substitutability or translatability of one sense modality by or into another results in the question of its equivalence, and the question of a functional interaction of the senses results in the question of synergy as unity in the diversity of the senses. In the following, the first question about the competitive relationship is integrated into the third question about synergy as a functional interaction of the senses and is resolved by defending the visual primacy in landscape construction, but at the same time relativizing and defusing it in the sense of a ‘primus inter pares’. The question of equivalence, on the other hand, can be put aside because the question of substitutability does not play a decisive role in this context.

3 Senses as Media with Specific Function: Multisensuality The question of a functional interaction of senses can be answered in a first step by interpreting senses also as media (cf. for example Münker 2005; Teichert 2005; Welsch 1998), insofar as media in a general sense denote a mediating instance (lat. medium, the middle,

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

55

the mediating, the means) (Hubig 2002), in the case of the senses between a perceiving (seeing, hearing, etc.) subject and perceived objects (here: physical spaces synthesized into landscapes). This understanding implies that without media there would be no meanings and thus no realities, that “sense always owes itself to the inscription in media, and that mediality is not added to sense retrospectively and externally, but is constitutive of sense from the very beginning, that it has productive significance for the processes of sense” (Welsch 1998, p. 236). For an adequate appreciation of the senses as media, it is also relevant that they are generally ‘specific’, since they “access all objects, but—like any other medium—only after their own kind” (Welsch 1998, p. 242). The sense of sight can access all objects in a landscape, but cannot hear the birdsong of the birds seen; the sense of hearing cannot see the colorful plumage of the birds heard; the sense of smell cannot smell that colorful plumage and birdsong, just as the senses of sight and hearing cannot smell the odor of a flower meadow in bloom. This specific medial character of the senses therefore fundamentally concerns the perceptual-aesthetic synthesis into landscape, in the course of which each sense organ productively synthesizes specific aspects of the perceived physical space into ‘landscape’, either for itself or in synergy with other senses (Kühne 2006, 2018d, 2019b, f, 2022; Wojtkiewicz and Heiland 2012) which cannot be achieved by other senses. In traditional aesthetics as a philosophy of art, for instance in Hegel’s (2003 [1823], the different senses are each attributed a distinct aesthetic performance. Hegel’s differentiations are made with regard to the assignment of the different senses to corresponding art genres within the framework of different “stages of the spiritualization of the content and the material” (Hegel 2003 [1823], p. 39). The “arts of visibility” are the visual arts architecture, sculpture, and painting, the “sounding art” (of audibility) is the “art of tone,” the “speaking art” (“for the imagination”) is “poetry” (Hegel 2003 [1823], 206 ff.). Poetry is the “all-embracing art, the one that has risen to the highest spiritualization. For in it the spirit is free in itself, has torn itself away from the merely sensual material and has lowered it to the sign of itself” (Hegel 2003 [1823], p. 44). As far as this immaterialization of the material of art is concerned in concrete terms, architecture still has as its material the gross external matter of inorganic nature; sculpture already has the spiritually formed and appropriated matter of stone; painting already has “visibility as such,” that is, color as a spiritual artistic medium; music has abstract audibility, that is, sound; poetry has the sign of the spirit, that is, the word. The desensualization of the “general forms of the sensuous” (Hegel 2003 [1823], p. 44) of space and time, is shown in architecture and sculpture by the fact that both still use space “in its three dimensions as the material of representation” (Hegel 2003 [1823], p. 44); painting already uses the two dimensions of space painting already of the two-dimensional surface; music of a time-point; poetry of a “point[s] of the mind as the thinking subject” (Hegel 2003 [1823], p. 45) as the connection of space (ideas) and time (history). In the face of a denaturation of the figure of the work of art, architecture stands as a heavy external construction; sculpture as a spiritualized natural figure; painting determines the “figure by imperceptible transitions of a coloration” (Hegel 2003 [1823], p. 261); music is the sound of the tone; poetry is an articulated tone as a sign of the spirit.

56

K. Berr

4 Defense of the Visual Primacy Regardless of the justified criticism of the ‘visual primacy’, with regard to the phenomenon of multisensuality, the question remains whether, in landscape perception, seeing does play an excellent role in the ‘concert’ of the senses (cf. Diaconu 2013, p. 53). This question can be answered in this article only in the context of first hints, which may be understood as a suggestion for further research. The mentioned question will be specified in the following to the question whether the sense of sight makes the integrating constitution of a sensual multiplicity to ‘landscape’ in the medium of different sensory faculties as media possible in the first place. Could such a constitution be achieved by hearing alone or by smelling alone? Or also the combination of the two senses? The question is whether seeing is not the integrating sense that enables the other senses to have their specific status in the course of an optically guided landscape synthesis. In order to come closer to an answer to these questions, it must first be remembered in this context that ‘landscape’ proves to be an image in a cultural-historical reconstruction. Afterwards it is to be shown that and how seeing is to be understood as primus inter pares within the unity of the senses in a first approximation.

Landscape as Image As is well known, with an established cultural-historical reconstruction of the genesis of the European concept of landscape, three main meanings of ‘landscape’ can be distinguished diachronically: first, an original territorial-political one (landscape as ‘regio’), second, a later aesthetic-emotional one developed in landscape painting (landscape as ‘image’ and ‘soul symbol’), and third, a physical-ontic one (landscape as ‘physical space’) (cf. among many: Berr 2018, 2020; Berr and Kühne 2020; Berr and Schenk 2019; Gruenter 1975 [1953]; Haber 2001; Hard 1991; Jackson 2005; Jessel 2005; Kirchhoff 2017; Kühne 2018d; Leibenath and Gailing 2012; Olwig 1996; Schenk 2013, 2017). The sociologist Georg Simmel related the culturally and historically decisive constitutional achievement of landscape painting to landscape observation per se and described ‘landscape’ as the product of a synopsis of “individual natural objects” (Simmel 1957 [1913], p. 147) to form a image. In this sense of a synthesis of individual things (‘natural objects’ or sections of the physical space) into a unity (‘landscape’), the observation of nature as landscape is a image. It owes itself to the ‘constructive’ gaze of an observer, whose constitutional prerequisites were described by Wilhelm Heinrich Riehl with the well-known formulation of a ‘landscape eye’ (Riehl 1996). However, the way of speaking about ‘nature’ is problematic, since ‘nature’ is, firstly, a philosophically elusive term (Berr and Jenal 2021; Gloy 2005 [1995]) and secondly, in the view of social constructivism, ‘nature’—like landscape—is by no means a ‘final’ foundation for theoretical work that cannot be questioned further, but a contingent construction among others (Kühne and Edler 2022).

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

57

The constituent view with a ‘landscape eye’ (Riehl 1996) required diverse cultural and social preconditions, so that only within the framework of a long social and cultural history (cf. among many: Berr and Kühne 2020; Berr and Schenk 2019; Hard 1977; Kirchhoff 2017; Kühne 2018d; Müller 1977; Schenk 2017) it was possible to learn to see a “‘looked[at] section of nature’” (Schenk 2017, p. 676) to see as landscape (vgl. Hammerschmidt and Wilke 1990; Hard 2002, p. 177). ‘Landscape’ is therefore a “visual figure” (Hard 1991, p. 14) in the sense of a viewing wholeness (cf. Schneider 2009; Steingräber 1985; Tesdorpf 1984), later also a symbolic sense-image (Kirchhoff 2017; Kortländer 1977; Kühne 2018b; Schneider 2009). Mediated via the walkable images of the English landscape gardens (Buttlar 1989, p. 14) and the literature and painting of Romanticism, which specifically tie such images to the perception and emotionality of an individual (Gruenter 1975 [1953]; Langen 1975 [1953]; Ritter 1996; Spanier 2006), the construction and representation scheme developed in art is ‘imitated’ and transferred to the ‘reality’ outside of art. (Hard 1991; vgl. Hauck 2014; Kühne 2018d). Henceforth, “world, nature, and earth(surface) could be potentially scenic” (Hard 1991, p. 14) “and— disregarding the aesthetic mediation—could be regarded as viewer-independent objective givens” (Berr and Schenk 2019, p. 30). Denis Edmund Cosgrove captured this process in the catchy formula of ‘landscape’ as “a way of seeing” (Cosgrove 1984, p. 13). Joachim Ritter, in his “classical” (Vietta 1995, p. 217) landscape essay (Ritter 1974 [1963], pp. 141 ff.) has presented an explanation for the “aesthetic constitution of landscape” in modern times (Ritter 1974 [1963], p. 183), for which there was no equivalent in the premodern world. The reason lies in the fact that the “nature” conceptually known in the context of metaphysical or ‘onto-theological’ orientation (Heidegger 1990 [1957], p. 47) can only be mediated with the life-world experience reality of humans if it can visualize nature as landscape in the medium of aesthetic contemplation: “Landscape is nature, which is aesthetically present in the sight for a feeling and sensing observer” (Ritter 1974 [1963], p. 150). That means: Without the sight of a specific section of the physical world, formed by cultural mediations, ‘landscape’ could not be ‘constructed’ or ‘visualized’ at all. Only by seeing as a synopsis of a physical spatial multiplicity the perception of a ‘landscape’ becomes possible. In this sense and in the context of the distinction between ‘genesis and validity’ (Gabriel 1993, 2012; Schildknecht et al. 2008) seeing is indispensable for the cultural-historical, social and cultural conditions of the genesis of the possibility of a landscape construction.

Vision as ‘Primus Inter Pares’ in the ‘Unity of the Senses’ The further question is then, however, to what extent the visual primacy of landscape perception can claim validity for current landscape perceptions beyond the genetic aspect. In other words, to what extent can vision be interpreted as ‘primus inter pares’ among the other senses and to what extent in a unity of the senses? To this end, a piece of theory by Hegel is sketched, which, using the functioning of human consciousness as an

58

K. Berr

example, can show on the model of a ‘living unity of mind’ how a functional interaction of the senses can be conceived at all. The corresponding explanations are supplemented by some references to Helmuth Plessner’s ‘aesthesiology of mind’ or (synonymously) ‘anthropology of the senses’ (Plessner 2022, p. 332) which emphasizes the connection of human perceptual processes to the fundamental corporeality and the interaction of the individual senses. It is also allowed to refer to Simmel’s ‘sociology of the senses’, which is not considered here (Simmel 1907), because it deals mainly with the importance of seeing for intersubjectivity and corresponding social interactions. The foregoing suggests that vision is ‘shaped’ or ‘formed’, as it were, by social and cultural forms and content. In lectures on his ‘philosophy of mind’, Hegel spoke in this sense of an “educated mind” (Hegel 1994 [1827/28], p. 188) and with regard to sensations in the ‘Encyclopedia’ of an “educated true sensation” (Hegel 1992 [1830], § 447). With regard to seeing, one can also speak of an “educated gaze” or of an “educated view” (Halbig 2002, p. 98) or of an ‘educated viewing’ (Berr 2009, pp. 75 ff.). With such expressions, Hegel opposes the contemporary scientific notion at the beginning of the nineteenth century that vision or viewing, for example, are part of a ‘machinery’ of human consciousness that processes incoming visual information and passes it on to other parts of this machinery for further processing. He contrasts this with the conception of a holistic structure of the mind, within which seeing is already “cognizant looking at” (Hegel 1992 [1830], § 445; emphasis in the original). That is, seeing is fundamentally based on various social and cultural presuppositions, such as habits of seeing, memories of what has been seen before, moral principles, aesthetic judgments of taste, religious convictions, scientific knowledge, philosophical insights, and much more. Hegel argues that the human ‘mind is by no means a mechanically functioning accumulation or “collection”’ (Hegel 1994 [1827/28], p. 183) of individual “faculties”, i.e. an “aggregate being” (Hegel 1992 [1830], § 445) but a “living unity” (Hegel 1992 [1830], § 379), so that “looking at, imagining, etc. is not isolated, but only present as a moment of totality, of cognition itself” (Hegel 1992 [1830], § 445). Using the example of a scientifically educated observer of nature, Hegel demonstrates that (here) scientific presuppositions flow into his comprehension of nature: “Only through the education of the mind does attention acquire strength and fulfillment. The botanist, for example, notices incomparably more on a plant in the same time than a person ignorant in botany. The same is naturally true with respect to all other objects of knowledge. A man of great sense and of great learning has at once a complete conception of what is before him; with him the sensation bears throughout the character of memory.” (Hegel 1995, p. 249). In another, current terminology, this means: The special knowledge stocks of experts or scientists as a specific mode of preconditions of landscape perception and evaluation guide the current perceptual or evaluative process (cf. Kühne 2018 [2020 erschienen]). Plessner also (2022) explores the question of how a ‘unity of the senses’ is possible. He, too, concludes that the individual senses work together and, moreover, that they support and complement each other. The belonging together and working together of the individual senses is based on the fact that they belong to an individual body, because

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

59

“only their embedding in the total organism, which they serve and which they, as it belongs to serving, also control, provides access to their comprehensive unity” (Plessner 2022, p. 384). Similarly, as in the sense of Kant’s ‘transcendental apperception’ in every conception within the framework of cognition, an ‘I think’ as the unifying ground of all objective cognition, anchored in the subject, must accompany and be able to accompany all conceptions, including their changing contents, in order to arrive at a synthesis (Kant 1959 [1781]), Plessner assumes, following Straus (1956), that in every perception the perceiver at the same time senses himself as perceiver in his bodily unity; that is, the consciousness of “being mine” (Straus 1956, p. 391) accompanies all perceptions, just as every cognition of something presupposes ‘unification’ in cognition: “No I-consciousness without knowledge of ways of unification (‘Vermeinigung’) of the given. But unification (‘Vermeinigung’) means unification in one consciousness” (Baumanns 1989, p. 19). The ‘Vermeinigung’ in perceiving thus leads to the unity of the perceived and thus to the unity of the senses as the ‘Vermeinigung’ in recognizing leads to the synthesis of the ideas. Like the process of cognition in Kant’s and Hegel’s sense, the process of perception in Plessner’s view is an intentional process that leads to the constitution of the perceived object by the bodily subject and gives meaning to this object. For the unity and this “sense of the senses” are fulfilled “in dealing with things” (Plessner 2022, p. 371). This refers to a thingness or materiality that can be taken into account without reontologization—this is to be returned to and linked to (“The Visual Primate in Landscape Phenomenology—Some Hints”). ‘Sense’ is ambiguous, it can mean on the one hand the sensuous, on the other hand the sense of something: “Sense is namely this wonderful word, which has two opposite meanings; for sense is on the one hand the immediate organ of sensuous apprehension, and on the other hand we call sense: the meaning, i.e. the other of the sensuous, the inner, the thought, the general of the thing. The one is the thing as immediate, the other the thought of the thing. And both we call sense” (Hegel 2003 [1823], p. 59 f.). The senses with their specific efficiency “bring the variety in the whole. So many pages, so many senses. But also: so many senses, so many sides” (Plessner 2022, p. 371). That is, “the mode of appearance corresponds to the mode of attention” (Plessner 2022, p. 371). The appearance, for example, corresponds to the sight, the sound to the hearing. However, nobody knows how the seen looks, “if no eye looks at it any more. The perceived and sensed does not depend on the perceiving and sensing, but in the way it appears it is indistinguishably connected with it, its way, its specific mode” (Plessner 2022, p. 372). Addressed here is the aforementioned dispute between immediate intuition and mediating concept, between empiricism and rationalism, or between phenomenology and constructivism (“Criticism of Visual Primacy”). How can a social constructivist approach (Kühne 2019f), as advocated in this article, be compatible with a phenomenology of the body? A very general answer comes from Peter Janich, who, from the point of view of a methodological culturalism as a continuation of methodological constructivism (Hartmann and Janich 1996; Janich 2015) objects against a possible “conceptual isolation of the active or of reception” that such isolation is “always superordinated to a unity of

60

K. Berr

aspects of the active, of producing and bringing forth on the one hand, and of the receptive, of receiving and experiencing on the other hand” (Janich 1993, p. 43). Another answer does not so much bring a unity into play, which is faced with the question “how this unity itself is to be operationally and phenomenally identified again” (Prange 2005, p. 28), but in the sense of the concept of ‘family resemblance’ (Wittgenstein 2019) points to a ‘kinship relation’ of social constructivist and phenomenological research (Kühne 2019c; Kühne and Berr 2021, p. 192). If social constructivist research focuses on social mediation processes (‘landscape 3’) and the individual in his or her specific constitution of the world (‘landscape 2’), phenomenological research investigates more strongly the effects and meanings of physical spaces (‘landscape 1’) on and for the individual, whereby the individual construction of space or landscape (‘landscape 2’) is influenced by the social mediation processes (‘landscape 3’). If social constructivist research is related to the social and individual construction processes of space or landscape, and thus to cognitive processes, phenomenological research is more related to individual practices, appropriations, meanings, and emotional grants, and is therefore more related to the relation between physical space or ‘landscape’ (‘landscape 1’) and the individual in his or her corporeality, perceptual readiness, and emotionality (‘landscape 2’). The relationship can also be grasped as a division of labor of theoretical conceptions, with social constructivism relating more to the relation between the social (‘landscape 3’) and the individual (‘landscape 2’), and phenomenology relating more to the relation between ‘landscape’ or physical space (‘landscape 1’) and the individual (‘landscape 2’). Accordingly, even if this division of labor has already been thematized, it is still in an initial and testing stage in concrete research. This also concerns the thematization of the function of the senses. In the following, however, some hints are given how this division of labor research can be understood not only as a relationship of kinship between the mentioned theoretical approaches, but also as an integration of phenomenological methods into social constructivist landscape research.

The Visual Primate in Landscape Phenomenology—Some Hints Regardless of the ‘unity of the senses’ (Plessner) or the ‘living unity’ of the spirit (Hegel) as well as the undisputed significance of the multisensuality of landscape perception, the question still remains whether a visual primacy of landscape perception is to be stated and how this is to be explained or justified. The developmental reconstruction of the concept of landscape and the corresponding perception of landscape has shown that without seeing the concept, but also the socio-cultural construct ‘landscape’ would not exist. Given would be spaces, things and phenomena in their diversity, for example meadows, fields, forests, biotopes, individual plants and animals, buildings, roads, industrial plants, residential and commercial areas, energy production plants and energy supply facilities as well as leisure, play and sports facilities etc., but no ‘landscape’. In this sense of the genesis of the concept of landscape, the visual cannot be left behind. The question

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

61

is, however, whether the visual must also play this primary role for a current landscape execution. Once ‘Landscape 3’ has been established as a pattern of seeing, an expectation of seeing, and a habit of seeing—is the visual still the primary thing in terms of validity? Is it not the same with ‘Landscape 3’ as with the ‘spirit of capitalism’? (Weber 2010 [1904/05]), which, once permanently established in capitalist economic systems, no longer needs its religious basis of origin to maintain its validity? Doesn’t the ‘spirit of landscape painting’ also apply to current landscape synthesis, even if it no longer requires its aesthetic basis of origin? Or is it a problem, in the face of changed historical and cultural conditions—as Simmel in his well-known landscape essay (Simmel 1996)— still to proceed from the paradigm of landscape painting and therefore from the conception of ‘landscape’ as a image (cf. on this Kühne and Edler 2022; in this volume: Kühne 2023)? For example, blind people can walk in ‘landscapes’ in the sense of ‘Landscape 1’ and visualize them by means of other senses, perceiving and feeling (Ritter 1996). They can smell meadows, fields, an agricultural homestead or a biogas plant, hear animal sounds, the wind in the trees or the spinning rotor blades of a wind turbine, as well as feel the loamy, sandy, boggy, grassy, concreted, asphalted, paved, gravelled or otherwise ground under their feet. They seem to know from sensory experience, without being able to see anything, that they are moving in a specific ‘landscape 1’. But is this really like this? Or does it require an experiential prior knowledge of the meaning of what is perceived as ‘landscape’ to make the blind person’s experience of landscape as landscape experience possible in the first place? And does the experience of the spatial structure of a ‘landscape 1’ not also require an integrating seeing that is bound to the movement of the body in space—with Husserl a ‘kinesthetic’ perception (Gander 2010, pp. 170 ff.)? How is it with non-blind people? What perceptions of ‘landscape’ can they make without having a prior knowledge of such meaning (‘landscape 3’) of the fact that the space they are in and within which they have landscape-synthesizing perceptions (‘landscape 2’) is a variant of ‘landscape 1’? A short thought experiment (on the philosophical status of thought experiments cf. Bertram 2012; Cohnitz 2006; Häggqvist 1996; Hauskeller 2006) may clarify what has been asked.1 Let us assume that someone is blindfolded (or blind) and led through a physical room without knowing where exactly this room is located and what it is like. There are only the possibilities of hearing, smelling, touching or tasting. Let’s say the person smells the smell of canola, hears birds chirping, and feels a sandy floor under

1 Georg

Bertram establishes a connection between (philosophical) conceptual work and thought experiments. He distinguishes three types of thought experiments: 1) those that illustrate and exemplify conceptual connections, 2) those that serve as argumentations for the purpose of “changing certain beliefs,” and 3) those that contribute “to the sharpening and innovation of concepts” (2012, p. 41). The last type serves, on the one hand, to “continually develop concepts for the articulation of the human relation to the world [...]” (ibid.), and, on the other hand, in this way “possibilities of understanding concepts” (ibid., 66; emphasis by author) are opened up.

62

K. Berr

his feet. Does the sum of these sensory impressions already constitute a landscape experience? Couldn’t the smelling, hearing and feeling person move and stay in a huge birdcage? That this is not so, the smelling, hearing and sensing person knows only by seeing, by looking at the phenomena, which can then be synthesized into landscape (or not, depending on the individual disposition to construct). Certainly, the person could be told that he or she is moving either in a birdcage or in a landscape. But this would then be a conceptual knowledge of a meaning independent of the sense impressions mentioned, which cannot be confirmed by the sense impressions at all, because these sense impressions could always also index another phenomenon. That is, only this conceptual knowledge synthesizes the sense impressions to ‘landscape’. Without such a concept, the person groping in the dark could certainly have an idea that he is moving in a landscape and then also interpret this experience like that of a landscape perception. But if a person actually sees a landscape and thereby knows that what is seen is constituted as a ‘landscape’ and is perceived accordingly, then this insight owes itself not to a conceptual knowledge but to seeing. In this approach, seeing can therefore be understood as the decisive sense, but not as a sense dominating or even suppressing the other senses, but as an integrating sense, so that then the other sense impressions can also be meaningfully located in a ‘landscape’. And this localization is then meaningful and correct in the context of multisensuality. The chirping of birds thus gets its sense from seeing a physical space as a landscape, rather than as a birdcage in a zoo. Metaphorically speaking, the polyphonic concert of the senses in landscape perception requires orchestration so as not to appear as mere noise or olfactory scenery. This orchestration is made possible by vision as the constituent synthesis of a physical multiplicity into ‘landscape’, which can meaningfully assign or integrate the individual sensory impressions to the experience of a landscape. This can be further specified phenomenologically. In one of his phenomenological aesthetic studies, Günter Figal pointed out that things are perceptible in various ways, but that visibility “in view of the thingness of things [has] a special importance. In seeing, one has a thing whole, even when one does not see it completely. But one sees it as a thing—in its permanence and as a single thing” (Figal 2012, p. 322). Sounds (birdsong) come and pass away, smells (rape) indicate not so much a thing as the substance or constituents of which they consist or are made, touches (the ground beneath one’s feet) allow one to sense something hand- or foot-firm, but the singularity of what is sensed only “comes to light” as soon as what is sensed “lifts out of a context and stands apart from a ground” (Figal 2012, p. 322). For this it must be seen. In order to avoid any misunderstanding at this point, a note is necessary: These reflections are not meant to speak the word of a re-ontologization of ‘landscape’, which would be a self-contradiction of a social constructivist approach. Rather, a phenomenological way shall be suggested to address the ‘blind spot’ of social constructivist landscape theory (cf. Berr et al. 2021) and to integrate it conceptually, namely the lack of consideration of its materiality or thingness (Kühne 2019d, 2019e, 2020; Kühne and Koegst 2023;

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

63

in this volume: Kühne et al. 2023). This can, of course, also be accomplished by means of neopragmatic supplementation by other theories, especially by so-called ‘more-thanrepresentational’ theories (Kühne 2019c, e), but within social constructivist landscape theory this would be an immanently innovative procedure. The reference to the context from which what is perceived must stand out in order to be perceived and experienced in its entirety is also relevant in another way and also concerns the materiality or thingness of a landscape. This other way concerns a crucial aspect of landscape perception: movement. The cultural-historical reconstruction (“Landscape as Image”) draws attention to the fact that English landscape gardens were conceived as ‘walkable images’. This moment of walkability or strolling can be found in numerous texts from, for example, Schiller (Riedel 1989; Schiller 2004) up to the socalled ‘promenadology’ of Lucius Burckhardt (Burckhardt 2006a). Walkability is a mode of moving in space that is indispensable for grasping the spatial structure of landscape (on theories of space cf. Kühne and Berr 2021). The concept of ‘movement’ is not necessarily to be sharpened to a walking around, it refers in the sense of Husserl especially to the movement of the eyes (Gander 2010, pp. 170 ff.). Figal, however, exemplifies the moment of movement by walking in a space using the architectural example of a building whose ‘structure’ can only be ‘opened up’ “by perceiving it in its thingness. It must be seen in such a way that one walks through the rooms and experiences them in their relationship to each other. This experiencing is above all moving and seeing. It is both in unity, in such a way that every movement and new position to the visible brings a new view with it, in such a way that every looking happens in a possibility field of movements and points of view and can therefore belong together with other views” (Figal 2012, p. 326f.). Without such ‘kinesthetic’ perceptions, the “allocation of spaces, their views and limitations” (Figal 2012, p. 327) cannot be grasped. What Figal shows by the example of a building is mutatis mutandis also valid for the experience of a landscape: it is comprehensible only in its “visible thingness” (Figal 2012, p. 327), that is, it can only be grasped in a concrete individual-bodily way beyond a conceptual meaning if it is experienced in the process of seeing, which is movement, and of a movement, which is seeing. Theoretically, in this way, the material or thing-like of a landscape can also be thematized and taken into account in a social constructivist theory. This also avoids the problematic way of talking about ‘nature’ by Simmel (Simmel 1957 [1913]) and still by Ritter (Ritter 1996), which raises more further questions than it can answer, since ‘nature’ is firstly a philosophically elusive concept (Berr and Jenal 2021; Gloy 2005 [1995]) and secondly, in the view of social constructivism—like landscape as well—it is by no means a ‘final’ foundation for theoretical work, which cannot be questioned further, but a contingent construction among others (Kühne and Edler 2022).

64

K. Berr

5 Conclusion and Outlook It has been shown that with regard to landscape perception the criticism of the visual primacy of a landscape perception is justified if this primacy leads to a low estimation of the other senses or if they are not or hardly taken into account in corresponding landscape research. The talk of multisensuality requires an explanation of its functioning, which is characterized by its respective specific mediality. This explanation was provided by theories of Hegel and Plessner, which assume a ‘unity of the senses’ or ‘spirit’, which is either a priori ‘cognizant looking at’ or bodily contact with things. The defense of visual primacy has been put forward in terms of a specific function of vision in landscape perception, namely in terms of the integrative function of vision. Developmentally, the possibility of being able to construct (‘look together’) and perceive a physical space as a ‘landscape 1’ at all owes itself to landscape painting; ‘landscape’ is by genesis an image and thus per se bound to seeing. Furthermore, seeing can be determined as ‘primus inter pares’ in the ‘unity of the senses’, whereby the ‘primus’ consists, first, in the integration of the senses in order to assign a sense within perception to the specific perceptions, second, in being able to thematize and take into account the thingness or materiality of the landscape and its synthesized ‘components’. These considerations offer a perspective on further research possibilities within social constructivist landscape research by relating phenomenological theorems to social constructivist theorems in order to integrate the ‘blind spot’ of social constructivism, the consideration of the thingness or materiality of landscape. This may be understood as a neopragmatic complementarity relation, a relation of kinship, or an integration, and operationalized accordingly. At this point, the implementation of the latter option is explicitly advocated in future research.

References Baumanns, P. (1989). Die Ethik Kants. Studienbief 3309 der Fernuniversität in Hagen. Hagen: Fernuniversität Hagen. Berr, K. (2009). Hegels Bestimmung des Naturschönen. Zur Betrachtung und Darstellung schöner Natur und Landschaft. Saarbrücken: Südwestdeutscher Verlag für Hochschulschriften. Berr, K. (2018). „Landschaft“ als Integrationsbegriff sittlich-politischer, ästhetischer, regionaler und partizipativer Aspekte. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (2, 123–138). Berr, K. (2020). Vom Wahren, Schönen und Guten. Philosophische Zugänge zu Landschaftsprozessen. In R. Duttmann, O. Kühne, & F. Weber (Eds.), Landschaft als Prozess (pp. 83–117). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Berr, K., & Jenal, C. (2021). Wald-Ästhetiken. Empirische Ergebnisse im Licht theoretischer Reflexionen über Natur und Landschaft. In K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Wald in der Vielfalt möglicher Perspektiven. Von der Pluralität lebensweltlicher Bezüge und wissenschaftlichen Thematisierungen (pp. 53–98). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Berr, K., & Kühne, O. (2020). „Und das ungeheure Bild der Landschaft …“. The Genesis of Landscape Understanding in the German-speaking Regions. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

65

Berr, K., & Schenk, W. (2019). Begriffsgeschichte. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 23–38). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Berr, K., Jenal, C., & Kühne, O. (2021). Stuttgart 21 im Fokus der Landschaftstheorie. Ergebnisse eines Masterkurses Geographie, Uni Tübingen. Stadt+Grün, (6, 11–19). Bertram, G. W. (Ed.). (2012). Philosophische Gedankenexperimente. Ein Lese- und Studienbuch (Reclam-Taschenbuch, vol. 20262). Stuttgart: Reclam. Bischoff, W. (2007). Nicht-visuelle Dimensionen des Städtischen. Olfaktorische Wahrnehmung in Frankfurt am Main, dargestellt an zwei Einzelstudien zum Frankfurter Westend und Ostend (Wahrnehmungsgeographische Studien, vol. 23). Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag. Borsche, T. (1996). Einleitung. Sprachphilosophische Überlegungen zu einer Geschichte der Sprachphilosophie. In T. Borsche (Ed.), Klassiker der Sprachphilosophie. Von Platon bis Noam Chomsky (pp. 7–13). München: Beck. Bruns, D., Kühne, O., Schönwald, A., & Theile, S. (Eds.). (2015). Landscape Culture – Culturing Landscapes. The Differentiated Construction of Landscapes. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Burckhardt, L. (2006a). Spaziergangswissenschaft (1995). In M. Ritter, & M. Schmitz (Eds.), Warum ist Landschaft schön? Die Spaziergangswissenschaft (pp. 257–300). Kassel: Martin Schmitz Verlag. Burckhardt, L. (2006b). Warum ist Landschaft schön? (1979). In M. Ritter, & M. Schmitz (Eds.), Warum ist Landschaft schön? Die Spaziergangswissenschaft (pp. 33–41). Kassel: Martin Schmitz Verlag. Buttlar, A. v. (1989). Der Landschaftsgarten. Gartenkunst des Klassizismus und der Romantik. Köln: DuMont. Cohnitz, D. (2006). Gedankenexperimente in der Philosophie. Paderborn: mentis Verlag. Cosgrove, D. (1984). Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape. London: University of Wisconsin Press. Dewey, J. (1998 [1929]). Die Suche nach Gewißheit. Eine Untersuchung des Verhältnisses von Erkenntnis und Handeln. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Diaconu, M. (2013). Phänomenologie der Sinne. Grundwissen Philosophie. Stuttgart: Reclam Verlag. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2019). Nicht-visuelle Landschaften. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 599–612). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2022). Aesthetics and Cartography: Post-Critical Reflections on Deviance in and of Representations. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 11, (10). https:// doi.org/10.3390/ijgi11100526. Edler, D., Kühne, O., Keil, J., & Dickmann, F. (2019). Audiovisual Cartography: Established and New Multimedia Approaches to Represent Soundscapes. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 69, (5–17). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-019-00004-4. Endreß, S. (2021). Beton, Parfüm, Fastfood – Geruchslandschaften. Phänomenologische Forschungsergebnisse eines Smellwalkes. Stadt+Grün, (6, 25–31). Endreß, S. (2023). Multisensory Landscapes – Smellscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Figal, G. (2012). Kunst. Philosophische Abhandlungen (Philosophische Untersuchungen, vol. 32, Unveränderte Studienausgabe). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. Fischer, J., & Mahler, M. (2023). Multisensory approaches to a disaster place? – A Phenomenological Walk through Altenahr after the Flood Disaster. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.

66

K. Berr

Gabriel, G. (1993). Grundprobleme der Erkenntnistheorie. Von Descartes zu Wittgenstein (3., durchgesehene Auflage). Paderborn: Schöningh. Gabriel, G. (2012). Geltung und Genese als Grundlagenproblem. Erwägen Wissen Ethik, 23, (4, 475–486). Gander, H.-H. (Ed.). (2010). Husserl-Lexikon. Darmstadt: WBG. Gerstlauer, S., & Mahler, M. (2023). To what extent are zoo landscapes staged? – A multisensory walk through the Wilhelma Zoo. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Gloy, K. (2005 [1995]). Die Geschichte des wissenschaftlichen Denkens. Das Verständnis der Natur. Köln: Komet. Gruenter, R. (1975 [1953]). Landschaft. Bemerkungen zu Wort und Bedeutungsgeschichte. In A. Ritter (Ed.), Landschaft und Raum in der Erzählkunst (Wege der Forschung, vol. 418, pp. 192– 207). Darmstadt: WBG. Gryl, I. (2022). Spaces, Landscapes and Games: the Case of (Geography) Education using the Example of Spatial Citizenship and Education for Innovativeness. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 359–376). Wiesbaden: Springer. Haber, W. (2001). Kulturlandschaft zwischen Bild und Wirklichkeit. In Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (Ed.), Die Zukunft der Kulturlandschaft zwischen Verlust, Bewahrung und Gestaltung (Forschungs- und Sitzungsberichte, vol. 215, pp. 6–29). Hannover: Selbstverlag. Häggqvist, S. (1996). Thought experiments in philosophy (Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis, vol. 18). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International. Halbig, C. (2002). Objektives Denken. Erkenntnistheorie und Philosophy of Mind in Hegels System. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog. Hammerschmidt, V., & Wilke, J. (1990). Die Entdeckung der Landschaft. Englische Gärten des 18. Jahrhunderts. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt DVA. Hard, G. (1969). Das Wort Landschaft und sein semantischer Hof. Zu Methode und Ergebnis eines linguistischen Tests. Wirkendes Wort, 19, (3–14). Hard, G. (1970). Die „Landschaft“ der Sprache und die „Landschaft“ der Geographen. Semantische und forschungslogische Studien. Bonn: Ferdinand Dümmlers Verlag. Hard, G. (1977). Zu den Landschaftsbegriffen der Geographie. In A. Hartlieb von Wallthor, & H. Quirin (Eds.), „Landschaft“ als interdisziplinäres Forschungsproblem. Vorträge und Diskussionen des Kolloquiums am 7./8. November 1975 in Münster (pp. 13–24). Münster: Aschendorff. Hard, G. (1991). Landschaft als professionelles Idol. Garten + Landschaft, 3/1991, (13–18). Hard, G. (2002). Zu Begriff und Geschichte von „Natur“ und „Landschaft“ in der Geographie des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts [1983 erstveröffentlicht]. In G. Hard (Ed.), Landschaft und Raum. Aufsätze zur Theorie der Geographie (Osnabrücker Studien zur Geographie, vol. 22, pp. 171– 210). Osnabrück: Universitätsverlag Rasch. Hard, G., & Gliedner, A. (1977). Wort und Begriff Landschaft anno 1976. In F. Achleitner (Ed.), Die Ware Landschaft. Eine kritische Analyse des Landschaftsbegriffs (pp. 16–24). Salzburg: Residenz Verlag. Hartmann, D., & Janich, P. (Eds.). (1996). Methodischer Kulturalismus. Zwischen Naturalismus und Postmoderne (Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft, vol. 1272). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Hauck, T. E. (2014). Landschaft und Gestaltung. Die Vergegenständlichung ästhetischer Ideen am Beispiel von „Landschaft“. Bielefeld: transcript.

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

67

Hauskeller, M. (Ed.). (2003). Die Kunst der Wahrnehmung. Beiträge zu einer Philosophie der sinnlichen Erkenntnis. Kusterdingen: SFG-Servicecenter Fachverlage. Hauskeller, M. (2006). Mögliche Welten. Neue phantastische Reisen durch die Philosophie. München: Verlag C. H. Beck. Hegel, G. W. F. (1992 [1830]). Enzyklopädie der philosophoschen Wissenschaften im Grundriss (1830). In W. Bonsiepen, & H.-C. Lucas (Eds.), Gesammelte Werke. Unter Mitarbeit von Udo Rameil (vol. 20). Hamburg: Meiner. Hegel, G. W. F. (1994 [1827/28]). Vorlesungen über die Philosophie des Geistes. Berlin 1827/1828 (Vorlesungen. Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte, vol. 13). Hamburg: Meiner (Nachgeschrieben von Johann Eduard Erdmann und Ferdinand Walter). Hegel, G. W. F. (1995). Werke in 20 Bänden. Auf der Grundlage der Werke von 1832–1845 neu editierte Ausgabe in der Schriftenreihe „Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft“ (SuhrkampTaschenbuch Wissenschaft, 10 – Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften III). Berlin: Suhrkamp Verlag (Redaktion Eva Moldenhauer und Karl Markus Michel). Hegel, G. W. F. (2003 [1823]). Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Kunst. Berlin 1823. Hamburg: Meiner. Heidegger, M. (1975). Platons Lehre von der Wahrheit. Mit einem Brief über den ‘Humanismus’. Bern: Francke. Heidegger, M. (1990 [1957]). Identität und Differenz. Pfullingen: Neske. Heidegger, M. (1993 [1927]). Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Hubig, C. (2002). Mittel. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag. Hubig, C. (2006). Die Kunst des Möglichen I. Technikphilosophie als Reflexion der Medialität. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag. Jackson, J. B. (2005). Landschaften. Ein Resümee [1984]. In B. Franzen, & S. Krebs (Eds.), Landschaftstheorie. Texte der Cultural Landscape Studies (Kunstwissenschaftliche Bibliothek, vol. 26, pp. 29–44). Köln: König. Janich, P. (1993). Gestaltung und Sensibilität. Zum Verhältnis von Konstruktivismus und Neuer Phänomenologie. In M. Großheim, & H.-J. Waschkies (Eds.), Rehabilitierung des Subjektiven. Bonn: Bouvier. Janich, P. (2015). Handwerk und Mundwerk. Über das Herstellen von Wissen. München: C.H. Beck. Jessel, B. (2005). Landschaft. In E.-H. Ritter (Ed.), Handwörterbuch der Raumordnung (4th ed., pp. 579–586). Hannover: Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (ARL). Kant, I. (1959 [1781]). Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag. Kazig, R. (2013). Landschaft mit allen Sinnen – Zum Wert des Atmosphärenbegriffs für die Landschaftsforschung. In D. Bruns, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Landschaften: Theorie, Praxis und internationale Bezüge. Impulse zum Landschaftsbegriff mit seinen ästhetischen, ökonomischen, sozialen und philosophischen Bezügen mit dem Ziel, die Verbindung von Theorie und Planungspraxis zu stärken (pp. 221–232). Schwerin: Oceano Verlag. Kazig, R. (2019). Atmosphären und Landschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 453–460). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kirchhoff, T. (2011). ‚Natur‘ als kulturelles Konzept. Zeitschrift für Kulturphilosophie, 5, (1, 69–96). Kirchhoff, T. (2017). Landschaft. In T. Kirchhoff, N. C. Karafyllis, D. Evers, B. Falkenburg, M. Gerhard, G. Hartung, et al. (Eds.), Naturphilosophie. Ein Lehr- und Studienbuch (pp. 152–158). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck; UTB. Kirchhoff, T., & Trepl, L. (2009). Landschaft, Wildnis, Ökosystem: zur kulturbedingten Vieldeutigkeit ästhetischer, moralischer und theoretischer Naturauffassungen. Einleitender Überblick. In T. Kirchhoff, & L. Trepl (Eds.), Vieldeutige Natur. Landschaft, Wildnis und Ökosystem als kulturgeschichtliche Phänomene (Sozialtheorie, pp. 13–68). Bielefeld: transcript.

68

K. Berr

Kortländer, B. (1977). Die Landschaft in der Literatur des ausgehenden 18. und beginnenden 19. Jahrhunderts. In A. Hartlieb von Wallthor, & H. Quirin (Eds.), „Landschaft“ als interdisziplinäres Forschungsproblem. Vorträge und Diskussionen des Kolloquiums am 7./8. November 1975 in Münster. Münster: Aschendorff. Kühne, O. (2006). Landschaft in der Postmoderne. Das Beispiel des Saarlandes. Wiesbaden: DUV. Kühne, O. (2018 [2020 erschienen]). Die Landschaften 1, 2 und 3 und ihr Wandel. Perspektiven für die Landschaftsforschung in der Geographie – 50 Jahre nach Kiel. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (3–4, 217–231). Kühne, O. (2018a). Die Landschaften 1, 2 und 3 und ihr Wandel. Perspektiven für die Landschaftsforschung in der Geographie – 50 Jahre nach Kiel. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (3–4, 217 – 231). Kühne, O. (2018b). Landscape and Power in Geographical Space as a Social-Aesthetic Construct. Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing. Kühne, O. (2018c). Landschaft und Wandel. Zur Veränderlichkeit von Wahrnehmungen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2018d). Landschaftstheorie und Landschaftspraxis. Eine Einführung aus sozialkonstruktivistischer Perspektive (2., aktualisierte und überarbeitete Auflage). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019a). Der dreifache Landschaftswandel. Forum Raumentwicklung, (1, 18–19). Kühne, O. (2019b). Die Sozialisation von Landschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 301–312). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019c). Landscape Theories. A Brief Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019d). Phänomenologische Landschaftsforschung. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 135–144). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019e). Sich abzeichnende theoretische Perspektiven für die Landschaftsforschung: Neopragmatismus, Akteur-Netzwerk-Theorie und Assemblage-Theorie. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 153–162). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019f). Sozialkonstruktivistische Landschaftstheorie. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 69–79). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2020). Landscape Conflicts. A Theoretical Approach Based on the Three Worlds Theory of Karl Popper and the Conflict Theory of Ralf Dahrendorf, Illustrated by the Example of the Energy System Transformation in Germany. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 12, (17, 1–20). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176772. Kühne, O. (2022). Foodscapes – a Neopragmatic Redescription. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, (online first, 1–21). https://doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2022-0016. Kühne, O. (2023). The multisensory Florentine landscapes – an update after Georg Simmel. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., & Berr, K. (2021). Wissenschaft, Raum, Gesellschaft. Eine Einführung zur sozialen Erzeugung von Wissen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Edler, D. (2018). Multisensorische Landschaften – die Bedeutung des Nicht-Visuellen bei der sozialen und individuellen Konstruktion von Landschaft und Herausforderungen für ihre Erfassung und Wiedergabe. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (1, 27–45). Kühne, O., & Edler, D. (2022). Georg Simmel Goes Virtual. From ‘Philosophy of Landscape’ to the Possibilities of Virtual Reality in Landscape Research. Societies, 12, (5, 122). https://doi. org/10.3390/soc12050122. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2020). The Threefold Landscape Dynamics – Basic Considerations, Conflicts and Potentials of Virtual Landscape Research. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.),

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

69

Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 389–402). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023). Land Loss in Louisiana. A Neopragmatic Redescription. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., Berr, K., Weber, F., & Dittel, J. (2023). From multisensory to ex-sensory – from landscapes of displeasure to landscapes of fear. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Langen, A. (1975 [1953]). Verbale Dynamik in der dichterischen Landschaftsschilderung des 18. Jahrhunderts (1948/49). In A. Ritter (Ed.), Landschaft und Raum in der Erzählkunst (Wege der Forschung, vol. 418, pp. 112–191). Darmstadt: WBG. Leerhoff, H., Rehkämpfer, K., & Wachtenhofer, T. (2010). Einführung in die Analytische Philosophie. Darmstadt: WBG. Leibenath, M., & Gailing, L. (2012). Semantische Annäherung an „Landschaft“ und „Kulturlandschaft“. In W. Schenk, M. Kühn, M. Leibenath, & S. Tzschaschel (Eds.), Suburbane Räume als Kulturlandschaften (Forschungs- und Sitzungsberichte, vol. 236, pp. 58–79). Hannover: Selbstverlag. Lembeck, K.-H. (2011). Theorie. In P. Kolmer, & A. G. Wildfeuer (Eds.), Neues Handbuch philosophischer Grundbegriffe (vol. 3, pp. 2180–2194). Freiburg im Breisgau: Alber. Liessmann, K. P. (2009). Ästhetische Empfindungen. Eine Einführung (UTB, vol. 3133). Stuttgart: UTB. Linke, S. I. (2019a). Die Ästhetik medialer Landschaftskonstrukte. Theoretische Reflexionen und empirische Befunde. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Linke, S. I. (2019b). Landschaftsästhetik. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 441–452). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Majetschak, S. (2016). Ästhetik zur Einführung (4., vollständig überarbeitete Auflage). Hamburg: Junius Verlag. Mittelstraß, J. (2004). Theoria. In J. Mittelstraß (Ed.), Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie (vol. 4, pp. 259–260). Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler. Müller, G. (1977). Zur Geschichte des Wortes Landschaft. In A. Hartlieb von Wallthor, & H. Quirin (Eds.), „Landschaft“ als interdisziplinäres Forschungsproblem. Vorträge und Diskussionen des Kolloquiums am 7./8. November 1975 in Münster (pp. 3–13). Münster: Aschendorff. Münker, S. (2005). Medienphilosophie der Virtual Reality. In M. Sandbothe, & L. Nagl (Eds.), Systematische Medienphilosophie (Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie Sonderband, vol. 7, pp. 381–396). Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Olwig, K. R. (1996). Recovering the Substantive Nature of Landscape. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 86, (4, 630–653). Palat Narayanan, N. (2023). Street-food and multisensorial construction of cityscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.

70

K. Berr

Payer, P. (2004). Gerüche – zwischen Abfall und Stimulans. Ein olfaktorischer Streifzug durch Wiens Geschichte und Gegenwart. In I. Kossina (Ed.), Abfallwirtschaft von Wien (pp. 49–58). Neuruppin: TK Verlag Karl Thomé-Kozmiensky. Plessner, H. (2022). Anthropologie der Sinne. In Anthropologie der Sinne. Gesammelte Schriften III (Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft, vol. 1626, pp. 317–393). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Popper, K. R. (2018 [1984]). Alle Menschen sind Philosophen. München: Piper (Herausgegeben von Heidi Bohnet und Klaus Stadler). Popper, K. R. (2019 [1987]). Auf der Suche nach einer besseren Welt. Vorträge und Aufsätze aus dreißig Jahren. München: Piper. Popper, K. R., & Eccles, J. C. (1977). Das Ich und sein Gehirn. München: Piper. Popper, K. R. (1973). Objektive Erkenntnis. Ein evolutionärer Entwurf. Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe. Prange, K. (2005). Die Zeigestruktur der Erziehung. Grundriss der Operativen Pädagogik. Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh. Reicher, M. E. (2015). Einführung in die philosophische Ästhetik (Einführungen Philosophie, 3., überarbeitete Auflage). Darmstadt: WBG. Riedel, W. (1989). Der Spaziergang. Ästhetik der Landschaft und Geschichtsphilosophie der Natur bei Schiller. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann. Riehl, W. H. (1996). Das landschaftliche Auge. In G. Gröning (Ed.), Landschaftswahrnehmung und Landschaftserfahrung (Arbeiten zur sozialwissenschaftlich orientierten Freiraumplanung, pp. 144–162). Münster: LIT Verlag. Ritter, J. (1974 [1963]). Subjektivität. Sechs Aufsätze. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Ritter, J. (1996). Landschaft. Zur Funktion des Ästhetischen in der modernen Gesellschaft. In G. Gröning (Ed.), Landschaftswahrnehmung und Landschaftserfahrung (Arbeiten zur sozialwissenschaftlich orientierten Freiraumplanung, pp. 28–68). Münster: LIT Verlag. Schenk, W. (2013). Landschaft als zweifache sekundäre Bildung – historische Aspekte im aktuellen Gebrauch von Landschaft im deutschsprachigen Raum, namentlich in der Geographie. In D. Bruns, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Landschaften: Theorie, Praxis und internationale Bezüge. Impulse zum Landschaftsbegriff mit seinen ästhetischen, ökonomischen, sozialen und philosophischen Bezügen mit dem Ziel, die Verbindung von Theorie und Planungspraxis zu stärken (pp. 23–36). Schwerin: Oceano Verlag. Schenk, W. (2017). Landschaft. In L. Kühnhardt, & T. Mayer (Eds.), Bonner Enzyklopädie der Globalität. Band 1 und Band 2 (pp. 671–684). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schildknecht, C., Teichert, D., & van Zantwijk, T. (Eds.). (2008). Genese und Geltung. Für Gottfried Gabriel. Paderborn: Mentis. Schiller, F. (2004). Der Spaziergang. In A. Meier (Ed.), Sämtliche Werke. Band 1: Gedichte. Dramen 1 (pp. 228–234). München: dtv. Schneider, N. (2009). Geschichte der Landschaftsmalerei. Vom Spätmittelalter bis zur Romantik. Darmstadt: WBG. Schürmann, E. (2008). Sehen als Praxis. Ethisch-ästhetische Studien zum Verhältnis von Sicht und Einsicht. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Sedelmeier, T., Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2022). Foodscapes (Essentials). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Siepmann, N., Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2020). Soundscapes in Cartographic Media. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 247– 263). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Simmel, G. (1907). Soziologie der Sinne. Die neue Rundschau, 18, (9, 1025–1036). https://socio. ch/sim/verschiedenes/1907/sinne.htm. Accessed: 24 March 2022.

Multisensuality Versus Visual Primacy of Landscape Perception

71

Simmel, G. (1957 [1913]). Brücke und Tür. Essays des Philosophen zur Geschichte, Religion, Kunst und Gesellschaft. Stuttgart: K. F. Kohler Verlag. Simmel, G. (1996). Philosophie der Landschaft. In G. Gröning (Ed.), Landschaftswahrnehmung und Landschaftserfahrung (Arbeiten zur sozialwissenschaftlich orientierten Freiraumplanung, pp. 91–105). Münster: LIT Verlag. Spanier, H. (2006). Pathos der Nachhaltigkeit. Von der Schwierigkeit, „Nachhaltigkeit“ zu kommunizieren. Stadt+Grün, (12, 26–33). Steingräber, E. (1985). Zweitausend Jahre europäische Landschaftsmalerei. München: Hirmer. Straus, E. (1956). Vom Sinn der Sinne. Ein Beitrag zur Grundlegung der Psychologie. Berlin: Springer Berlin. Teichert, D. (2005). Medienphilosophie des Theaters. In M. Sandbothe, & L. Nagl (Eds.), Systematische Medienphilosophie (Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie Sonderband, vol. 7, pp. 199– 219). Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Tesdorpf, J. C. (1984). Landschaftsverbrauch. Begriffsbestimmung, Ursachenanalyse und Vorschläge zur Eindämmung. Dargestellt an Beispielen Baden-Württembergs. Berlin: Tesdorpf. Thiel, C. (2004). Theorie. In J. Mittelstraß (Ed.), Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie (4, Sp – Z, pp. 260–270). Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler. Vietta, S. (1995). Die vollendete Speculation führt zur Natur zurück. Natur und Ästhetik. Leipzig: Reclam. Weber, M. (2010 [1904/05]). Die protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus (Beck’sche Reihe, vol. 1614, Vollständige Ausgabe, 3. Auflage). München: C.H. Beck. Welsch, W. (1996). Grenzgänge der Ästhetik. Stuttgart: Reclam. Welsch, W. (1998). Eine Doppelfigur der Gegenwart. Virtualisierung und Revalidierung. In G. Vattimo, & W. Welsch (Eds.), Medien-Welten Wirklichkeiten (pp. 229–248). München: Fink. Wild, M. (2021). Sehen. In H. J. Sandkühler (Ed.), Enzyklopädie Philosophie. In 3 Bänden (Band 3: Q – Z, pp. 2381–2385). Hamburg: Meiner. Wils, J.-P. (2011). Sinne/Sinnlichkeit. In P. Kolmer, & A. G. Wildfeuer (Eds.), Neues Handbuch philosophischer Grundbegriffe (vol. 3, pp. 2000–2012). Freiburg im Breisgau: Alber. Wittgenstein, L. (2019). Philosophische Untersuchungen (Bibliothek Suhrkamp, vol. 1372, 9. Auflage). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag. Wojtkiewicz, W., & Heiland, S. (2012). Landschaftsverständnisse in der Landschaftsplanung. Eine semantische Analyse der Verwendung des Wortes „Landschaft“ in kommunalen Landschaftsplänen. Raumforschung und Raumordnung – Spatial Research and Planning, 70, (2, 133– 145). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13147-011-0138-7.

Dr. Karsten Berr  is a research associate at the professorship of Urban and Regional Development at the University of Tübingen.

Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods Observing Landscape. A Systems Theoretical Approach Robert Lämmchen

Abstract

The perception of our environment has always been a central topic of scientific research. All knowledge and every conception of the world is linked to perception. Consequently, every time we observe a form we call landscape, we also rely on multisensory perception and our organism. The aim of this contribution is to develop a systems theoretical approach to analyse the event-based perception of our environment and therefore landscape. According to Luhmann’s theory of social systems, constituent and autopoietic systems must be analysed for this purpose. Three moments are particularly constitutive for this. Firstly, observed landscape must be computed by a biological system. Secondly, landscape needs to be constructed and remembered as information by a psychological system. Thirdly, the information must be indicated linguistically. Furthermore, landscape is outlined as a form that enables the observation of landscape. Keywords

Landscape research · Multisensory landscape · Systems theory · Observing systems ·  Cybernetics · Theory of perception · Cognitive science

R. Lämmchen (*)  University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_5

73

74

R. Lämmchen

1 Introduction We observe. We observe other people in a conversation. We try to observe ourselves reacting in certain situations. We observe our immediate environment. The world as we know it is an observed world (Fuchs 2015, p. 11). Space, every conception of space and the specific section of space we call landscape is also the result of observation (Baecker 2014, pp. 70–71, 2015). We observe landscape. This sentence sounds trivial at first. How should we experience landscape if we do not observe it—if we do not see it, if we do not explore it exemplarily through movement or analyse the physical geographical characteristics of that section with technical aids? We are forced to observe landscape if we want to gain information about it which can be helpful for us. The aim of this contribution is to explicate the sentence ‘we observe landscape’ with Niklas Luhmann’s social theory. Luhmann (1927–1998), who can be counted among the circle of later cybernetics (Ramage and Shripp 2020, pp. 183–231), developed a social theory that combines the interdisciplinary work of radical constructivism and structural functionalism in a sociological theory (Kühne 2019, pp. 92–94). Luhmann’s theory of social systems is a result of the interweaving of sociological, philosophical, biological, and mathematical approaches with the claim to be a universal sociological theory (Luhmann 1988, p. 33). The central paradigm is the distinction between system and environment (Luhmann 1988, pp. 242–285). Systems (exemplified by families, political organisations, psychological systems, organisms) observe their environment and can only guide specific, system-internal operations by means of this observation (Luhmann 1988, p. 246). According to this, the term observation serves as a general term for any kind of cognition (Baecker 2014, pp. 70–71). Observation implies a difference—a distinction and an indication—and only in this way the connection of further operations of a system are enabled (Fuchs 2015, pp. 11–23; Spencer-Brown 2020). Consequently, observation is a prerequisite for communication (Luhmann 2018b, pp. 52–55). The general thesis for this contribution is: landscape is observed landscape. The previously formulated sentence ‘we observe landscape’ is particularly suitable for explaining this thesis because it emphasises the processuality of observing landscape (for the categorization of landscape understandings see in this volume: Kühne et al. 2023a, b). According to systems theory and from a cybernetic framework for explaining cognition, every observed landscape is a system-specific snapshot. Only in the present an observer-dependent construction of landscape becomes possible and every observation as a process is bound to the moment in which it is fulfilled. Observations are constituted event-based and everything that happens, happens in the present (Nassehi 2011, p. 19). With this concept of observation, the temporality of the operative genesis (Nassehi 2009, p. 238) of the social is therefore potentiated and even time, analogous to space, is the result of observation (Baecker 2014, pp. 70–71; Luhmann 2018c, pp. 126–128; Nassehi 2008a, pp. 189–194).

Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods

75

To explain the sentence ‘we observe landscape’, I proceed as follows. Firstly, I will outline specific systems which are differentiated in Luhmann’s systems theory to introduce the general structure of the theory (see Sects. 2 and 3). In this context, the concept of landscape from a social science and, in particular, social constructivist perspective will be discussed (Berr and Schenk 2019; Kühne 2008, 2018a, b, 2019; Kühne and Weber 2020; Kühne et al. 2019). The result of this first step is that the word ‘we’ can be defined in the sentence to be explicated. I argue that the ‘we’ is preceded by an attribution process and therefore observation. Secondly, I will examine how we can observe and hence multisensory perceive a form that can be called landscape (see Sect. 4). Thirdly, landscape is designed as a form along the mathematical calculus of Spencer-Brown (2020) (see Sect. 5). This theoretical framing succeeds in connecting multisensory perception and communication about landscape. In summary, the results of this observation and their possible empirical significance are discussed (see Sect. 6).

2 Social Systems and Landscape The term landscape is subject to a constant change of meaning (Kühne 2018b). For example, Berr and Schenk (2019, p. 24) distinguish between the legal-territorial, its later aesthetic and the currently dominant physical-material meaning. Analogous to the numerous scientific definitions of landscape, there are also just as many perspectives on and observations of landscape, which can be guided by interests. In this respect, landscape is also a political or a functional term regarding economic goal setting (Kühne et al. 2019, p. 3; Kühne 2008, pp. 231–312, 2019). This makes the term landscape and its use depending on the social problem comparable to the pluralism around the German term Bildung (education) (Tenorth 2011). Considering social systems, Luhmann (1988, p. 16) differentiates between systems of interaction, systems of organisations and functional systems (or society). The systems of politics (Luhmann 2002) and economics (Luhmann 2019) are ranked among the systems of law (Luhmann 2018a), art (Luhmann 1997) or education (Luhmann 2017; Luhmann and Schorr 1988) as functional systems of society. These systems are functionally differentiated through specialisation (Luhmann 2008, pp. 48–49, 2018e; Nassehi 2011, pp. 123–160) and operate along specific codes and programmes (Luhmann 2008, pp. 50–66, 2018e; Kühne 2019, pp. 94–98). In terms of landscape, the economic system operates along the code to pay/not to pay (Luhmann 2019), the system law with the code legal/illegal (Luhmann 2018a, pp. 165–213) and the system politics with the code power/no power respectively with government/opposition (Luhmann 2002, pp. 88–139). In view of these codes, systems, like all types of systems, operate self-referential and closed (Luhmann 2018c, pp. 92–120). This means that the unity of the system can only be reproduced with its own operations, like the system economy with payments (Luhmann 2018a, p. 440, 2019, pp. 17–42). Nevertheless, this does not mean that the economic system, for example, would be blind to the legal foundations to be observed for

76

R. Lämmchen

payment transactions or production processes. Despite the operational closure and thus clearly feasible differentiation through their own operations, these systems are open to environmental influences. These environmental influences (by other systems) are necessarily assumed and can be experienced as irritation (Luhmann 2018d, p. 22). All openness to these environmental influences refers to the closedness of the systems of the functionally differentiated society (Luhmann 2019, p. 49; Nassehi 2003, p. 309). Therefore, Kühne (2019, p. 98) stated that Luhmann’s theory is suitable for analysing the construction of landscape from a functional or macro sociological perspective (Kühne 2019, p. 98). In this way, complexity-reducing and selective observations can be reconstructed as second-order observations (von Foerster 2003; Kühne 2019; Luhmann 1988, p. 47, 2018c, p. 144). Dependencies both between functional systems and at further levels, so-called structural couplings (Luhmann 2018a, pp. 440–495, c, pp. 92–120), can also be analysed historically and taken into account in the observation of current conjunctures around the observation of landscape. According to this, Kühne (2019) attributes a certain potential to Luhmann’s systems theory for analysing communications and observations of functional systems, but also systems of interaction and organisations, which follow specific logics of their own. However, Kühne (2019, p. 98) also states that systems theory is less appropriate for the theoretical framing of the relation between the individual, society, and landscape. For this, social constructivist landscape theory should be preferred. As an example, the processuality and changeability of landscape as a construct can be examined with the dreifacher Landschaftswandel (Kühne 2018a; Kühne and Weber 2020) in order to investigate changes in physical space, the understanding of landscape in society and, beyond that, individual associations around landscape. In this contribution, I want to argue that, particularly with regard to the significance of the multisensory perception of landscape (Kühne and Edler 2018), a systems theoretical framing can be developed to unfold the relationship between experience and social attribution of meaning to landscape. For this purpose, a further system level is differentiated below.

3 Psychological and Social Systems In addition to the distinction between interactions, organisations and functional systems or society, which Luhmann (1988, p. 16) describes as social systems that emerge through communication (see Sect. 2), he differentiates a further system level. Psychological and biological systems are presupposed as a necessary correlate for the emergence of social systems and communication (Luhmann 2018c, p. 84, g; Nassehi 2008a, p. 167). In accordance with this distinction, the meaning of psychological and social systems will first be discussed. According to Luhmann (1988, pp. 92–98), psychological and social systems have emerged in a co-evolution and therefore one type of system is the necessary environment of the other. By means of this co-evolution, it is possible to reduce complexity by selection for senseful experience. Sense emerges only through the contingent selection from a multitude of referential possibilities in psychological or social

Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods

77

systems (Luhmann 1988, p. 94). The concept of sense is fundamental for the observation of landscape, because “the operations called ‘observation’ can be performed only in the medium of sense: the systems of consciousness and communication are sense-producing and sense-processing systems” (Benedek 2015, p. 129). Sense therefore means the selection of a possible combination of information (see Sects. 4 and 5) for the further processing of operations. As already described, however, systems operate in an operationally closed manner. It is true that psychological and social systems are necessary and therefore each co-evolutionarily dependent on the other as an environment. Nevertheless, they operate as autopoietic systems and thus completely autonomously (Luhmann 2018b, p. 50, g, p. 30). This step must be emphasised. Luhmann transfers the concept of autopoiesis from biological theory (Hejl 1990, p. 215; Maturana 2000, pp. 181–192; Maturana and Varela 2012, pp. 55–60; Vanderstraeten 2001, p. 299; Varela et al. 1974) and applies it to social systems as well (Nassehi 2008a, p. 168). This was already preconditioned in the description of functional systems such as the economy or the legal system (see Sect. 2). Autopoiesis in relation to social systems means that communication as the process that constitutes society (Luhmann 1988, p. 193) can only follow communication (recursively). Communication forms an emergent reality sui generis and constitutes itself as a self-referential process from its own elements (Luhmann 1988, pp. 198–201, 2018c, p. 105). However, despite the autopoietic mode of operation of communication, consciousness is a necessary precondition and a possible moment of irritation (Luhmann 2018g, pp. 29–34). Social systems and therefore communications are structurally coupled to psychological systems but these two systems are non-transparent to each other. This means that even communication among those present (interaction) is not to be understood as a transmission performance of thoughts (Luhmann 2018g, pp. 32–34; Maturana and Varela 2012, p. 212). Psychological systems also operate autonomously and are accordingly operationally closed and recursive (von Foerster 1982a, p. 296, 1993, pp. 252–261). Psychological (consciousness) and social systems (communications) remain in a relationship of system and environment and only in a relationship of structural coupling. This has both empirical and epistemological consequences. The semantic unity of the human being is abandoned, and social, psychological and biological systems are differentiated (Luhmann 2018c, pp. 103–109). This leaves the concept of the subject, the individual or the human being merely as an empirical one, whose attribution, for example to a section of consciousness, can admittedly be analysed in terms of systems theory. For Luhmann’s systems theory, however, these concepts do not constitute starting points. It is only possible to observe what an observer indicates when he or she uses these terms (Fuchs 2007, pp. 23–28; Luhmann 1994; Nassehi 2008b, p. 172). From this, a first conclusion can be drawn for the sentence to be discussed (‘we observe landscape’). The ‘we’ is replaced by specific observing systems that can remain in a relationship of dependence (von Foerster 1982a; Fuchs 1994; Luhmann 1988, p. 67). Only by structural couplings of autopoietic and thus operationally closed and

78

R. Lämmchen

self-sustaining systems (biological, psychological, and social systems) the connections between these systems become visible. Referring to the views of Luhmann, a ‘we’ can only be thought of as a unit insofar as an observer indicates it as, for example, a subject, individual or human being (Fuchs 2007, pp. 23–28). With the differentiation of biological, psychological, and social systems, multisensory perception can be brought into focus at the same time. The organism, and particularly the brain is necessarily dependent on environmental stimuli, analogous to communication and consciousness (Luhmann 2018c, pp. 107–108). But how do biological systems manage to observe and perceive the environment in order to build a reliable basis for psychological and social systems? How, then, can the organism be thought of in relation to psychological and social systems? To answer these questions and clarify how a biological system observes its environment, the terms perception, cognition, and communication are defined.

4 Perception, Cognition, and Communication Luhmann (1997, pp. 13–24) sees perception as the basis for communication and describes it as a special component and actual ability of consciousness. Only through perception the psychological system can be affected by the external world and is a prerequisite for the autopoiesis of consciousness. The observed world only appears as a world by means of perception (von Glasersfeld 2016). It is only through perception that a boundary and a difference can be drawn between the world and the observing consciousness in the world. From the perspective of systems theory, perception of the external world can only take place based on structural couplings of nervous systems and psychological systems. Perception is therefore not the achievement of a single system, but the result of the constant simultaneous processing of nervous system and consciousness (Luhmann 1997, p. 17). This relationship results in an immediacy between the external world and the perceived external world. Along the radical constructivist paradigm of Luhmann’s systems theory (Luhmann 2018c, pp. 34–35), it is only possible to construct a reality that is stable for itself (von Glasersfeld 1997; von Foerster 1982a, p. 295; Luhmann 1997, pp. 13–24; Fuchs 2007, p. 94). Biological or living systems1 therefore serve as a starting point for consciousness and communication, since they observe the environment by means of specific sensory receptors. A psychological system can follow it up with further operations of selection through structural couplings. Accordingly, the organism itself cannot distinguish which quality is attributed to a perceived stimulus by a consciousness. The organism cannot distinguish whether we perceive a colour as red or blue, whether we combine sounds as a musical work, or what an odour reminds

1 According

to Maturana (2000, pp. 181–192), a living system is an organic, autopoietic system whose components are molecular units and reproduce within themselves in a closed network (see also Simon 1997).

Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods

79

us of and whether we perceive it as pleasant or repulsive. By means of receptors, a living system can only specify the quantity of a stimulus. Sensory receptors “are all ‘blind’ as to the quality of their stimulation, responsive only as to their quantity” (von Foerster 1982a, p. 293). The question of how a psychological system can continuously recognise the colour red as red or remember and consequently categorise an odour is the “‘Problem of Cognition’, the search for an understanding of the cognitive processes” (von Foerster 1982a, p. 294). In the tradition of cognitive science, the term cognition can be generally understood as the process of stimulus perception and rule-based transformation of information, which serves as the basis for mental representations (Walter 2014, p. 13). Assuming this traditional view, it suggests that there is information in the external world that is accessible as information for the internal world. This is not compatible with the systems theoretical and cybernetic understanding outlined here. Referring to Luhmann (1992, p. 321), information is not an input, but only differentiation of possibilities for further operations. Only when, for example, a psychological system perceives the colour red as red information will arise. In this regard, information can become the content of contingent communication as a description of a specific perception and categorisation (such as the colour red). Heinz von Foerster (1982b, p. 254) describes this observation as follows: “Cognitive processes create descriptions of, that is information, about the environment. […] The environment contains no information. The environment is as it is.” Information is therefore not a predetermined order. It is not possible to fix the quality of an object that can be recognised by the subject. Information results exclusively from the cognitive processes of the systems themselves, which proceed autonomously, self-referentially, and in an autopoietic manner (Varela 1990, p. 121; von Foerster 1982a, b). Information is a difference because it presupposes contingent perception and observation, which in turn can generate a difference (Luhmann 2018c, p. 190). At the same time, cognition is the ability to connect new operations to remembered ones (Luhmann 2018c, p. 122). Thus, it must be learned to categorise the colour red as red. Through this, temporality becomes relevant (Nassehi 2008a, p. 182). Perceived and performed distinctions, which appear to the psychological system as information, go back to previous, remembered, and learned distinctions. Every situation requires a highly selective recourse to condensates of past operations (Luhmann 2018c, p. 122). The perceived Jetzt (now) must recall an already past perceived Jetzt (now). Perception as a snapshot is event-based and requires that the psychological system processes information from the perceived stimuli in each situation and matches it with already processed information (or not). The pure operation of perception by the living system is therefore not yet cognition (Luhmann 2018f, p. 11). Only the remembering, the mirroring of what has already been experienced and its classification (or categorisation) is the operation of cognition. Only with the simultaneous processing of perception by the nervous system and the performance of consciousness it is possible to construct a stable reality (von Foerster 1982a, p. 295; von Glasersfeld 2016, p. 35; Luhmann 1997, p. 17). Consequently, with this theoretical framework it is possible “to interpret cognitive processes as

80

R. Lämmchen

n­ ever-ending recursive processes of computation” (von Foerster 1982a, p. 296; Luhmann 1992, p. 321). Furthermore, perception is pre-structured by language (Luhmann 1997, p. 14). Communication cannot directly influence the perception of an organism. However, communication can be recognised by a psychological system when it processes information. Perceived impressions from the environment can be created as information by matching them with remembered, already linked linguistic contexts. In addition to the temporal dependence and necessity of the ability to remember distinctions, language is fundamental to indicate what is perceived. It must be culturally and thus socially learned how a perception can be indicated. This link between perception and cultural and linguistic categorisation is also part of various streams of modern cognitive science such as exemplified by the approach of enactive cognition (Thompson 2005, 2010, 2016; Varela et al. 2017, pp. 169–183) which in parts are based on the approaches of embodied cognition (Gallagher 2014; Lakoff 2012; Moya 2014; Walter 2014, pp. 55–66; Wilson 2002). Both approaches share the assumption that the body serves as a kind of resource for cognitive processes to guide interaction, and thus also linguistically and socially with the environment (Walter 2014, pp. 55–66, 98–108). In the case of enactive cognition, Varela et al. (2017, p. 171) cite the example of the linguistic categorisation of colours in relation to cultural and linguistic differentiations. As an example, in the Tarahumara language spoken in northern Mexico, there is only one word for green and blue, whereas these colours are differentiated in English or in German. For this reason, it can be stated that “colour categories depend on culture-specific cognitive processes” (Varela et al. 2017, p. 171). Dirk Baecker (2014, pp. 218–226) also comes to a comparable conclusion in the course of neurosociological studies on the formulation of a sociological theory of the brain. Baecker (2014, p. 219) understands the brain in the organism as a cognitive differential of engagement with a social, cultural, mental and open environment. Only by means of language it is possible for the brain to order a series of its ideas in such a way that they can be called thoughts (Baecker 2014, p. 23). In summary, the matching of perceptual performance with remembered perceptions must be linguistically and culturally shaped insofar as perception can only be structurally coupled to consciousness and consciousness can only be structurally coupled to communication via language (Luhmann 2018c, pp. 113–114). Nassehi (2008a, p. 182) therefore refers to autopoietic systems as temporalised systems. They require a succession in the processing of information to allow for a current convergence between consciousness and communication. With this understanding of perception, cognition, and communication, three conclusions can be drawn from the perspective of Luhmann’s theory: (I) It is not possible to recognise the reality. Only a reality can be computed event-based by an observer and via the specific sensory features of a living system and thus via perception. (II) Perception and cognition are dependent on time. The recursively computed systeminternal information must always be compared with already perceived information to cog-

Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods

81

nitively generate a stable reality for a psychological system. Accordingly, the system must learn to categorise and interpret the always event-based perceptions. (III) Perception, the categorisation of perception, and interpretation of perception are culturally and socially constructed. It must be assumed that it is possible to describe perceptions linguistically to be able to consider them as information in social systems.

Consequently, it is possible to define the second term in the sentence ‘we observe landscape’. The term observation has so far been used as a general term for any kind of cognition (Baecker 2014, pp. 70–71) (see Sect. 1). It has also been postulated that observation means the handling of a difference and is a prerequisite for communication. However, it has not yet been clarified why Luhmann opts for such a formal concept of observing, which can be defined as the operation of a distinction and indication (Luhmann 1992, p. 73). The concept of observation is so central for Luhmann because it de-ontologises (Fuchs 2015, p. 25). By means of observation, no being outside of observation, and consequently outside of the indicated form, must be taken for granted (Fuchs 2007, pp. 116–125; Spencer-Brown 2020). Only a reality can be constructed by a specific system (von Foerster 1982a, p. 295). With every observation, the contingent form of an observation and a performance of selection of a specific system becomes visible. The complexity of the observable environment can only be reduced through observation and selection. Baecker (2014, p. 70) therefore uses the concept of observation as a general term for any kind of cognition. Luhmann also considers the concept of observation to be so abstract that it can be used to describe the respective cognitive operations of living systems (organisms), psychological systems (systems of consciousness) and social systems (communications) (Luhmann 1992, p. 128). At the same time, only psychological and social systems can operate in the medium of sense subsequent to an observation (Benedek 2015; Luhmann 2018c, p. 122). According to Benedek (2015, p. 132), this can be summarised as follows: “The world is formed by senseful operations and as such it is bounded to the systems formed also by these operations. The world as environment (the ‘outside’) and the identity of the observer (the system; the ‘inside’) are both effects of senseful operations. Sense is not a substance but a relation. It is not essential, but processual.” In relation to the terms perception and cognition, observation serves as a general term for them since the processing of information requires the multisensory processing of a stimulus (perception) and its recollection of what has already been perceived (cognition). Concurrently, the perceived and cognitively constructed information must be able to be described linguistically to make it connectable to social systems (communication) (Luhmann 1997, pp. 27–36). Accordingly, observation serves as a general term for every process of perception (and cognition) in biological, psychological, and social systems. These systems can be connected via structural couplings and in this way the connection between perception and communication can be formulated in terms of systems theory (Baecker 2014, p. 70). Furthermore, the observation of another observer also presup-

82

R. Lämmchen

poses perception as a second-order observation (von Foerster 2003). An observer could not be observed anyway if we did not have the means to derive information from visual or acoustic stimuli. For the topic and with regard to the general thesis of this contribution, the following conclusion can be drawn. Landscape is observed landscape insofar as the organism’s perception of specific stimuli enables the consciousness to process and remember information (cognition) and subsequently to indicate it linguistically and culturally. A distinct form can only be characterised as landscape if it can be computed via perception, remembered, and linguistically indicated as such (Spencer-Brown 2020). No single system can be responsible for this. Autonomous and self-referential systems are needed for this process which relate to structural couplings. Regarding the second term to be explicated in the sentence ‘we observe landscape’ and following the previously elaborated concepts of perception, cognition and communication, it can be stated: (I) Observed landscape is computed landscape. (II) Observed landscape is learned landscape. (III) Observed landscape is described landscape.

This understanding of observation and landscape requires the indication of landscape as form (Spencer-Brown 2020). Consequently, it becomes possible to describe the third term of the sentence to be explicated (landscape).

5 Landscape as a Form Luhmann integrates Spencer-Brown’s (2020) mathematical calculus into sociological social theory to define the concept of form. According to Spencer-Brown (2020), a form always consists of two sides, which requires the marking of a distinction and thus indication (Luhmann 2018c, p. 198; Fuchs 2015, p. 25; Vanderstraeten 2001, pp. 299– 302). Accordingly, an observer observes his or her environment and makes distinctions, which, as already outlined, he or she can perceive, label by means of language (marked state (m)) and in turn distinguish from the unmarked side (unmarked state (n)) (Baecker 2015, pp. 38–41; Spencer-Brown 2020). Landscape is to be understood as form in systems theory and along the Laws of Form according to Spencer-Brown (2020) insofar as it requires an observer-dependent distinction, which must be made by the observer and indicated as such by means of language. Landscape is observed form. Admittedly, sections of the observed landscape can themselves be systems, such as agricultural systems as parts of the economic system (Kühne 2019, p. 95) (see Sect. 2). However, with Luhmann’s systems theory, what is observed and thus constructed as landscape by the observer is subject to this formalism (Baecker 2007, pp. 55–69; Spencer-Brown 2020). Especially with regard to the observation of landscape as described landscape (III) (see Sect. 4), the notion of form and observation brings into focus the question of how

Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods

83

the perceived (computed) and cognitively remembered (learned) information is communicated (described). The word description is to be used here as any form of communication (oral communication among those present, written, digital, aesthetic-artistic etc.) of observed landscape. As already noted, the communication of a piece of information cannot mean a conventional transmission of thoughts (Luhmann 2018g, pp. 32–34; Maturana and Varela 2012, p. 212) (see Sect. 3). The concept of transmission is replaced with the distinction between medium and form. Communication systems are only constituted by means of medium and form (Luhmann 2018c, pp. 195–202). Through this further distinction besides system/environment (Luhmann 1988, pp. 242–285) (see Sect. 1), medium/form can be used to mark an inside of the observed and thus perceived section. If landscape is observed as form, it is constituted from specific media. For example, features such as trees, hills or fields are attributed to the form landscape and thus an image is computed (von Foerster 1982a, p. 294). Following the multisensory perception (by the organism) of these, the media tree, hill or field are then included in the form landscape at the moment of observation and distinction (by the psychological system) and can be described as such (in social systems). The fixation of medium and form can or must, however, be developed anew in each case and consequently situationally as a snapshot of the present. If only one tree is observed as an example, it can also appear as a form. This is then constructed by the observer from leaves, branches, twigs, and a trunk as media. Conversely, landscape can be a medium if it is understood as the inside of an enclosing outside. In this way, specific landscapes and landscape types (media) can be located in a superordinate spatial section (form). This can be illustrated once again with another example, namely language. A letter can be described as a symbol for a sound. It differs from other symbols (letters) in its form. If a word is formed from several letters, the letter is medium, and the word is form. The word thus includes a certain combination of letters and becomes fixed and recognisable as a form. If a sentence is then formed from words, the sentence is the form and the individual words are media, which form the sentence as a form (Luhmann 2018c, pp. 190–202). Languages (forms) are thus composed—in very simplified terms—of special symbols, words and ways of forming sentences in a system of rules that arranges the combination of these elements (media). However, communication is by no means a straightforward exchange of fixed meanings and thus forms. Terms must be filled with certain meanings and these meanings can be subject to change. Language is bound to learning processes and patterns of recognition and therefore to specific processes of information processing that cannot be separated from our perception (von Foerster 1997, pp. 47–51; von Glasersfeld 1997, pp. 211–217; von Glasersfeld 2016, pp. 36–37; Varela 1997). Consequently, it must be heard, read as writing or felt and cognitively processed. This is also fundamental for the concept of landscape. We must be able to perceive and attribute forms multisensory as media (trees, hills, fields) of the form landscape, but we must first have learned what these computations (distinctions) can be indicated. These computations are only made by means of perception (von Foerster 1982a, p. 294). Once again, it becomes clear that perception (I), cognition (II) and communication (III) can

84

R. Lämmchen

be observed separately with regard to the various autopoietic system performances, but that they mean one after the other and presuppose structural couplings (Luhmann 2018c, pp. 103–109; Nassehi 2008a, p. 182) (see Sect. 4). With this formalism (Baecker 2007, pp. 55–69) it is possible to consider both perceived and thus cognitive as well as social (communicative) constructions of landscape. On the social level, the observer can orientate himself on proven observations and descriptions—on constructs that have already proven to be viable (von Glaserfeld 2016, p. 35). These vary—as is also considered in other approaches—as a function of time (Berr and Schenk 2019) and along functional demands (Kühne et al. 2019, p. 3; Kühne 2008, pp. 231–312, 2019) (see Sect. 2). With Luhmann (1993, pp. 17–19), these viable selections can be called semantics. Semantics, as possible components of culture,2 offer guidance and point to meaningful ways of controlling risk in communicative contexts (Luhmann 1988, p. 224). They are a store of distinctions that guide self-observation and self-description of society and reduce complexity (Redepenning 2006, pp. 131–136; Stichweh 2006). Semantics themselves are forms of social communication (Luhmann 1993, p. 18) which arrange available selections. Furthermore, semantics can also imply a clear spatial reference to allow meaningful referrals. For example, it is not unusual in the German-speaking world to associate the term landscape as a form or semantic content with the term Heimat (home/homeland) (Kühne and Weber 2020, p. 71). Numerous other overlaps regarding the classification (indication) of landscape can thus be analysed in social systems. According to this, semantic contents that indicate senseful distinctions can be available to the observer. With this concept of form, the third term in the sentence to be explicated, ‘we observe landscape’, can finally be abstracted. Referring to Luhmann’s theory and with regard to the thesis, landscape is observed landscape when landscape is understood as a form that is constructed from specific media by an observer. It must be distinguished and indicated as a form by an observer. For this, landscape must be computed (I), constructed and remembered as information (II) and is thereby described landscape insofar as the term landscape is also linguistically and culturally produced (III). This view can vary and the perception and cognitive processing of landscape is predetermined by terms and semantic references to meaning.

2 Following

Nassehi (2003, pp. 43–44) and Luhmann (2018c, p. 165), culture is generally defined as a proven (viable) and contingent form of observation. Culture hypostasises the own as the particular and already draws attention to the other side of observation. Culture obtains its own security by pointing to its contingent basis (Nassehi 2003, p. 43).

Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods

85

6 Conclusion The aim of this contribution has been to demonstrate which impact Luhmann’s systems theory has to the analysis of the multisensory perception of landscape. The result of this theoretical study is that landscape as computed (perceived), remembered (informatively and cognitively produced) and described (communicated) landscape is always observed landscape. Landscape is observed, and thus distinguished and indicated. Consequently, with this theoretical approach, it can be summarised that we observe landscape eventbased and are forced to do so if we want to gain any information about the environment. With this understanding of landscape, it is possible to look at the temporal, and therefore the event-based processing of landscape along autopoietic systems (Nassehi 2008a, p. 182). Consequently, a systems theoretical analysis is not merely limited to observing social systems and the logics of constituent functional systems (Kühne 2019). Rather, it becomes possible to analyse the sensory reception of stimuli, the construction of information and the social level of the communicative and thus semantic production of sense. A further engagement with these system-theoretical considerations for the analysis of the multisensory perception of landscape, in consideration of social structures, could thereby highlight the following points: Firstly, it can be considered to what extent Luhmann’s theory could be supplemented with modern cognitive science approaches. In this context, it should be examined to what extent separate approaches could be combined with the epistemological fundamentals of systems theory. The approach of enactive cognition (Thompson 2005, 2010, 2016; Varela et al. 2017, pp. 169–183) seems potentially promising, since it has parallels with phenomenology comparable to systems theory (see in particular Nassehi 2008b) and a large number of terms overlap (Varela 1997; Varela et al. 1974, 2017; Maturana and Varela 2012). Moreover, the enactive approach abandons the subject/object schema and attempts to overcome the last elements of ‘Cartesian anxiety’ (Varela et al. 2017, pp. 133–145). Secondly, the perception of landscape as an observed landscape can develop empirical potential in other sub-disciplines. For example, systems theory can play a role in geography education, as the distinction between perception, cognition and communication marks multiple starting points for guiding educational research, exemplified by mobile, location-based learning with digital media (Pietsch et al. 2020; Schneider et al. 2020; Stintzing et al. 2020). Here, two moments of observation are projected in multimedia on the one hand (Luhmann 1997), and on the other hand, the observer in situ must perceive the space and therefore landscape independently. In both moments, the observer is dependent on multisensory perception. With systems theory, it is possible to investigate and reconstruct the different moments of observation—of computing, learning and describing—of the teachers and learners.

86

R. Lämmchen

Finally, it can be summarised that from the perspective of systems theory, landscape can only be treated as a distinction of an observer, which implies temporality. From Luhmann’s perspective, following the Laws of Form according to Spencer-Brown (2020) and with regard to the thesis, it can be stated that landscape is always observed landscape and consequently form. Such an approach presupposes event-based observation (distinction and indication). Therefore, every view of the environment and every perception of landscape is the result of observation. The first step is always: “draw a distinction” (SpencerBrown 2020, p. 3). And only either an observer can draw attention to the fact that this is already observation, or the observer himself observes his own distinction and indication following his own observation (re-entry) (Spencer-Brown 2020, pp. 57–63). Accordingly, world is observed world and landscape is observed landscape, and therefore in every event-based observation landscape is a form which is constituted by an observer and cannot take place without perception.

References Baecker, D. (2007). Form und Formen der Kommunikation. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Baecker, D. (2014). Neurosoziologie: Ein Versuch. Berlin: Suhrkamp. Baecker, D. (2015). Raum, formtheoretisch betrachtet. In P. Goeke, R. Lippuner & J. Wirths (Eds.), Konstruktion und Kontrolle (pp. 37–47). Wiesbaden: Springer. Benedek, T. (2015). The term ‘Sense’ in Niklas Luhmann’s theory. Belvedere Meridionale, 27(1), 126–133. Berr, K., & Schenk, W. (2019). Begriffsgeschichte. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 23–38). Wiesbaden: Springer. Foerster, H. von (1982a). On constructing a reality. In H. von Foerster (Ed.), Observing systems (pp. 288–309). Seaside (California): Intersystems Publications. Foerster, H. von (1982b). Thoughts and notes on cognition. In H. von Foerster (Ed.), Observing systems (pp. 232–255). Seaside (California): Intersystems Publications. Foerster, H. von (1993). Prinzipien der Selbstorganisation im sozialen und betriebswirtschaftlichen Bereich. In S. J. Schmidt (Eds.), Wissen und Gewissen: Versuch einer Brücke (pp. 233–268). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Foerster, H. von (1997). Abbau und Aufbau. In F. B. Simon (Ed.), Lebende Systeme. Wirklichkeitskonstruktionen in der systemischen Therapie (pp. 32–51). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Foerster, H. von (2003). Ethics and second-order cybernetics. In H. von Foerster (Ed.), Understanding understanding: Essays on cybernetics and cognition (pp. 287–304). New York: Springer. Fuchs, P. (1994). Der Mensch - das Medium der Gesellschaft? In P. Fuchs & A. Göbel (Eds.), Der Mensch - das Medium der Gesellschaft? (pp. 15–39). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Fuchs, P. (2007). Das Maß aller Dinge: Eine Abhandlung zur Metaphysik des Menschen. Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft. Fuchs, P. (2015). Der Sinn der Beobachtung: Begriffliche Untersuchungen. Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft. Gallagher, S. (2014). Phenomenology and embodied cognition. In L. A. Shapiro (Ed.), Routledge handbooks in philosophy. The Routledge handbook of embodied cognition (pp. 9–18). Abingdon: Routledge.

Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods

87

Glasersfeld, E. von (1997). Radikaler Konstruktivismus. Ideen, Ergebnisse, Probleme. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Glasersfeld, E. von (2016). Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit und des Begriffs der Objektivität. In H. Gumin & H. Meier (Eds.), Einführung in den Konstruktivismus (pp. 9–39). München: Piper. Hejl, P. M. (1990). Soziale Systeme: Körper ohne Gehirne oder Gehirne ohne Körper? Rezeptionsprobleme der Theorie autopoietischer Systeme in den Sozialwissenschaften. In H. R. Maturana, V. Riegas & C. Vetter (Eds.), Zur Biologie der Kognition: Ein Gespräch mit Humberto R. Maturana und Beiträge zur Diskussion seines Werkes (pp. 205–236). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Kühne, O. (2008). Distinktion — Macht — Landschaft. Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O. (2018a). Die Landschaften 1, 2 und 3 und ihr Wandel. Perspektiven für die Landschaftsforschung in der Geographie – 50 Jahre nach Kiel. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92(3/4), 217–231. Kühne, O. (2018b). Landschaft und Wandel: Zur Veränderlichkeit von Wahrnehmungen. Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O. (2019). Autopoietische Systemtheorie und Landschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 91–103). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O., & Edler, D. (2018). Multisensorische Landschaften: Die Bedeutung des Nicht-Visuellen bei der sozialen und individuellen Konstruktion von Landschaft und Herausforderungen für ihre Erfassung und Wiedergabe. Berichte zur deutschen Landeskunde, 92(1), 27–45. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Weber, F., Berr, K., & Jenal, C. (2019). Landschaft – ein einleitender Überblick. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 3–22). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O., & Weber, F. (2020). Sozialwissenschaftliche Zugänge zur Prozesshaftigkeit von Landschaft. In R. Duttmann, O. Kühne & F. Weber (Eds.), Landschaft als Prozess (pp. 69–81). Wiesbaden: Springer. Lakoff, G. (2012). Explaining embodied cognition results. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4(4), 773– 785. Luhmann, N. (1988). Soziale Systeme: Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (1992). Die Wissenschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (1993). Gesellschaftsstruktur und Semantik: Studien zur Wissenssoziologie der modernen Gesellschaft, 1. Berlin: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (1994). Die Tücke des Subjekts und die Frage nach den Menschen. In P. Fuchs & A. Göbel (Eds.), Der Mensch - das Medium der Gesellschaft? (pp. 40–56). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (1997). Die Kunst der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (2002). Ausdifferenzierung und operative Schließung des politischen Systems. In A. Kieserling (Eds.), Die Politik der Gesellschaft (pp. 69–139). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (2008). Ökologische Kommunikation: Kann die moderne Gesellschaft sich auf ökologische Gefährdungen einstellen? Wiesbaden: Springer. Luhmann, N. (2017). Das Erziehungssystem der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

88

R. Lämmchen

Luhmann, N. (2018a). Das Recht der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (2018b). Die Autopoiesis des Bewußtseins. In N. Luhmann (Ed.), Soziologische Aufklärung 6: Die Soziologie und der Mensch (pp. 49–105). Wiesbaden: Springer. Luhmann, N. (2018c). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (2018d). Die operative Geschlossenheit psychischer und sozialer Systeme. In N. Luhmann (Ed.), Soziologische Aufklärung 6: Die Soziologie und der Mensch (pp. 15–27). Wiesbaden: Springer. Luhmann, N. (2018e). “Distinctions directrices”. In N. Luhmann (Ed.), Soziologische Aufklärung 4: Beiträge zur funktionalen Differenzierung der Gesellschaft (pp. 3–23). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (2018f). Probleme mit operativer Schließung. Soziologische Aufklärung 6: Die Soziologie und der Mensch (pp. 1–14). Wiesbaden: Springer. Luhmann, N. (2018g). Wie ist Bewußtsein an Kommunikation beteiligt? Soziologische Aufklärung 6: Die Soziologie und der Mensch (pp. 29–47). Wiesbaden: Springer. Luhmann, N. (2019). Die Wirtschaft der Gesellschaft. Berlin: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N., & Schorr, K. E. (1988). Reflexionsprobleme im Erziehungssystem. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Maturana, H. R. (2000). Biologie der Realität. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (2012). Der Baum der Erkenntnis. Die biologischen Wurzeln des menschlichen Erkennens. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer. Moya, P. (2014). Habit and embodiment in Merleau-Ponty. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 8, Article 542. Nassehi, A. (2003). Geschlossenheit und Offenheit. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Nassehi, A. (2008a). Die Zeit der Gesellschaft: Auf dem Weg zu einer soziologischen Theorie der Zeit. Wiesbaden: Springer. Nassehi, A. (2008b). Phänomenologie und Systemtheorie. In J. Raab (Eds.), Phänomenologie und Soziologie: Theoretische Positionen, aktuelle Problemfelder und empirische Umsetzungen (pp. 163–173). Wiesbaden: Springer. Nassehi, A. (2009). Der soziologische Diskurs der Moderne. Berlin: Suhrkamp. Nassehi, A. (2011). Gesellschaft der Gegenwarten. Berlin: Suhrkamp. Pietsch, S. M., Stintzing, M., & Heyer, I. (2020). SpielRäume – Entdeckungs- und Erlebnisraum Landschaft. GW-Unterricht, 1, 37–49. Ramage, M., & Shipp, K. (2020). Systems Thinkers. London: Springer. Redepenning, M. (2006). Wozu Raum? Systemtheorie, critical geopolitics und raumbezogene Semantiken (Doctoral dissertation, Leibniz Institute for Regional Geography, 2004). Beiträge zur regionalen Geographie, 62. Schneider, J., Schaal, S., & Schlieder, C. (2020). Integrating simulation tasks into an outdoor location-based game flow. Multimedia tools and applications, 79(5), 3359–3385. Simon, F. B. (1997). Einleitung: Wirklichkeitskonstruktionen in der Systemischen Therapie. In F. B. Simon (Ed.), Lebende Systeme: Wirklichkeitskonstruktionen in der systemischen Therapie (pp. 7-18). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Spencer-Brown, G. (2020). Laws of form. Lübeck: Bohmeier. Stichweh, R. (2006). Semantik und Sozialstruktur: Zur Logik einer systemtheoretischen Unterscheidung. In D. Tänzler, H. Knoblauch & H.-G. Soeffner (Eds.), Neue Perspektiven der Wissenssoziologie (pp. 157–171). Konstanz: UVK. Stintzing, M., Pietsch, S., & Wardenga, U. (2020). How to teach “Landscape” through games? In D. Edler, C. Jenal & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern approaches to the visualization of landscapes (pp. 333–349). Wiesbaden: Springer.

Multisensory Landscape—Theories, Research Fields, Methods

89

Tenorth, H.-E. (2011). „Bildung“ – ein Thema im Dissens der Disziplinen. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 14(3), 351–362. Thompson, E. (2005). Sensorimotor subjectivity and the enactive approach to experience. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 4(4), 407–427. Thompson, E. (2010). Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Thompson, E. (2016). Living ways of sense making. In T. Breyer & O. Müller (Eds.), Funktionen des Lebendigen (pp. 25–42). Berlin: De Gruyter. Vanderstraeten, R. (2001). Observing systems: A cybernetic perspective on system/environment relations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 31(3), 297–311. Varela, F. J. (1990). Kognitionswissenschaft - Kognitionstechnik: Eine Skizze aktueller Perspektiven. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Varela, F. J. (1997). Erkenntnis und Leben. In F. B. Simon (Eds.), Lebende Systeme: Wirklichkeitskonstruktionen in der systemischen Therapie (pp. 52–68). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Varela, F. J., Maturana, H. R., & Uribe, R. (1974). Autopoiesis: The organization of living systems, its characterization and a model. Biosystems, 5(4), 187–196. Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (2017). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cumberland: MIT Press. Walter, S. (2014). Kognition. Ditzingen: Reclam. Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625– 636.

Robert Lämmchen (M.A.) is a doctoral candidate at the University of Tübingen. He studied business administration (B.Sc.) and social and population geography (M.A.) at the University of Bamberg. His research focus and interests lie in digital education and knowledge transfer, systems theory, geography education and political geography.

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations, Phenomenological Approaches and Historical Developments of the ‘Multivillage Metropolis’ Lara Koegst and Olaf Kühne

Abstract

On a neopragmatic epistemological meta-theoretical basis (Richard Rorty) and under an ontological approach by means of the theory of the Three Landscapes (based on Karl Popper’s Three Worlds Theory) we examine in a regional geographic investigation the development of Baton Rouge, its cinematic staging as well as our experience of particularly present parts of Louisiana’s capital (using a positivist, a social constructivist and a phenomenological framework of empirical approaches). In this context, Baton Rouge presents itself as a ‘multivillage metropolis’, that is, as a pastiche of numerous relatively small units as a result of the comparatively small impact of spatial planning interventions. These small units, in turn – as a result of their relative non-specificity – exhibit a high degree of suitability as interchangeable backdrops not necessarily located in Baton Rouge. We are convinced that the results and procedure of our study have made a useful contribution to the understanding of contingent spatial constellations. Keywords

Neopragmatism · Baton Rouge · Three Regional geography · Urban geography

Landscapes

Theory · Film

geography · 

L. Koegst (*) · O. Kühne  Geographisches Institut, Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] O. Kühne e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_6

91

92

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

1 Introduction Baton Rouge is – after New Orleans – the second most populous settlement as well as capital of the state of Louisiana. Among cities in the United States, Baton Rouge has a notable history of “having flown under ten flags” (Armstrong 2010, p. 9), “the flags of France, England, Spain, the independent republic of West Florida, the United States and the Confederate States of America were flown over it, some of them more than once” (Gleason and Brockway 1991, p. vii). The economic development was also not very continuous, so Baton Rouge was initially a trading town, characterized by its Mississippi River port, became a major location of the petrochemical industry and became dependent on world prices for oil and oil products, experienced a tertiarization of the economy (see for example: Carleton 1981; Gleason and Brockway 1991; Hendry and Edwards 2009; Rodrigue and Phillips 2011). These processes are still present today, both in physical space and in social regional self-description. In the process, Baton Rouge also experienced a certain popularity as a setting for films and series, not least because the state has granted tax incentives for such productions since 2002 (Block 2014). Even if the number of productions is nowhere near that of New Orleans as a multicultural metropolis with Mardi Gras and a bit of voodoo supernaturalism, it seems worthwhile to visit Baton Rouge (Yodis et al. 2016) and to take a look at the cinematic presence of Baton Rouge in the context of Louisiana. In order to contextualize investigations of cinematic constructions of space, it is also possible to follow up on numerous preliminary regional geographic investigations (especially our own neopragmatic ones). These have dealt, among other things, with aspects of the physical-spatial, the socio-spatial, but also the political and economic geographic development of Baton Rouge, but also its general mass media presence, with innovative cartographic representations and the exemplification of the neopragmatic approach to spatial research (Kühne et al. 2020; Kühne and Jenal 2020a, b, c, 2021a, b; Stemmer et al. 2022; Weber et al. 2022; in this volume: Edler and Dickmann 2023; Fischer and Mahler 2023), using Dieter Brill’s 1963 dissertation on Baton Rouge, written in the style of classical geographic regional geography, as a comparative foil (Brill 1963). While the focus of our study is on Baton Rouge’s downtown development, since this in turn is integrated into processes in a larger spatial context – even far beyond Baton Rouge – these are also addressed in our paper when they are relevant to understanding downtown development. Our paper is part of a series of publications in which the epistemological neopragmatic approach is used ontologically with the theory of the Three Landscapes as a basis for a combination of theories, methods, researcher perspectives as well as data – aligned with the research question and research goal1 (for more details see: Kühne and Koegst 2023a). We will begin by outlining these theoretical foundations before taking a closer

1 The

paper was written as part of the project “Geographies of Unsustainability – eine neopragmatische Regionale Geographie Louisianas” funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG).

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

93

looking at the spatial development of Baton Rouge. This will be followed by an examination of the cinematic representaiton of Baton Rouge (in the general context of Louisiana; in this context, see in this volume: Kühne and Koegst 2023b). This presence will then be contrasted using the results of phenomenological walks in Baton Rouge. In the concluding chapter, we will address the interpretation of the results in light of the theoretical framework as well as the formulation of further research needs.

2 Landscape-Theoretical Approaches – About Three Landscapes and a Neopragmatic Approach The theoretical framework on which this paper is based has been derived, justified, and tested elsewhere in more detail (Kühne 2018c, 2020; Kühne and Jenal 2020a, 2021a, c; Kühne and Koegst 2023a) In this respect, we limit ourselves at this point to aspects that are central to the understanding of the following elaborations and refer to the literature cited for further consideration of the theoretical framework. In his theory of the three worlds, Karl Popper differentiates (Popper 1973, 1979, 1984; Popper and Eccles 1977) into World 1 (material world), World 2 (individual contents of consciousness), and World 3 (cultural contents and social stock of knowledge). For Popper, world 2 is at the center, in that worlds 3 and 1 are connected solely through world 2. Also, there are hybrids, for example a book as part of world 3 and world 1, but especially the human being, who has a share in all three worlds, after all he has an individual consciousness (so the hope), a body and his personal stock of knowledge is also a share of world 3. In derivation of these three worlds, spaces 1, 2 and 3 can be understood. Thus, material objects in spatial arrangement form space 1, individual conceptions of, to and about spaces form space 2 and socially shared knowledge stocks about spaces form space 3. Cities or landscapes again represent special cases of spaces, on the basis of social conventions not every space is interpreted as a city or landscape, this also highlights that in the case of city or landscape the constitutive level lies on that of social (city 3/landscape 3) or individual (city 2/landscape 2) construction. On this basis, city 1 resp. landscape 1 is projected into space 1 (Edler and Kühne 2022; Greider and Garkovich 1994; Kühne and Edler 2022; Kühne and Jenal 2020d; in this volume: Berr 2023; Kühne 2022; Kühne et al. 2023a, b; Kühne and Koegst 2023b). This projection does not take place in the same way for all people, so an essential difference of the construction takes place in the different modes (to empiricism and theory among many: Kühne 2018a, 2021; Wojtkiewicz and Heiland 2012): 1. The a-mode, described as ‘native normal landscape’, arises from direct individual experience (city/landscape 2a) of the surrounding space (1a) to city/landscape 1a. Thereby, drawing on socialized interpretations from Landscape 3. Formed in a-mode, the normative expectation is directed to the stability of material (but also social) structures.

94

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

2. The b-mode describes the common sense in relation to what is called city or landscape. It thus contains the interpretation, categorization and valuation patterns shared in a society with regard to city/landscape. A central component here are social stereotypes, mostly aesthetic, increasingly also ecological, these are given normative meaning. Landscape 3b is constitutive here. 3. The c-mode describes the expert-like special knowledge stocks. These are mostly formed in academic studies. As a result of the different disciplinary approaches, they show a considerable competition for interpretative sovereignty among each other. Usually, the c-modal construction of the world is superimposed on the a- and b-modes. The normative expectation of landscape 1a lies in its fit to the disciplinary standards (which it can never fulfill, not least due to different space 1 claims). As a result, it can be stated that a space 1 and 3 contains many cities and landscapes 1 and 3, which are constructed into it depending on the mode. Even with respect to level 2, divergent constructions in a-, b-, possibly c-mode can be empirically demonstrated (Kühne 2018b). From this knowledge of the contingent construction of world, space, city and landscape, the attempt to construct a hegemonic construction dominating the other interpretations could be derived. We follow a different path and strive to use the productive potential of contingent constructions with the help of neopragmatism. The philosophical basis of neopragmatism, as developed especially by Richard Rorty, but also by other thinkers such as Hillary Putnam (Putnam 1995; Rorty 1982, 1997), takes up the tradition of pragmatism and develops it further. Pragmatism can be understood as the ‘awareness to act’. (Gethmann 1987). It advocates the primacy of practical criteria over abstract theory, the principle of suitability replacing the principle of ultimate justification. In neopragmatism, this principle is supplemented by ideas of linguistic theory, in parts also poststructuralist thought: “Apart from the usual American suspects (Rorty’s favorite was Dewey), they also included in his view European philosophers like Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Foucault, and Derrida” (Barnes 2008, p. 1543). The consequence is that, for Rorty, “there is no way to grasp reality (whatever that is) without the mediation of a linguistic description” (Baltzer 2001, p. 26). Accordingly, for Rorty, “neither knowledge of nature nor beliefs concerning moral or social facts […] are a reflection of a given reality.” (Baltzer 2001, p. 27). Instead of an ‘objective truth,’ Rorty sees pluralistic conceptions of the world that deal with the contingency of the world (Rorty 1997, 1998). Consequently, for Rorty, ‘discovery’ is replaced by ‘invention’. At this point his nominalist worldview becomes evident (Rorty 1991, 1997). Succinctly speaking, neopragmatism is not devoted to ‘the discovery of truth’, but to the ‘invention of world interpretations’. These interpretations, in turn, must prove suitable for addressing scientific as well as practical questions. Following the insight into contingency and the norm of suitability, neopragmatically conducted research of complex objects and questions does not rely on an exclusivist approach, in which one theory or methodological approach alone is understood as legiti-

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

95

mate, but on triangulations, with regard to different theoretical perspectives, survey and evaluation methods, as well as researcher perspectives (for example, in relation to professional perspectives, age and career phases, gender, but also relevant everyday interests, etc.), data from different sources (and types), but also forms of representation. Also, it often seems essential to go beyond the c-mode to integrate the a- and b-modes. These triangulations, in turn, need to be justified in the research process, they require objectappropriate justification (Kühne and Koegst 2023a). In what follows, we address the cinematic representation of Baton Rouge. This cinematic construction of the city is contextualized in two ways: First, against the backdrop of the current state of regional geographic research as well as our own surveys of land use in the downtown area. Then, at a later point, against the background of one’s own experience. This implies recourse to or generation of research findings based on different theoretical perspectives. This relates to, for example, a positivist perspective underlying the survey of land uses, a phenomenological perspective underlying the study of one’s own experience. But this also concerns a social constructivist perspective, under whose framing the construction of Baton Rouge in film is examined. This theoretical framing is therefore chosen because a positivist approach has proven to be suitable with regard to the engagement with the material world. Since the cinematic construction of world, which suggests the social constructivist approach, strongly emphasizes the generation of (spatial) atmospheres (Aitken and Dixon 2006; Crossey et al. 2022; Escher and Zimmermann 2001; Kazig 2007; Kühne 2008; Plien 2017) which develop between – generally speaking – world 1 and 2, a phenomenological access is justified.

3 Baton Rouge – Historical Approaches to Planlessness, Modernization, Multiple Villages, and the Search for a Center The first mention of the name ‘Baton Rouge’ is in 1699 when Pierre le Moyne, Sieur D’Iberville and his brother Bienville led an expedition up the Mississippi River. In the area of the present city of ‘Baton Rouge’, on the eastern bank of the river (Fig. 1) they found a red pole (other sources speak of a large cypress tree). Because of this object, the terraced area was initially given the topographical name ‘Bâton Rouge’ (in English: Red Stick). The name was later transferred to one of the emerging settlements (whose leaders managed to absorb competing settlements). Settlement development from Baton Rouge, meanwhile, was initially restrained: in 1721, the D’Artaguette brothers established a farm on what is now the town site. Until the turn of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the French, Spanish and English (as alternating colonial powers) attempted a systematic settlement, but without the success of a significant urban structure (Carleton 1981; Rodrigue and Phillips 2011). It was not until the first decade of the nineteenth century that Baton Rouge developed a ­modest

96

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

Fig. 1   Location of Baton Rouge in Louisiana. (From: Kühne and Jenal 2021a)

central-local function for the surrounding local area (Brill 1963). After a brief interlude of belonging to the short-lived independent state of ‘West Florida’, Baton Rouge (as part of the state of Louisiana) was incorporated into the United States in 1812. The liberal economic order of the United States as well as the integration of the Mississippi River into a single state territory boosted trade, not only in Baton Rouge (Koegst 2021; Long 2014; Schneider 2014; Taylor 1976). In 1850, the city was politically upgraded: Baton Rouge became the capital of Louisiana (Brill 1963; Douglas 1955). Baton Rouge became the capital of Louisiana, not least to separate the center of economic prosperity (New Orleans in Louisiana) from the center of political power, as was often the case in the United States. The American Civil War (1961–1865) interrupted Baton Rouge’s boom: commerce (especially on the Mississippi River) collapsed and the city lost (temporarily) its political importance. Due to acts of war, the Louisiana State Capitol (today: with the addition of “Old”; Fig. 2) was destroyed in parts, and the capital functions reverted to New Orleans. The Reconstruction era that followed the Civil War also severely limited the political

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

97

Fig. 2   The ‘Old State Capitol’ was the center of political power in Louisiana until the 1930s. Today it is part of the tourist staging of Baton Rouge. (Photograph: Olaf Kühne 2022)

self-government of the states of the former Confederacy (Guelzo 2020). Baton Rouge was again designated the state capital by the Louisiana Constitution in 1879, which the city has remained to this day. Subsequently, Baton Rouge continued to grow, reaching a size in the late nineteenth century that warranted the operation of a streetcar. Although the only line was ring-shaped and single-tracked, it was also quickly decommissioned as a result of mass automobile mobilization. At that time, the cityscape was still dominated by unpaved streets, and due to inadequate canalization, floods regularly occurred after heavy rainfall. During floods, movement in the streets was possible either by boat or via improvised footbridges (Brill 1963; Carleton 1981; Draughon Jr. 1998; Rodrigue and Phillips 2011; Woodward 1981). The first three decades of the twentieth century were associated with significant bursts of development in Baton Rouge. They left “few elements of the nineteenth century city intact” (Brill 1963, p. 73). A forced industrialization of the somewhat sleepy commercial and administrative city was triggered in 1909 by the settlement of a Standard Oil refinery. The likewise forced expansion of the Louisiana State University (LSU) was reflected since the 1920s in the construction of a campus in the south of the city area. This campus continued to undergo new expansions (Ruffin 2006). The modernization of Louisiana’s technical and social infrastructures (from the paving of roads to the expansion of LSU and the stadium of the Tigers with their Marching Band) was pushed by Governor Huey P. Long from the late 1920s until his assassination in 1935 (with sometimes questionable

98

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

Fig. 3   The new capitol building in art deco style. It was completed in 1932 under the reign of Huey P. Long. With its 137 m high tower, it is not only the tallest building in the city to date, but also the tallest Capitol building in the United States. Thus, it can be interpreted not least as an expression of the governor’s claim to state importance (and his own claim to importance). Using a fisheye lens (photo right), the Capito statue axis is highlighted even more. (Photographs: Olaf Kühne 2022)

methods of staff selection and management), and implied not least an expansion of state administration in Baton Rouge. This development was reflected, in addition to the governor’s need for prestige, in the construction of a new capitol building (Gleason and Brockway 1991; Kühne and Jenal 2020a; Rodrigue and Phillips 2008, 2011; Fig. 3). The tripolar structure of petrochemical industry, state government, and LSU that emerged in this way continues to shape not only the physical space of Baton Rouge today, but also its social and economic development (Fig. 4). Not only the tripolar structure, but other specifics from the first half of the twentieth century persist to this day. These make Baton Rouge different from other metropolitan areas (especially of comparable size; Bartholomew 1945–1948; Brill 1963; Kühne and Jenal 2020a): 1. The extensive use of land by industry and public administration. 2. The small areal extent and equally small importance of the Central Business District.

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

99

Fig. 4   The Baton Rouge development tripole of refinery, political and administrative structures, and Louisiana State University. (From: Kühne and Jenal 2021a)

3. The weak degree of development and strongly expandable state of preservation of the transport infrastructure. The former can be attributed to the early polycentric settlement structure, the latter leads to the fourth point: 4. Spatial development is carried out in the absence of political or administrative ambitions. They largely follow economic spatial development logics, with correspondingly low funding of public infrastructures.

100

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

The high demand for petroleum and petroleum products resulting from World War II, the economic boom that followed in the 1950s and 1960s, and OPEC’s oil pricing policies in the 1970s, combined with a strong transportation focus on the automobile and the airplane, meant a period of prosperity for Baton Rouge (and much of Louisiana). During this period, the metropolitan area’s population grew, driven in particular by rapid suburbanization, the petrochemical industry provided good-paying jobs on a larger scale, and city and state tax revenues were high. By the late 1950s, Baton Rouge’s downtown – particularly Third Street, also along Main Street – had a strong retail presence (Fig. 5). Public use areas are massed to the north of Downtown (state administration) and to the south (City and Parish administration). Towards the east, unused areas or areas occupied by residential buildings increase (this classification is already found in the original mapping). The prolonged boom ended a low-price phase of crude oil in the 1980s: Cost reductions in the petrochemical industry through rationalization freed up labor that had low skill levels, tax revenues declined, and showed the downside of the lopsided economic development trajectory (Colten 2014; Hochschild 2016) that also affected (and potentially still affects) Baton Rouge’s other two development poles: Budget cuts hit both public administration and LSU. Accompanied and in some cases partly caused by this was a widespread loss of function of the Downtown as a retail center and the construction of office buildings also remained subdued. This in turn had the unintended side effect of preserving a comparatively extensive stock of historic buildings in the Downtown. Accordingly, a comparatively large structural substance has been available to Downtown revitalization efforts since the 1990s (in the course of postmodern urban development that values the historic). However, efforts to functionally revitalize the Downtown remain limited due to its eccentric location on the edge of the urban area. It had emerged as a commercial center at the now-redeveloped port, with the discontinuation of ferry service between Port Allen and Baton Rouge through the construction of the O. K. Allen Bridge north of today’s EXXON refinery and the Horace Wilkinson Bridge south of the Downtown and the relocation of the region’s port activities to the west bank of the Mississippi River, only a marginal location remained. The relocation of retail to different generations of shopping malls further contributed to the decline of the Downtown (Brill 1963; Carleton 1981; Kühne and Jenal 2020a; Rodrigue and Phillips 2011; Ruffin 2006). Hurricane Katrina in the summer of 2005 caused numerous New Orleans residents to relocate permanently to Baton Rouge, which in turn was associated with a modest population boost as well as rising real estate prices (Rodrigue and Phillips 2011). Today, Baton Rouge can be described as a spatial pastiche with a high degree of fragmentation and disparity of developments. As such, it occupies an exceptional position even among metropolitan regions in the southern United States. Settlement development in the metropolitan region is currently characterized by a simultaneity of centrifugal and centripetal forces: Efforts to revitalize the Downtown (attracting residents, attracting restaurants and hotels, offices, etc.), urbanization efforts around the Downtown, but also away from it (especially through the construction of multi-story apartment buildings), are contrasted by (partially successful) efforts to incorporate suburban, previously

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

101

Fig. 5   Land use in downtown Baton Rouge in 1959. (Own representation, modified from: Brill 1963)

unincorporated suburban areas of the East Baton Rouge Parish (Central City northeast of Baton Rouge, currently in the south: St. George). A key driver of these efforts is, not least, the desire to reduce municipal taxes, which limits the tax revenue capacity of the Parish (in other U.S. states: County). This, in turn, particularly affects the neighborhoods

102

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

east of the ExxonMobil refinery affected by successive de-industrialization, which is dominated by populations with below-average endowments of symbolic capital, mostly of African-American descent (Burby 2000; Harris 2019; Jones 2019; Karlin 2019; McCollister 2019; The City of St. George 2019). This part of Baton Rouge also has a limited number of educational institutions, difficult access to (healthy) food, as well as patchy sidewalks in poor condition (similar applies to streets), above average heat islanding, as well as a high inventory of dilapidated buildings. Situated roughly between Interstate 110, Airline Highway, and Florida Street/Florida Boulevard, it can be understood as a ‘triangle of reduced life chances’ (Kühne and Jenal 2020a). Contrasting this ‘triangle of reduced life chances’ are residential subdivisions located south of Florida Street/ Boulevard, making Florida Street/Boulevard act as a kind of ‘social equator’ (Kuehne and Jenal 2020a). These subdivisions are predominantly inhabited by white populations and those with high endowments of symbolic capital. A similar contrast is formed by the ‘triangle’ to younger suburban developments. An intersection of the two is found in St. George (Antipova 2010; Burby 2000; City of Baton Rouge and Parish of East Baton Rouge 2015; Kuai and Zhao 2017; Kuehne et al. 2020; Kuehne and Jenal 2020a, 2021a; Stratmann et al. 2020; United States Census Bureau 2019; Fig. 6). The profound transformation of Baton Rouge’s economic, as well as political, development is also reflected in the structure of the Downtown’s land use when comparing 1959 and 2019 (Fig. 7). In the wake of the shift of retail from Downtown to shopping malls, and later to Internet commerce, as outlined above, retail uses in the Downtown have all but disappeared, replaced in particular by office buildings. The shift to internet retail is symbolized by the construction of an Amazon distribution center on the site of the former Cortana Mall in the area of the intersection of Florida Boulevard and Airline Highway on the east side of Downtown. In the Downtown area, the expansion of the importance of government administration is also documented in an increasing land use, both north and south of Downtown. The construction of multi-story parking garages on the south side of North Street is noteworthy in this context, symbolizing not least the growing importance of motorized private transport, as is the conversion of the Baton Rouge passenger train station into a museum. The railroad tracks running through the city currently serve only freight traffic. As a result of the already extensive disappearance of small-scale retail from downtown Baton Rouge, which was commonly particularly affected by the Covid 19 pandemic, changes in use between 2019 and 2022 (Fig. 8) are comparatively small (Bartik et al. 2020; Dunphy et al. 2022). The development of Baton Rouge’s Space 1 can be described in large part as a collateral consequence of the specific inherent logics, especially economics, but also the inscriptions of individual city and landscape 2a and 2b. The inscription of specific ideas of the c-mode specialized in spatial developments in space 1 are a rare occurrence in the urban area – and then, as with the LSU campus (which we will return to in more detail), stand out all the more. Beyond the campus, a small-grained pastiche dominates City 1, counterpointed only by current attempts to build design-coherent neighborhoods. These ‘islands of coherent design’ in Space 1 thereby form new community-oriented villages in

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

103

Fig. 6   A view along Plank Road, which traverses the ‘triangle of reduced life chances’. Barely supported stump poles and a discontinuous sidewalk illustrate the state of technical infrastructure, a dilapidated commercial building the economic decline of a part of the city formerly prospering through petrochemical jobs. (Photo: Olaf Kühne 2019)

the ‘multivillage metropolis’ of Baton Rouge (Kühne and Jenal 2020a). We will address what suitability this brings to the film industry, particularly as a filming location, in the following section.

4 ‘Hollywood South’ – Baton Rouge (Disguised) in Movies A major medium of generating spatial stereotypes (b-mode) is film (but also its subtypes, such as television series). Neither feature films nor documentaries simply represent spaces 1 in this process; spaces 1 are selected, dressed, or produced according to the desired effect on the viewer. Film, like media content, does not represent ‘reality’, it is rather the result of “selection, evaluation, processing and interpretations of social events” (Werlen 1997, p. 383). Film draws on the contents of the b-mode and updates them through its representations, the fundamental irritation of which is usually forbidden, not least because of the economic interests of the film industry (Gold and Gold 2013;

104

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

Fig. 7   Land use in Downtown Baton Rouge in 2019. (Own survey and illustration)

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

Fig. 8   Land use in downtown Baton Rouge in 2022. (Own survey and illustration)

105

106

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

Klumpe 2022; Kühne 2018a; Zimmermann 2019). In accordance with these considerations, the following section is based on a social constructivist theoretical perspective, from which a qualitative empirical approach to the films discussed is derived (for more detail: Keutzer et al. 2014; Kühne 2012; Kühne and Schönwald 2015). Historically, the film industry in the U.S. has focused primarily on the large and internationally present cities of New York and Los Angeles as centers for filming, production, and locating related services (a.o. Miller 2017). In the 1970s, New York allowed filmmakers to shoot in the city “with no requirements on how the city was portrayed” (Miller 2017, p. 468) which, according to Webb (2014, p. 76) led to “dystopian and often implicit anti-urban images of the city”. Rather than harming New York’s image, however, the city was seen as a “problem to be solved”, helping to legitimize New York’s restructuring at the end of the 1970s (Webb 2014, p. 76). Following New York’s example, many cities and states in the U.S. began to favor film production through tax cuts in the 1990s; Louisiana was the first state to introduce a “Motion Picture Production Tax Credit Program” in 1992, which – in an adapted version – was one of the most generous programs in the U.S. from 2002 to 2017 (Soba 2021, p. 2). Aim of the Motion picture production tax credit (LA RS § 47:6007) is “to encourage development in Louisiana of a strong capital and infrastructure base for motion picture production in order to achieve an independent, self-supporting industry”, as well as to “[e]ncourage increased employment opportunities within this sector and increased global competitiveness with other states in fully utilizing economic development options within the motion picture industry” (Louisiana State Legislature 2021). Spatially, the settlement of film production businesses is concentrated in the New Orleans, Baton Rouge and Shreveport areas (Bhayroo and Meehan 2008, p. 196). According to Soba (2021, p. 6), Louisiana is not only attracting the production of movies and (television) series, but is subsequently also attracting the audience of these productions in the form of media- or movie-related tourism. Natchitoches, for example, attracted the interest of tourists, as the film location of ‘Steel Magnolias’ (1989) can be visited there (Soba 2021, p. 9). For filmmakers, Louisiana is one of the most well-known film locations in the U.S. because of the above mentioned tax cuts (a.o. Mayer 2017; Miller 2017) and in 2013, with 18 films by major Hollywood companies produced there, even represented the production location where the most films were produced worldwide – ahead of Canada, the UK, and California (Miller 2017; Soba 2021). Blockbusters and successful films such as ‘Easy Rider’ (1969), ‘The Curious Case of Benjamin Button’ (2008), ‘12 Years a Slave’ (2013), ‘Green Book’ (2018), ‘Greyhound’ (2020) and most recently ‘Where the Crawdads Sing’ (2022) were all produced in Louisiana and point to the attraction of low tax rates for film production companies (a.o. Miller 2017; Soba 2021). Following the development of the Vancouver metropolitan area as a popular Hollywood film location in the 1990s and its designation as ‘Hollywood North’, Louisiana and especially New Orleans is also known as ‘Hollywood South’ (Bhayroo and Meehan 2008, p. 190; Harris 2012; Mayer 2017, p. 9). A paradoxical change in the choice of production location can be seen: While in the early days of the film industry, movies such as ‘Tarzan and the Apes’ (1918) which were set in Louisiana, were shot in Hollywood with sets represent-

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

107

ing Louisiana and supplemented by a few establishing shots from the ‘real’ Louisiana (Mott 1984, p. 59). In recent years, though, more and more films are shot in Louisiana, but these films are often not set in the Pelican State, but rather locations in Louisiana are disguised as other or even fictitious locations (Harris 2012; Miller 2017; Ray and Harris 2012; Soba 2021). This is a trend that, according to Miller (2017, pp. 476–478) is particularly evident in 2013: In only two of the 18 films produced in Louisiana in this year does Louisiana play an important role; in three other films, Louisiana is partly portrayed as the state itself, but in parts it also serves for other locations. The film ‘Now You See Me’ (2013), for example, was filmed in New Orleans, but the city in the film not only represents New Orleans itself, but is also dressed as Las Vegas and New York. In the remaining thirteen films Miller (2017, p. 476) examined, “Louisiana appears disguised as a specific existent other place (another specific US city)”, such as in ‘This is the End’ (2013), a film set entirely in Los Angeles, yet not being filmed there, but rather representing New Orleans disguised as L.A. (Miller 2017, p. 481). Based on observations such as these, it can also be assumed that Louisiana is not chosen by film production companies for production because of its diverse spatial conditions and even more diverse possibilities to use them cinematically, but rather the financial incentives of the state’s tax cuts are the decisive argument, so that Louisiana is ultimately preferred in parts even to the locations that are relevant to the content of the films. If films produced in Louisiana are, in fact, set there, there are often filmed aspects and things unique to Louisiana and they “often rely on what their viewer expects a region to be like” (Schuth 1984, p. 5). Schuth (1984) refers in particular to peacefully depicted swamps and bayous (such as in ‘Evangeline’ 1929), oil rigs in pristine swamps (such as in ‘Louisiana Story’ 1948), childlike and simply depicted Cajuns and Hurricanes (as in ‘Thunder Bay’ 1953, among others), at the same time dangerous and inhospitable Swamps (among others in ‘Southern Comfort’ 1981) and again and again New Orleans. The latter is portrayed in particular on the basis of four recurring aspects: “history, mystery, pageantry and sexuality” (Schuth 1984, p. 12). Schuth (1984, p. 13) concludes that “film/video makers tend to look for and often exaggerate the uncommon”. In parts, films produced in Louisiana – in reference to the ‘Western’ – are also referred to as ‘the Southern’. Interestingly, Louisiana is usually “a metaphor for the worst in America – violence, corruption, oppression – as well as the best – individualism, pride, self-reliance, honor, and true grit” (Allain 1986, p. 231). Developments and tendencies in cinematic representation such as Miller (2017) noted for Louisiana as a whole can also be seen in the cinematic representation of Baton Rouge. While a majority of the best-known films produced in Baton Rouge listed on the IMDb website2 are filmed at least in part in the city – both in and around the city itself, 2 The

Internet Movie Database (IMDb) is, by its own account, the world’s best-known website for obtaining information on movies, celebrities and TV shows, and for deciding what to watch and where (IMDb 2022a). Within the website, it is possible to filter by production locations and thus identify films and series that were produced in Louisiana, Baton Rouge or New Orleans.

108

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

and in film studios located in Baton Rouge – few of the films are actually set there (see Table 1). In IMDbs 25 most popular films produced in Baton Rouge, only two films are predominantly set in Baton Rouge: ‘Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte’ (1964) and ‘Sex, Lies, and Videotape’ (1989). The former in particular draws on the stereotypical Southern romanticism on the base of the home, a former plantation – shot in Houmas House, south of Baton Rouge on the banks of the Mississippi River – but also integrates the violence of the ‘Southern’ through the bloody murders. In ‘Sex, Lies, and Videotape’ it can also be seen based on the architecture that the film was shot in the Southern states, even though the majority of the film consists of interior shots in buildings. Baton Rouge has no further significance for the plot of the film. In the remainder of the 25 most popular films produced in Baton Rouge, the proportion of all those films that were filmed in Baton Rouge but are not set there predominates. Rather, the city is disguised as another place, another city, or even a fictional place. The latter can be, for example, a futuristic city, as in the film ‘The Host’ (2013) which is set in a dystopian future. Baton Rouge is not mentioned as a city, but it is pointed out that the protagonist grew up in Louisiana. The protagonist’s hiding place from the invasion and colonization of the ‘souls’ (a kind of alien society) is located in the Louisiana swamps, which suggests parallels to the historical interpretation of the swamps as inhospitable, which were used as a retreat by escaped former slaves before the Civil War (cf. i.a. Parker 1996, p. 38; Wilson 1977 [1858], p. 340). The futuristic city depicted in the film bears little resemblance to Baton Rouge in establishing shots, but landmarks of the city are clearly visible in some of the urban scenes: for example, the Capitol Park Museum serves as one of the novel buildings of the futuristic city, allowing views of the Louisiana State Capitol (cf. Fig. 9; Louisiana Office of Tourism 2022b). Furthermore, in another scene of the film, part of a street with typical Southern houses can be seen, which in combination with the peacefully walking people is supposed to illustrate the alleged idyll of the new world. In parts, Baton Rouge is also disguised as other locations by means of the use of CGI, for example in the war movie ‘Greyhound’ (2020), which was shot – in addition to studio shots – on the museum warship USS Kidd permanently moored on the banks of the Mississippi River. In the film, the ship is then seen on stormy seas (see Fig. 10), although it never left its berth on the Mississippi River bank at any point during filming. The rest of the city plays no role in the film, with only the lobby of the Louisiana State Capitol making a brief appearance when Tom Hanks on screen character Commander Ernest Krause meets with his girlfriend in San Francisco (sceen it 2022). The Louisiana State University served as the location for the Accapella comedy ‘Pitch Perfect’ (2012), and gave the fictional university where the film is set, Bard University, its appearance (Louisiana Office of Tourism 2022a). In the film, the clever placement of banners welcoming new students obscures the names of the buildings affixed to the walls (see Fig. 11). The typical architecture of Louisiana State University, however, cannot be concealed in the film and remains clearly recognizable even under the attempted disguise as Bard University. The rest of Baton Rouge does not appear in the film, making it yet

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

109

Table 1  List of the 25 most popular movies and series on the imdb.com website that were produced in Baton Rouge. There is no further distinction in the ranking, if the movies and series are set in Baton Rouge as a city, Baton Rouge is only disguised as another city or if they were only shot in film studios in the city. In addition, it is noted whether the films were only shot in Baton Rouge (no distinction is made here as to whether only a scene was shot in Baton Rouge or the entire film), or also set there (Own representation based on IMDb 2022b; accessed from the United States). No.

Title

Year

Shot/set in Baton Rouge (BR)

1

True Blood

2008–2014

Shot in BR

2

Captain Marvel

2019

Shot in BR, also New Orleans, one scene set in BR

3

Fantastic Four

2015

Shot in BR and BR Film Studios

4

Oblivion (I)

2013

Shot in BR Film Studios, shot on site in New Orleans and St. Francisville

5

Pitch Perfect

2012

Shot in BR

6

The Twilight Sage: Breaking Dawn—Part 2

2012

Shot in BR Film Studio

7

The Magnificent Seven

2016

Shot in BR, stood in for the ‘wild west’

8

The Maze Runner

2014

Shot in BR Film Studio

9

Battleship

2012

Shot in BR Film Studio

10

Dallas Buyers Club

2013

Shot in BR

11

Jack Reacher: Never Go Back

2016

Shot in BR as Washington DC

12

Greyhound

2020

Shot in BR

13

Pitch Perfect 2

2015

Shot in BR

14

Scream: The TV Series

2015–2019

Shot in BR Film Studio

15

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn—Part 1

2011

Shot in BR Film Studio

16

The Dukes of Hazzard

2005

Shot in BR

17

22 Jump Street

2014

Shot in BR and other LA locations

18

Failure to Launch

2006

Shot in BR

19

Sex, Lies, and Videotape 1989

Shot in BR, set in BR

20

Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte

1964

Shot in BR, set in BR

21

The Final Girls

2015

Shot in BR

22

The Host

2013

Shot in BR and BR Film Studio

23

Ray (I)

2004

Shot in BR

24

Battle Los Angeles

2011

Shot in BR and Shreveport

25

Hard Target

1993

Shot in BR and other LA locations

110

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

Fig. 9   Scenes from the film ‘The Host’ shot at Capitol Park Museum in Baton Rouge (top) and the respective view in the summer of 2022 (bottom). (Photographs: Lara Koegst 2022; own compilation based on ‘The Host’ 2013)

Fig. 10   A scene from the movie ‘Greyhound’ (2020) and the corresponding filming location in Baton Rouge: the USS Kidd – jacked up on the banks of the Mississippi River in Baton Rouge (right) – served as the film location for the USS Keeling with the call name Greyhound. Per animation, the warship appeared to be on high seas in the film. In addition, some scenes were shot at a film studio in Baton Rouge (left). (Left: Screenshot from the film ‘Greyhound’ 2020; right: photograph: Lara Koegst 2022; own compilation)

another disguise of the city – more specifically, of the Louisiana State University – and is for many viewers, very likely another unnoticed appearance of Baton Rouge on the big screen. Accordingly, Baton Rouge’s cinematic spatial construction can only be guessed at second glance: In many of the films produced in Louisiana’s capital city, the location can only be inferred by obtaining further information or recognizing landmarks – such as the Louisiana State Capitol or the USS Kidd – since it is not mentioned by name, or

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

111

Fig. 11   Louisiana State University’s staged Atkinson Hall becomes part of Bard University in the film ‘Pitch Perfect’ (left); Louisiana Office of Tourism 2022a, based on ‘Pitch Perfect’ 2012). When compared to a photo from a similar perspective (right), the placement of the banner in the film covering the lettering of Atkinson Hall is striking. (Left: Louisiana Office of Tourism 2022a, based on ‚Pitch Perfect‘ 2012; Right: photograph by Lara Koegst 2022; Own compilation)

is supposed to represent another place. Often, Baton Rouge stands in for other cities, is used as a futuristic city through animation, or is completely animated. It can be assumed that the film industry does not necessarily come to Louisiana because the state has such an enormous variety of different locations and filming sites from the antebellum South to today. Rather, based on the frequency of Louisianas and Baton Rouges disguise as another location, it can be surmised that the tax cuts of film productions in Louisiana are far more important in the decision to locate a production than the diversity and individuality of the region. This is also reflected in the high proportion of films shown in Table 1 that were produced in Baton Rouge, yet not shot in the city, but on sets in film studios. For example, ‘Breaking Dawn’ Part 1 (2011) and Part 2 (2012) were shot on sets at the Celtic Film Studio in Baton Rouge (Celtic Studios 2022), but the city itself plays no role in the film. The space 1 depicted in the film is accordingly often based on Baton Rouge in its physical conditions, but the viewers are brought to perceive another space through corresponding scenic elements as well as content-related references in the plot – the cinematic construction of space in Baton Rouge contributes to the construction of other spaces and influences the expectations viewers have of these places. Baton Rouge has no nationally known iconographic landmarks; at best, a larger presence is achieved by the State Capitol (Weber et al. 2022). This makes the city a suitable location for films that do not have specific location claims in terms of landscape or city 1. In this respect, Baton Rouge often functions as an interchangeable backdrop. Baton Rouge fulfills this function as a result of the diversity of ‘villages’ that make up city 1 in a way that allows for numerous settings. On its own, it is difficult – and we will also discuss this in the following – to stage metropolitan flair in Baton Rouge. The attractiveness of Baton Rouge (and Louisiana in general) for the film industry, however, also arises from its promotion by the state, which increases the attractiveness of the location to choose it as a disguised setting, which, however, runs counter to the function of using the medium of film to anchor Louisiana in general, Baton Rouge in particular, more strongly in a supra-regional b-modal landscape or city construction.

112

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

5 An Experience of Baton Rouge Between History and Film The historical development and the representation as well as the disguise of Baton Rouge in films give diverse insights into the ‘multivillage metropolis’ of Baton Rouge. But what impression does one get of the Louisiana state capital on the ground? In April and May 2022, we explored the city on foot over several days and recorded our perceptions and sensory impressions – our experience of Baton Rouge. We methodically resort to the phenomenological walk, in which we note our impressions of experiencing the physical space of Baton Rouge, with recourse to all sensory impressions (Burckhardt 2006a; Kühne and Jenal 2020a; Wylie 2005; in this volume e.g.: Endreß 2023; Gerstlauer and Mahler 2023; Kühne 2023; Kühne et al. 2023; Palat Narayanan 2023). In this section, we will first discuss downtown Baton Rouge, as well as the Louisiana State Capitol and State Capitol Park, and then highlight the adjacent Spanish Town and Beauregard Town. Due to Louisiana State University’s high presence in film, internet communications, as well as its importance to Baton Rouge’s space 1 structure, we also explored this part of the city on foot. Downtown Baton Rouge has a smaller size and a smaller physical co-presence of other people than we would have expected for the capital of a state in the United States. At noon, there are only a few people on the wide streets between the few skyscrapers and office buildings, likewise only now and then a car drives past us – apart from that, it is quiet. Nevertheless, the downtown does not seem dreary, on the contrary, despite the high houses, the many parking lots and parking garages and undeveloped areas (with restrained use as a parking lot) we get a rather peaceful and quiet, even tranquil impression. However, the closer we get to the State Capitol Park and thus the State Capitol of Louisiana, the more the tranquil impression fades. Buildings of the fading twentieth century form the southern border of the park. The State Library and the Capitol Park Museum are located here. The latter is the building used as a filming location in the movie ‘The Host’: the size of the State Capitol is evident in the movie, but the futuristic city in the movie is staged far busier than we found Baton Rouge (cf. Fig. 9). The view is directed from downtown by a wide street as a visual axis and the structure of the park to the tall, monumental building of the State Capitol and the statue of former Governor Huey P. Long standing in the middle of the park. The park is very well-kept, almost anemic, sterile and very concerned with perfection, this concerns not only those parts that are laid out in the style of a French garden with its geometric shapes, but also those that are oriented towards an English landscape garden. In the center of the rectangular park, planted beds, hedges and grassy areas encompass the statue of Huey P. Long facing the State Capitol. The cult of personality associated with this monument seems a bit out of time and, given the desertedness of the surrounding park, carries a dissonant atmosphere. Burckhardt’s description (2006b, p. 140) of a “planning suit[s] tailored too large” seems a fitting comparison here. The monumental construction of the State Capitol underlines this impression and manifests the will to demonstrate power, importance

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

113

and influence. Today, in view of the otherwise tranquil Downtown, the Capitol and Park appear as monuments of an unredeemed optimism for the future (the ideas of a future City 1 conveyed in City 2 by Huey P. Long and at City 3 proved to be an overestimation of the possibilities that could result from the forced modernization of the time). Framing the park at regular intervals are conifers and the large and spreading Life Oak Trees so typical of Louisiana. But efforts to domesticate nature are only incompletely realized: The hedge rows in the central part of the park are accurately trimmed, yet they are only patchily planted. Without the Life Oak Trees, typical for the region, the park corresponds to any other park in the world. Likewise, we are a little bit surprised about today’s use of the oversized park infrastructure (paths, lanterns, garbage cans, benches), even though the park is only sparsely visited except us. Despite lunch breaks in the surrounding government buildings, the park is hardly busy, and those we encounter on foot or in cars are moving at a leisurely pace. After the lunch break, there are hardly any people in the public space. We wonder if this is due to the warm temperatures and high humidity. Nevertheless, it is easy to sit on one of the benches in the shade of a Life Oak Tree. In the branches of the trees some squirrels are on the move and we hear the singing of birds. The wind carries the sounds of the nearby Interstate 110 over to us. The State Capitol towers over the park and the surrounding buildings by far (see Fig. 12). To the northeast, Spanish Town immediately adjoins Baton Rouge’s Downtown. While the two neighborhoods are physically and spatially contiguous, the transition is visually quite abrupt: In the shadow of the tall buildings of the Downtown compared to the rest of the metropolitan region, there are smaller, older, but mostly renovated and spruced-up, small single-family homes with porches and planted front yards on narrow streets. The architecture of the houses is oriented on Spanish models or updates the Southern style. Thus, the shotgun houses, which are widespread in Louisiana, can also be found here. However, the different houses of the rather small-structured properties have one thing in common: A tendency to individualization through facade colors and additions, furnishing of the verandas and planting of the front gardens by the residents is evident. The high presence of usually only temporarily fixed decorations such as fairy lights and Mardi Gras chains further clarify this impression and point to a generalization and deconventionalization of the formerly special (see Fig. 13). Frequently present, moreover, are flags of the United States, the state of Louisiana, Louisiana State University, and its sports teams, the LSU Tigers, but also – in regard to the current conflict in the Ukraine – Ukrainian flags. Leaning trees provide shade, and it’s a little less warm than it was downtown a moment ago. Yet the walkability of the neighborhood is limited due to the large roots of the trees that have lifted sidewalk slabs. This hinders the phenomenological walk a bit, as the possibility of the simultaneity of walking, observing and noting the observations is reduced. A fluid walk thus becomes an oscillation between concentrated walking on the one hand and observation and noting while lingering on the other. The development and planting of the neighborhood appears very nonconformist and unstructured, in parts front gardens extend beyond the sidewalk to the narrow strip

114

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

Fig. 12   Looking south toward downtown from the observation deck atop the Louisiana State Capitol. In the foreground, the symmetrical layout of the State Capitol Park is clearly visible, with the statue of former Governor Huey P. Long in the center. To the left at the edge of the picture, the first houses of Spanish Town can be seen following the park, as well as the Interstate 110 close to the horizon. The emptiness of the streets is also striking here, cars are predominantly parked at the roadside. Baton Rouge stands with its back to the Mississippi River (right in the picture), although the river has actually shaped the city significantly. The waterfront is only half-heartedly developed with a narrow promenade that ends in nothingness and is separated from the rest of the city 1 by a road, rails and a large parking lot. (Photograph: Lara Koegst 2022)

of green between sidewalk and street, creating a hybrid space of public access – the sidewalk – and private design – the garden (see Fig. 13). We walk in parts on the almost untraveled street so as not to intrude too much into the private space of the residents. The traffic volume in the neighborhood is very low, so that even a cat rolls comfortably in the sun in the middle of the road – it creates an almost village-like, idyllic impression of quiet tranquility. South of Downtown is Beauregard, dating back to one of the many modest settlement founding efforts in the early days of European settlement (the second oldest part of the city after Spanish Town today). In particular, the portions adjoining North Boulevard to the south present themselves largely in an accurate state of renovation of the buildings (which often house law offices) and a state of home gardens that testify to the dedication of numerous gardening hours, without, however, appearing mannered. Thus, Beauregard appears as if it embodies the Town 1 manifestation of an implementation of a stereotypi-

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

115

Fig. 13   Hybrid space in Spanish Town: Planting on the narrow strip between the street and sidewalk incorporates it into the front yard design, creating a hybrid space of public and private space (left). Fairy lights and Mardi Gras chains on the fences of properties illustrate the tendency to individualize the building design (right). ( Photographs: Lara Koegst 2022)

cal Southern small-town idyll that strives for perfection (Town 3c and b). The figure of Spanish Town seems like the other pole of possible renovation ideals: here the inscription of more individual notions of Town 2b and c dominates. On a building wall behind a sprawling parking lot at the corner of America and St. Ferdinand Streets, a law firm is struggling to attract clients with an offensively patriotic mural. In general, the edges of the neighborhood are marked by departures from the otherwise dominant dollhouse idyll of Beauregard: south of Government Street, the ages of the buildings are more varied, interspersed with commercial uses, especially at the edges. To the northeast are manifestations of a modest URFSURBanization (Kühne et al. 2016; Kühne and Schönwald 2015)., that is, the urbanization of former suburban settlements, here in the form of apartment buildings. To the northwest along North Boulevard, in the area of City Hall (no longer attributed to Beauregard), rudiments of urban settlement design and land use are evident; modest park-like street design, restaurants, and water features present themselves to a sparse user base.

116

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

In general, the soundscape (as part of Landscape 1) of downtown Baton Rouge and its surrounding neighborhoods as well as Capitol Parks is characterized by the everpresent background noise of the interstates. In some places (and depending on traffic situations on the interstates) this is sometimes more, sometimes less dominant. Mixed in – as another widespread component – are the sounds of individual cars passing by. Rarely do the sounds of passing buses reach our ears – Baton Rouge is not a city with a strong sense of public transportation. Rather sporadically, the sounds of birds can be heard, very sporadically conversations of people in physical presence or in technically mediated form via cell phone reaches us, a consequence of the abstention of physical presence of people in the public space of Baton Rouge. From time to time, the tooting of locomotives approaches us from a distance, signals that warn of the approach of a train at the numerous ungated railroad crossings in Baton Rouge. All in all, the soundscape of Baton Rouge also conveys the impression of a tranquil little town in which life outside of buildings flows along, especially in the form of automobile traffic. This impression is also underlined by the smellscape (Landscape 1): It remains inconspicuously neutral, with a few exceptions: in the west, in the area of the banks of the Mississippi River, there is a slight smell of river water in the air, in the north a slight whiff of exhaust fumes from the petrochemical industry, everywhere along the streets the sporadic smell of burnt oil, emitted by cars whose engines are apparently awaiting a piston ring overhaul (Fig. 14).

Fig. 14   The presence of train traffic and (petrochemical) industry in Baton Rouge has consequences for the Sound and Smellscape. (Photograph: Olaf Kühne 2022)

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

117

The Louisiana State University (LSU) is located between the Mississippi River and the University Lakes in the southern part of Baton Rouge. Here, too, we are on foot and explore the surroundings. The architectural similarity of the buildings is striking even at a superficial glance; the campus is laid out like a park. It gives the impression of a neatly maintained landscape garden with interspersed buildings, rather than what we expect the campus of a university to look like. Only the signs and banners attached to the streetlights, bearing information and the name of the university, make the denotation of the site clear. Large Life Oak Trees shade the sometimes very large and expansive green spaces between the buildings, which in parts seem almost palatial (see i.a. Fig. 15). The architectural design of the buildings and the color of their facades make it very clear that the location of Barden University in the film ‘Pitch Perfect’ is in fact Louisiana State University. Although, in the film, the many flags and signs in LSU’s colors – purple and yellow – have been replaced with the color green. Instead of dining halls, as they are present at German universities, at LSU we find various fast food restaurants in the Student Union, as well as the Faculty Club. The Student Union is located in one of the central places of the university, right next to the Parade

Fig. 15   At first glance, these photos do not suggest that they were taken on a university campus. The partly castle-like buildings (top left) and spacious green areas reminiscent of landscaped gardens are shaded by large Life Oak Trees (top right). The Parade Ground overlooking the LSU Law Center looks more like the forecourt of a castle or palace (lower right). The Greek Theater is also located on the LSU grounds and is also another filming location for the movie ‘Pitch Perfect’ (lower left). (Own photographs 2022)

118

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

Ground, a large grassy open space (see Fig. 15). To us, the dimensions of this space seem quite remarkable. Perhaps because of this, LSU’s campus has a tranquil, leisure-oriented feel. This impression is reinforced by the fact that, in addition to various halls where people work and teach, sports facilities are especially present on campus. In particular, the Tiger Stadium of the LSU football team towers above the surrounding buildings and can be seen from afar. The tranquility and calm of the university campus becomes clear once again when crossing the North Gate: There is a clear break between the well-kept, park-like campus of the university and the district center with clubs and bars beyond the university grounds; here, the idea of a uniformly planned ensemble of buildings and green spaces does not manifest itself – as on the campus. This space 1 appears more as a result of individual building and design decisions. The hustle and bustle of the evening and night life, which is often found here, fits into this picture, although it often announces itself as early as noon (see Fig. 16). Towards the south and the closer we get to the university lakes, more and more elaborate buildings in the southern style, even villas with a view over the lakes, are connected to the university buildings. Often, they house – indicated by corresponding inscriptions – student fraternities. On the shores of the lakes, geese and other

Fig. 16   The north gate of Louisiana State University separates the campus, which resembles a landscaped garden, from the adjacent district center with bars and clubs. When driving through the gate onto the LSU campus, it looks as if one is entering the grounds of a castle. (Photograph: Olaf Kühne 2022)

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

119

waterfowl are also on the move, which sporadically become acoustically present, in the water we see turtles that quickly disappear into the water as soon as they have noticed us. The high humidity present almost everywhere is particularly noticeable here. The LSU campus conveys – this is our impression – very succinctly the multifunctionality of Space 1. With its large trees, extensive open spaces, largely uniform architectural style, and the strong presence of sports facilities to its west, the impression suggests that the denotation of its layout was never quite clear-cut: University, sports facility, or physical manifestation (Landscape 1) of landscape architectural c-modal distinction efforts. Also, given the history, the question arises to what extent the University teaching legitimizes the soccer team and the soccer team legitimizes the marching band (Huey P. Long, after all, enthusiastically operated the construction of the same). Or does the educational operation not also serve to enliven the landscape garden? Or did both not arise from the desire not to put the forced industrialization aside also by the urbanization of its capital?

6 Conclusion Today, Baton Rouge presents itself as a multifaceted space-1 patchwork, with numerous low-density ‘islands’ forming a structure that is more reminiscent of a conglomerate of villages than an integrated metropolis. Although it was possible to subject Baton Rouge to forced modernization (especially industrialization) in the first decades (not least under the influence of Huey P. Long), the urbanization, let alone metropolization, of Baton Rouge remained rather imperfect. Downtown development lagged behind that of settlements of comparable size in function and structure (with the exception of Louisiana state government facilities). Thus, beyond busy streets, Baton Rouge tends to convey tranquility and quiet. This continued on the LSU campus, with the exception of a reasonable area – dominated by dining establishments – outside the north gate of campus. At this point, the contrast between the coherently designed campus and the city 1, designed more according to economic logics and individual aesthetic preferences, becomes clear. The multiformity of the “multivillage metropolis” also makes it interesting for the film industry as a backdrop, as it can unite many different – albeit interchangeable – settings in a comparatively small space 1. For example, Baton Rouge has hardly any landmarks that are present in the b-mode on a supra-regional scale (to a modest extent, this is most likely true for the Capitol). Combined with extensive state support for the film industry, this makes Baton Rouge attractive as a disguised location, which in turn does not help the specific Space 1 to become more anchored in b-mode spatial constructions. Our investigation is based on the epistemological foundation of the neopragmatic approach to regional geographies. This approach aims at investigating complex spatial syntheses by using different theories, methods, data, researcher perspectives, as well as forms of representation based on the research question. The present study was based on the use of a positivist, a social constructivist, and a phenomenological theoretical per-

120

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

spective. From a positivist perspective, the development of Baton Rouge’s Space 1 in particular was captured using classical methods of quantitative spatial observation and land use mapping and subjected to a c-modal synthesis, which in turn represents a contingent construction of space. Cinematic constructions of space, in turn, utilize and update b-modal constructions of space, and the choice of settings is made according to b-modal expectations, again suggesting a social constructivist perspective – in combination with a qualitative methodological approach to film. While from a positivist perspective the research is particularly oriented towards space 1c, from a social constructivist perspective the transformation from space 1b to city or more generally landscape 3b is examined. Level 2 of space, city and landscape is brought into research focus in the phenomenological approaches in relation to level 1. The experience of space 1 in a synthesis to city 2 and landscape 2 thereby also actualizes c-modal patterns of interpretation. Overall, however, the combination of theoretical perspectives and methods we have chosen provides a suitable approach to the three levels of space, landscape, and city and the relations between levels, but at the cost of a relatively complex presentation. Even if this combination of theories and methods has proven itself, this does not mean that other combinations, such as those involving critical approaches or incorporating a-modal perspectives or other methods, could not also provide suitable results. This, in turn, highlights the contingent construction of spaces – even in c-mode, which in turn gives rise to numerous possibilities for (scholarly) reference to Baton Rouge. Funding Information and Acknowledgement  The research this article is based on is part of the project ‘Geographies of Unsustainability – a Neopragmatic Regional Geography of Louisiana’ funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG).

References 12 Years a Slave. USA 2013. Director: McQueen, S. Regency Enterprises, River Road Entertainment, Plan B Entertainment, New Regency, & Film4 Productions 2013. Aitken, S. C., & Dixon, D. P. (2006). Imagining Geographies of Film. Erdkunde, 60, (4, 326–336). Allain, M. (1986). Glamour and Squalor: Louisiana on Film. Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association, 27, (3, 229–237). Antipova, A. (2010). Land use, individual attributes, and travel behavior in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 3450. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/3450/​. Accessed: 13 June 2019. Armstrong, A. M. (2010). Historic Neighborhoods Of Baton Rouge (American Chronicles: A History Press Series). Charleston: The History Press. Baltzer, U. (2001). Rorty und die Erneuerung des Pragmatismus. In T. Tietz, & U. Schäfer (Eds.), Hinter den Spiegeln. Beiträge zur Philosophie Richard Rortys mit Erwiderungen von Richard Rorty (pp. 21–48). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Barnes, T. J. (2008). American pragmatism: Towards a geographical introduction. Geoforum, 39, (4, 1542–1554). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.02.013.

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

121

Bartholomew, H. (1945–1948). The 25 Year-Parish Plan for Metropolitan Baton Rouge. Louisiana. Baton Rouge: Self-published. Bartik, A. W., Bertrand, M., Cullen, Z., Glaeser, E. L., Luca, M., & Stanton, C. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on small business outcomes and expectations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117, (30, 17656–17666). https://doi. org/10.1073/pnas.2006991117. Berr, K. (2023). Multisensuality versus visual primacy of landscape perception. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Bhayroo, S., & Meehan, E. R. (2008). The Other LA: Louisiana Woos Hollywood. In J. Wasko, & M. Erickson (Eds.), Cross-Border Cultural Production. Economic Runaway or Globalization? (pp. 189–215). Amherst, New York: Cambria Press. Block, A. B. (2014). How Georgia Toppled Louisiana in Attracting TV Productions. The Peach State used convenience (26 daily flights to L.A.!) and less regulation (but is it too lax?) to lure nearly $1 billion in 2013. The Hollywood Reporter. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ general-news/how-georgia-toppled-louisiana-attracting-690836/​. Accessed: 23 November 2021. Brill, D. (1963). Baton Rouge, LA. Aufstieg, Funktionen und Gestalt einer jungen Großstadt des neuen Industriegebietes am unteren Mississippi (Schriften des Geographischen Instituts der Universität Kiel, vol. 21,2). Kiel: Selbstverlag des Geographischen Instituts der Universität Kiel. Burby, R. J. (2000). Baton Rouge: The Making (and Breaking) of a Petrochemical Paradise. In C. E. Colten (Ed.), Transforming New Orleans and Its Environs. Centuries of Change (History of the Urban Environment, pp. 160–177). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Burckhardt, L. (2006a). Spaziergangswissenschaft (1995). In M. Ritter, & M. Schmitz (Eds.), Warum ist Landschaft schön? Die Spaziergangswissenschaft (pp. 257–300). Kassel: Martin Schmitz Verlag. Burckhardt, L. (2006b). Warum ist Landschaft schön? Die Spaziergangswissenschaft. Kassel: Martin Schmitz Verlag. Carleton, M. T. (1981). River Capital. An Illustrated History of Baton Rouge. Woodland Hills: Windsor Publications, Inc. Celtic Studios. (2022). Shot at Celtic. Wrapped Productions. http://www.celticstudios.net/​. Accessed: 9 September 2022. City of Baton Rouge and Parish of East Baton Rouge. (2015). Consolidated Plan and Strategy 2015–2019 and Year 2015 Action Plan. https://www.brla.gov/DocumentCenter/ View/2518/2015-2019-Consolidated-Plan-and-Strategy-with-Year-One-2015-Action-Plan-PDF. Accessed: 1 July 2019. Colten, C. E. (2014). Industrie und Umwelt in den Südstaaten der USA. Eine historisch-geographische Betrachtung. Geographische Rundschau, 66, (3, 53–37). Crossey, N., Dittel, J., Kazig, R., Thiollière, P., & Weber, F. (2022). Landschaft in situ. Der Beitrag von Atmosphären zum Verständnis der Konstruktion von Landschaft. Raumforschung und Raumordnung | Spatial Research and Planning. https://doi.org/10.14512/rur.183. Douglas, M. L. (1955). Some Aspects of the Social History of Baton Rouge from 1830 to 1850. Baton Rouge: Self-published. Draughon Jr., R. (1998). Down By The River. A History of the Baton Rouge Riverfront (Preserving Louisiana’s Heritage). New Orleans: US Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District. Dunphy, C., Miller, G. F., Rice, K., Vo, L., Sunshine, G., McCord, R., et al. (2022). The Impact of Covid-19 State Closure Orders on Consumer Spending, Employment, and Business Revenue. Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP, 28, (1, 43–49). https://doi. org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000001376.

122

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

Easy Rider. USA 1969. Director: Hopper, D. Pando Company Inc., & Raybert Productions 1969. Edler, D., & Dickmann, F. (2023). Geospatial Data Literacy: Considering the Multisensory Perspective. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2022). Aesthetics and Cartography: Post-Critical Reflections on Deviance in and of Representations. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 11, (10). https:// doi.org/10.3390/ijgi11100526. Endreß, S. (2023). Multisensory Landscapes – Smellscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Escher, A., & Zimmermann, S. (2001). Geography meets Hollywood. Die Rolle der Landschaft im Spielfilm. Geographische Zeitschrift, 89, (4, 227–236). Evangeline. USA 1929. Director: Carewe, E. Joseph M. Schenck 1929. Fischer, J., & Mahler, M. (2023). Multisensory approaches to a disaster place? – A Phenomenological Walk through Altenahr after the Flood Disaster. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Gerstlauer, S., & Mahler, M. (2023). To what extent are zoo landscapes staged? – A multisensory walk through the Wilhelma Zoo. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Gethmann, C. F. (1987). Vom Bewusstsein zum Handeln. Pragmatische Tendenzen in der deutschen Philosophie der ersten Jahrzehnte des 20. Jahrhunderts. In H. Stachowiak (Ed.), Pragmatik. Handbuch pragmatisches Denken. Band 2 (pp. 202–232). Leipzig: Meiner. Gleason, D. K., & Brockway, W. R. (1991). Baton Rouge. Photographs and Text. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Gold, J. R., & Gold, M. M. (2013). The field and the frame: landscape, film and popular culture. In P. Howard, I. Thompson, & E. Waterton (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Landscape Studies (pp. 210–219). London: Routledge. Green Book. USA 2018. Director: Farrelly, P. Participant Media, DreamWorks Pictures, Innisfree Pictures, Cinetic Media, & Alibaba Pictures 2018. Greider, T., & Garkovich, L. (1994). Landscapes: The Social Construction of Nature and the Environment. Rural Sociology, 59, (1, 1–24). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.1994.tb00519.x. Greyhound. USA 2020. Director: Schneider, A. Sony Pictures Entertainment, Stage 6 Films, FilmNation Entertainment, Bron Ceative, Zhengfu Pictures, Playtone, et al. 2020. Guelzo, A. C. (2020). Reconstruction. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Harris, A. (The Atlantic, Ed.). (2019). The New Secession. Residents of the majority-white southeast corner of Baton Rouge want to make their own city, complete with its own schools, breaking away from the majority-black parts of town. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/ archive/2019/05/resegregation-baton-rouge-public-schools/589381/​ . Accessed: 13 December 2019. Harris, S. J. (2012). Hollywood South. In S. J. Harris (Ed.), World Film Locations New Orleans (pp. 86–87). Chicago: Intellect Books, The University of Chicago Press. Hendry, P. M., & Edwards, J. D. (2009). Old South Baton Rouge. The Roots of Hope. Lafayette: University of Louisiana at Lafayette Press. Hochschild, A. R. (2016). Strangers In Their Own Land. Anger And Mourning On The American Right. New York: The New Press. Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte. USA 1964. Director: Aldrich, R. The Associates and Aldrich 1964.

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

123

IMDb. (2022a). About IMDb. https://www.imdb.com/pressroom/?pf_rd_m=A2FGELUUNOQJNL &pf_rd_p= 54ba8afc-e217-4e54-9d65-c8a41b46eb75&pf_rd_ r= VVTDYW4CXEGX4X12SEHB&pf_rd_s= center-1&pf_rd_t= 60601&pf_rd_ i=pressroom&ref_=fea_pr_pr_abt_lk9. Accessed: 6 September 2022. IMDb. (2022b). Filming Location Matching “Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA” (Sorted by Popularity Ascending). https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?locations=Baton%20Rouge,%20Louisiana,%20USA. Accessed: 6 September 2022. Jones, T. L. (The Advocate, Ed.). (2019). Here’s why St. George’s effort in Baton Rouge will happen, leaders of similar project say. https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/ article_1edd239e-2afa-11e9-ac4c-8bf177e0e1a2.html. Accessed: 13 December 2019. Karlin, S. (2019). Louisiana lawmakers, over objections from Mayor Broome, pass St. George transition bill. The Advocate. https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/legislature/article_cee67e14-83c1-11e9-8eaf-3f731f98791a.html. Accessed: 2 January 2020. Kazig, R. (2007). Atmosphären – Konzept für einen nicht repräsentationellen Zugang zum Raum. In C. Berndt, & R. Pütz (Eds.), Kulturelle Geographien. Zur Beschäftigung mit Raum und Ort nach dem Cultural Turn (pp. 167–187). Bielefeld: transcript. Keutzer, O., Lauritz, S., Mehlinger, C., & Moormann, P. (2014). Filmanalyse. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Klumpe, J. (2022). Mediale Landschaftskonstruktionen. Die Darstellung des (sub)urbanen Lebens am Beispiel US-amerikanischer Serien. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Koegst, L. (2021). Mississippi River Blues – Über symbolische Aufladungen und Zuschreibungen des Mississippi River in Songtexten. In O. Kühne, T. Sedelmeier, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Louisiana – mediengeographische Beiträge zu einer neopragmatischen Regionalen Geographie (pp. 69–88). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kuai, X., & Zhao, Q. (2017). Examining healthy food accessibility and disparity in Baton Rouge, Louisiana​​​​. Annals of GIS, 23, (2, 103–116). https://doi.org/10.1080/19475683.2017.1304448. Kühne, O. (2008). Distinktion – Macht – Landschaft. Zur sozialen Definition von Landschaft. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Kühne, O. (2012). Stadt – Landschaft – Hybridität. Ästhetische Bezüge im postmodernen Los Angeles mit seinen modernen Persistenzen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2018a). Landscape and Power in Geographical Space as a Social-Aesthetic Construct. Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing. Kühne, O. (2018b). Landschaft und Wandel. Zur Veränderlichkeit von Wahrnehmungen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2018c). Reboot „Regionale Geographie“ – Ansätze einer neopragmatischen Rekonfiguration „horizontaler Geographien“. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (2, 101–121). Kühne, O. (2020). Landscape Conflicts. A Theoretical Approach Based on the Three Worlds Theory of Karl Popper and the Conflict Theory of Ralf Dahrendorf, Illustrated by the Example of the Energy System Transformation in Germany. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 12, (17, 1–20). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176772. Kühne, O. (2021). Potentials of the Three Spaces Theory for Understandings of Cartography, Virtual Realities, and Augmented Spaces. KN - Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information), 71, (4, 297–305). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-021-00089-w. Kühne, O. (2022). Foodscapes – a Neopragmatic Redescription. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, (online first, 1–21). https://doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2022-0016. Kühne, O. (2023). The multisensory Florentine landscapes – an update after Georg Simmel. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.

124

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

Kühne, O., & Edler, D. (2022). Georg Simmel Goes Virtual. From ‘Philosophy of Landscape’ to the Possibilities of Virtual Reality in Landscape Research. Societies, 12, (5, 122). https://doi. org/10.3390/soc12050122. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2020a). Baton Rouge – The Multivillage Metropolis. A Neopragmatic Landscape Biographical Approach on Spatial Pastiches, Hybridization, and Differentiation. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2020b). Baton Rouge (Louisiana): On the Importance of Thematic Cartography for ‘Neopragmatic Horizontal Geography’. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 71, (1, 23–31). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-020-00054-z. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2020c). Stadtlandhybride Prozesse in Baton Rouge: von der klassischen Downtown zur postmodernen Downtownsimulation. In R. Duttmann, O. Kühne, & F. Weber (Eds.), Landschaft als Prozess (431–454). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2020d). The Threefold ´Landscape Dynamics – Basic Considerations, Conflicts and Potentials of Virtual Landscape Research. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 389–402). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2021a). Baton Rouge – A Neopragmatic Regional Geographic Approach. Urban Science, 5, (1, 1–17). https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci5010017. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2021b). Baton Rouge in neopragmatischer Perspektive – mediale Repräsentanzen und ihre materiellen Rückbindungen. In O. Kühne, T. Sedelmeier, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Louisiana – mediengeographische Beiträge zu einer neopragmatischen Regionalen Geographie (pp. 89–106). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2021c). Neopragmatische Regionale Geographien – eine Annäherung. In O. Kühne, T. Sedelmeier, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Louisiana – mediengeographische Beiträge zu einer neopragmatischen Regionalen Geographie (pp. 13–23). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023a). Land Loss in Louisiana. A Neopragmatic Redescription. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023b). The multisensory construction of landscape – the computer adventure game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps”. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., & Schönwald, A. (2015). San Diego. Eigenlogiken, Widersprüche und Hybriditäten in und von ‚America’s finest city‘. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., Schönwald, A., & Weber, F. (2016). Urban/Rural Hybrids: The Urbanisation of Former Suburbs (URFSURBS). Quaestiones Geographicae, 35, (4, 23–34). https://doi.org/10.1515/ quageo-2016-0032. Kühne, O., Jenal, C., & Koegst, L. (2020). Postmoderne Siedlungsentwicklungen in Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Stadtlandhybridität und Raumpastiches zwischen Begrenzungen und Entgrenzungen. In F. Weber, C. Wille, B. Caesar, & J. Hollstegge (Eds.), Geographien der Grenzen. Räume – Ordnungen – Verflechtungen (391–411). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., Berr, K., Weber, F., & Dittel, J. (2023). From multisensory to ex–sensory – from landscapes of displeasure to landscapes of fear. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

125

Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Long, A. P. (2014). Louisiana History. In R. Orgera, & W. Parent (Eds.), The Louisiana Field Guide. Understanding Life in the Pelican State (pp. 18–35). Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Louisiana Office of Tourism. (2022a). Pitch Perfect. https://www.louisianatravel.com/film-louisiana/pitch-perfect. Accessed: 9 September 2022. Louisiana Office of Tourism. (2022b). The Host. https://www.louisianatravel.com/film-area/host. Accessed: 9 September 2022. Louisiana State Legislature. (2021). §6007. Motion picture production tax credit. RS 47:6007. https://www.legis.la.gov/legis/Law.aspx?d=102363. Louisiana Story. USA 1948. Director: Flaherty, R. J. Robert Flaherty Productions Inc. for Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey 1948. Mayer, V. (2017). Almost Hollywood, Nearly New Orleans. The Lure of the Local Film Economy. Oakland, Calofornia: University of California Press. McCollister, R. (Greater Baton Rouge Business Report, Ed.). (2019). Publisher: St. George could have been avoided. https://www.businessreport.com/opinions/st-george-baton-rouge. Accessed: 13 December 2019. Miller, J. L. (2017). Louisiana Disguised: Film Tax Inventives and Location Representation in Contemporary Hollywood Films. The Journal of Popular Culture, 50, (3, 466–489). Mott, D. R. (1984). Louisiana Filmmaking: A Grassroots Prespective. Southern Quarterly, 23, (1, 59–84). Now You See Me. USA 2013. Director: Leterrier, L. Summit Entertainment, & K/O Paper Products 2013. Palat Narayanan, N. (2023). Street–food and multisensorial construction of cityscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Parker, J. P. (1996). His Promised Land: The Autobiography of John P. Parker, Former Slave and Conductor on the Underground Railroad. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Pitch Perfect. USA 2012. Director: Moore, J. Gold Circle Films, & Brownstone Pictures 2012. Plien, M. (2017). Filmisch imaginierte Geographien Jugendlicher. Der Einfluss von Spielfilmen auf die Wahrnehmung der Welt. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Popper, K. R. (1979). Three Worlds. Tanner Lecture, Michigan, April 7, 1978. Michigan Quarterly Review, (1, 141–167). https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/p/popper80.pdf.. Accessed: 12 May 2020. Popper, K. R. (1984). Auf der Suche nach einer besseren Welt. Vorträge und Aufsätze aus dreißig Jahren. München: Piper. Popper, K. R., & Eccles, J. C. (1977). Das Ich und sein Gehirn. München: Piper. Popper, K. R. (1973). Objektive Erkenntnis. Ein evolutionärer Entwurf. Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe. Putnam, H. (1995). Pragmatism: An Open Question. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Ray, J., & Harris, S. J. (2012). New Orelans: City of Imagination. In S. J. Harris (Ed.), World Film Locations New Orleans (pp. 6–7). Chicago: Intellect Books, The University of Chicago Press. Rodrigue, S. F., & Phillips, F. (2008). Baton Rouge. Charleston: Arcadia Publishing. Rodrigue, S. F., & Phillips, F. (2011). Historic Baton Rouge. An Illustrated History (2nd ed.). San Antonio: Historical Publishing Network, a division of Lammert Incorporated. Rorty, R. (1982). Consequences of Pragmatism. Essays: 1972–1980. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

126

L. Koegst and O. Kühne

Rorty, R. (1991). Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rorty, R. (1997). Contingency, irony, and solidarity (Reprint). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rorty, R. (1998). The Contingency of Language. In M. F. Bernard-Donals, & R. R. Glejzer (Eds.), Rhetoric in an antifoundational World. Language, culture, and pedagogy (pp. 65–85). New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. Ruffin, T. F. (2006). Under Stately Oaks. A Pictorial History of LSU (Revised Edition). Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. sceen it. (2022). Greyhound (2020). Louisiana State Capitol. https://www.sceen-it.com/ sceen/3945/Greyhound/Louisiana-State-Capitol. Accessed: 9 September 2022. Schneider, P. (2014). Old Man River. The Mississippi River in North American History. New York: Henry Holt and Company. Schuth, H. W. (1984). The Images of Louisiana in Film and Television. Southern Quarterly, 23, (1, 5–17). Sex, Lies, and Videotape. USA 1989. Director: Soderbergh, S. Outlaw Productions 1989. Soba, J. A. (2021). Beyond Aesthetics: Hollywood Studios, Financial Incentives and Film-induced Tourism. InMedia. The French Journal of Media Studies, (9.1, 1–19). https://doi.org/10.4000/ inmedia.2929. Southern Comfort. USA 1981. Director: Hill, W. Cinema Group Ventures Phoenix 1981. Stemmer, B., Bernstein, F., Behre, E., & Kaußen, L. (2022). Naherholung als Teil der grünen Infrastruktur – ein neopragmatischer Ansatz. In O. Kühne, T. Freytag, T. Sedelmeier, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Landschaft und Tourismus (RaumFragen, in diesem Band). Wiesbaden: Springer. Stratmann, J., Ristea, A., Leitner, M., & Paulus, G. (2020). Exploring Urban “Blightscapes” Applying Spatial Video Technology and Geographic Information System: A Case Study from Baton Rouge, USA. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 497–515). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Tarzan and the Apes. USA 1918. Director: Sidney, S. National Film Corporation of America 1918. Taylor, J. G. (1976). Louisiana. A History. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. The City of St. George. (2019). The City of St. George, Louisiana. http://www.stgeorgelouisiana. com/​. Accessed: 13 December 2019. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. USA 2008. Director: Fincher, D. Paramount Pictures, Warner Bros. Pictures, & The Kennedy/Marshall Company 2008. The Host. USA 2013. Director: Niccol, A. Nick Wechsler Productions, & Silver Reel 2013. The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1. USA 2011. Director: Condon, B. Temple Hill Entertainment, & Sunswept Entertainment 2011. The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2. USA 2012. Director: Condon, B. Summit Entertainment, Sunswept Entertainment, & Tempel, M. 2012. This is the End. USA 2013. Directors: Rogen, S., & Goldberg, E. Columbia Pictures, Mandate Pictures, & Point Grey Pictures 2013. Thunder Bay. USA 1953. Director: Mann, A. Universal Pictures 1953. United States Census Bureau. (2019). American FactFinder – Baton Rouge City, Louisiana. https:// www.census.gov/quickfacts/batonrougecitylouisiana. Accessed: 25 October 2020. Webb, L. (2014). The Cinema of Urban Cirsis. Seventies Film and the Reinvention of the City. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Weber, A.-M., Kühne, O., Koegst, L., Fischer, J. D., & Jenal, C. (2022). Die internetmassenmediale touristische Konstruktion von Baton Rouge – ein neopragmatischer Zugriff. In O. Kühne, T. Freytag, T. Sedelmeier, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Landschaft und Tourismus (RaumFragen, in diesem Band). Wiesbaden: Springer.

Moving Baton Rouge – From Cinematic Representations …

127

Werlen, B. (1997). Sozialgeographie alltäglicher Regionalisierungen. Band 2 Globalisierung, Region und Regionalisierung (Erdkundliches Wissen Schriftenreihe für Forschung und Praxis, vol. 119). Stuttgart: Steiner. Where the Crawdads sing. USA 2022. Director: Newman, O. Columbia Pictures, 3000 Pictures, Hello Sunshine, & HarperCollins Publishers 2022. Wilson, T. (1977 [1858]). Albion (Liverpool), 20 February. In J. W. Blassingame (Ed.), Slave Testimony. Two Centuries of Letters, Speeches, Interviews, and Autobiographies. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Wojtkiewicz, W., & Heiland, S. (2012). Landschaftsverständnisse in der Landschaftsplanung. Eine semantische Analyse der Verwendung des Wortes „Landschaft“ in kommunalen Landschaftsplänen. Raumforschung und Raumordnung – Spatial Research and Planning, 70, (2, 133– 145). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13147-011-0138-7. Woodward, C. V. (1981). Origins of the New South, 1877–1913. A History of the South (A History of the South, vol. 9). Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Wylie, J. (2005). A single day’s walking: narrating self and landscape on the South West Coast Path. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 30, (2, 234–247). https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2005.00163.x. Yodis, E. G., Colten, C. E., & Hemmerling, S. E. (2016). Geography of Louisiana (7. Auflage). Boston: McGraw-Hill. Zimmermann, S. (2019). Filmlandschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 623–629). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

Lara Koegst, MA is a research associate and doctoral candidate at the Urban and Regional Development Group at Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen. Dr. Dr. Olaf Kühne  is Professor of Urban and Regional Development at the Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen.

The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer Adventure Game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps” Olaf Kühne and Lara Koegst

Abstract

The topic ‘game’ is gaining popularity as a research subject, not least as a result of the increasing proliferation and differentiation of computer-based games. Starting with the theory of the three landscapes and their transfer to the generation of virtual worlds, we deal with the computer adventure game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps”. Here, the focus is on the integration of the acoustic dimension of landscape into the game. In general, the scenic contextualization of the game seems strongly stereotypical, sometimes even conceptless (for example, with regard to the question of how likely a certain arrangement of depicted objects is). An atmosphere appropriate to the places depicted may not materialize, since for instance—even in New Orleans—only persons are depicted who have a meaning for the course of the game, thus no reason is given to depict something like acoustic urbanity. This already makes it clear that the soundscape of the game is kept rather sparse. In this respect, the game provides a reason to think about the integration of visual and acoustic stimuli in computer-based games, as well as to think about the representation of objects in games, stereotypes and scenic comprehensibility, since these aspects in the game clearly provide cause for critical reflection.

O. Kühne (*) · L. Koegst  Geographisches Institut, Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] L. Koegst e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_7

129

130

O. Kühne and L. Koegst

Keywords

Landscape · Game · Louisiana · Adventure game · Mystery of the swamps · Theory of three landscapes · Multisensory landscape · Soundscape

1 Introduction While the topic of ‘play’, starting from evolutionary research, has been established as a research topic in psychology, pedagogy and sociology most recently also didactics (Coccoli et al. 2015; Gordon 2008; Koegst et al. 2022; Mead 1975 [1968]; Oerter 2007; Stintzing et al. 2020; Sutton-Smith 1997), it has found its way into landscape-related research only in the recent past (for example, in: Edler 2020, 2022; Edler and Dickmann 2017; Fontaine 2017, 2020a; Gryl 2022; Kühne et al. 2020, 2021; Kühne and Schmitt 2012a, b; Lahl 2019; Liboriussen 2008; Longan 2008; Papadimitriou 2022). Thereby, an increasing scientific interest in the connection between landscape and game becomes evident as a result of the increasing spread of computer-aided games (Beil et al. 2015, 2018; Pánek et al. 2018; Scharpf 1997; van Vleet and Feeney 2015a, b) which in turn has also increased interest in the study of analog games and their landscapes (Eberhardt 2022; Koegst 2022a; Kühne 2022b; Kühne et al. 2022b; Sedelmeier and Baum 2022), this in a context of an overall increasing interest in questions of audiovisual communication (Edler et al. 2019; Edler and Kühne 2022; Kühne and Edler 2018; Siepmann et al. 2020; in this volume e.g.: Edler and Dickmann 2023). Landscape—as Fontaine attests (2020b, p. 275)—has the function in (here especially virtual) games as “a kind of ‘stage’ on which social desires and actions become visible. Design patterns are associated with attempts to create particular atmospheres that take aesthetic issues into account with the aim of promoting escapism”. In an effort to create atmospheres, game developers are turning not only to three-dimensional graphics, but also to sound effects. As a result of increasing computing power, it is possible to create virtually complex spatial virtual and acoustic structures and to integrate these into computer games (Kühne et al. 2022a). This multisensory system of computer-based games has not been in the focus of scientific considerations regarding the meaning of landscape in games until now. Computer-based games can be understood as part of the ‘fourth media revolution’, which “places the availability of digital media in a historical series with the development of language, the advent of writing, and the invention of printing” (Thomas 2020, p. 448). A (rather modest) contribution to this revolution is also made by the computer game we studied, “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps.” Three reasons speak for its selection for the investigation: First, the title already suggests that the game is equipped with clear scenic references. Second, the game, developed by “SilverPlay Entertainment” and only available in German, with its highly generalized graphics, does not promise too much detail orientation, but rather a landscape synthesis already inscribed in the graphics.

The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer …

131

Third, it deals with Louisiana, a space to which we are dedicated from a regional geographic perspective in the context of a research project funded by the German Research Foundation, with a focus on medial constructions of space. The research results obtained to date thus provide a suitable framework for identifying spatial stereotypes (e.g.: Jenal et al. 2021; Kühne et al. 2021; Kühne and Koegst 2022, 2023). The multisensory construction of landscape in the computer game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps” is approached first by theoretical preliminary considerations on landscape and its function in games. Then we introduce the computer game before we turn to the acoustic-visual construction of landscape. In the conclusion we tie these results back to the theoretical considerations.

2 Landscape—Some Theoretical Preliminary Considerations Our paper follows the theory of three landscapes, which has been discussed in more detail elsewhere (in general: Kühne 2018, 2020a; Kühne and Berr 2021; in relation to games: Koegst 2022b; Kühne et al. 2020, 2022; in this volume: Berr 2023; Kühne 2022a, 2023; Kühne et al. 2023a, b) and in this respect is presented here only to the extent that an understanding of further engagement is possible. The theory of three landscapes represents an operationalization of Karl Popper’s theory of three worlds (Popper 1979, 1996; Popper and Eccles 1977). Thus, landscape is in each case a subset of the three worlds, world 1 as the material world, world 2 as the world of individual consciousness and world 3 of cultural contents, of socially shared knowledge. Landscape represents a synthesis of aesthetic and normative contents usually in terms of spatial arrangements (these spatial arrangements are not obligatory, since landscape, in German, can also have a metaphorical meaning, for example in the form of ‘Bildungslandschaft’—‘education landscape’). Landscape 3 (the same applies to world in the following) affects world 2 by means of socialization of aesthetic and ecological patterns of interpretation, valuation, and categorization, which actualizes them and can either have a confirmatory effect on landscape 3 or an innovative effect on landscape 3 (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1   The three landscapes in the three worlds and their tiebacks. (After: Kühne 2020a)

132

O. Kühne and L. Koegst

Landscape 1 frames and structures by means of the corporeal constitution of landscape 2 its possibilities to move in landscape 1 and is observed by landscape 2. By means of its corporeality, landscape 2 is also able to intervene materially in landscape 1. All in all, landscape 2 (as well as world 2) has the central position of mediating materiality (world 1/landscape 1) and the social and cultural world (3/landscape 3). Landscape is thereby formed in three different modes (see among many: Kühne 2008, 2013; Winkler 2005, 2006 [1995]; Wojtkiewicz and Heiland 2012): The a-mode denotes the ‘native normal landscape’ that is negligible in the context of the analysis of the game. The b-mode denotes the common sense of aesthetic and ecological interpretations, categorizations, and valuations about landscape that is brought from landscape 3 to landscape 2 in the course of schooling, newspaper reading, Internet content, etc. The landscape of the c-mode, in turn, denotes ‘expert-like special knowledge’, which—very differentiated—is imparted in landscape-specific courses of study. As a result of digitalization, the communicative object of landscape is no longer necessarily the material space, but it can also be virtual or augmented (to make this clear, the levels of landscape 1, 2 or 3 can be preceded by a ‘v’ for virtual, an ‘a’ for augmented and ‘m’ for material; for more on this, see: Kühne 2021). The generation of a computer game landscape is shown in Fig. 2 for the case where ALTER (the programmer of the virtual landscape) has a c-modal understanding of the landscape, and EGO (the user of it). Communication of landscape v1 works when the gamescape generated in c-mode is connectable to EGO in b-mode. This brings us to the functions of landscapes in games, here the computer game.

Fig. 2   The construction of a computer game landscape, structured according to the theory of three landscapes. (Modified after: Kühne 2021)

The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer …

133

3 Functions of Landscape in the Game The scientific concern with ‘play’ has produced different understandings of its function. Sigmund Freud (2013 [1920]) understood childlike play as a way to escape the (educational) constraints of adults. Tabooed impulses (aggression, sexuality, etc.) could thus be revived. According to Freud, the child’s play follows (2013 [1920]) follows a pleasure principle rather than a reality principle. Play—this does not only concern childish play— means the production of a ‘reality’ “which one has for oneself” (Piaget 1969, p. 216). In play it is possible to “add an active counterpart to unmastered everyday passive experience” (Oerter 2007, p. 12). On the other hand, a culture-forming function is ascribed to play, because in play the shaping of social functional systems can be developed and tested, which are then institutionalized through ritualization (see in detail Huizinga 1938). Thus, in play, a relationship develops between world 2 and world 3 that is characterized by a stronger contingency than social ‘reality’ allows. Burghardt outlines the complex relations of ‘play’ between individual and society (worlds 2 and 3) on the basis of five characteristics (Burghardt 1999, 2005, 2011): 1. Play forms a positive activation. Play is spontaneous, voluntary, intentional, enjoyable, rewarding, reinforcing, or autotelic. 2. Play takes place in a ‘relaxed field’. In play, players are not subject to any immediate rationality of purpose (as in gainful employment or education). 3. Accordingly, play has an incomplete functionality in the social context. After all, play does not fulfill an immediate function (such as gainful employment or education). 4. Play has an ‘eccentric’ position to ‘normality’. Play is incomplete, exaggerated, awkward, precocious “or involves behaviors with altered form, sequencing, or purpose” (Burghardt 2011, p. 14). 5. Play enables repetition and in this repetition also variation. Thus, games with the same layout determined by the rules lead to different results when repeated. As Kühne et al. (2022a) abstract, games reduce complexity: they select certain structures from the abundance of social structures, while others are excluded from the game context (this becomes clear, for example, in the classic game character of Pac-Man, whose range of movement is restricted by a two-dimensional maze). At the same time, games reduce complexity because only certain functions are allowed, many other functions are excluded (in Pac-Man the function is limited to eating or being eaten, negotiating with ghosts or singing an aria are not provided for). Games allow—not least due to their temporal compression—an increase in contingency through repetition of the game; finally, game play is—as mentioned above—characterized by variation (thus the place of appearance of the ghosts in Pac-Man is not necessarily in one place, but it is also not arbitrary, as it is bound to the maze).

134

O. Kühne and L. Koegst

The example of the classic computer game Pac-Man already illustrates the importance of spatial arrangements. However, due to the low computer and graphics card power at the time of the game’s initial release, 1980, the graphics were so reduced that it is difficult to interpret them as landscape (in any of the three modes). Such an interpretation receives a basis using the possibilities of advancing development of hard- and software by providing graphic processing to a degree that allows landscape interpretations (including evaluations and categorizations). Landscape representations in computer-based games have functions comparable to those in movies and Internet videos (Escher and Zimmermann 2001; Kühne 2020b; Kühne and Schönwald 2015; Kühne and Weber 2015; Lukinbeal 2005, 2012; Zimmermann 2019). Based on this film- and video-related research, according to Kühne et al. (2021; similarly in: Abraham and Jayemanne 2017), a four-level classification of the intensity of meaning of landscape in games can be presented: 1. Landscape has no meaning for the game (for example, when playing with abstract cards, such as Skat or Canasta). Here the difference to space becomes clear, because the card game also takes place in space 1, the rules given by space 3 are observed by space 2 (for example, not to place one’s own body in such a way that one can look into the hand of other players). A synthesis of the arrangement to landscape, however, does not take place. 2. Landscape acts as a backdrop. It provides a framework for the game. However, no special (symbolic) meaning is attached to this framework. Landscape 1 contextualizes through the arrangement of material objects that give a meaningful framework for a game, such as cops and robbers, which makes certain demands on Landscape 1. The same is true for quartet games when the constructive elements, such as cars or locomotives, are presented in a landscape context. 3. Landscape 1 functions in the form of a location of the game plot that conveys authenticity. In computer simulations of car racing, for example, certain physical arrangements legitimize the road layout in the form of switchbacks. From this level of landscape significance, non-visual stimuli have a role in landscape contextualization. Thus, even the driving sounds (simulated here) can be understood as part of a landscape 1 (shaped by infrastructure; Kühne 2006, 2015; Varnelis 2009). 4. Landscape 1 has a constitutive meaning for the game. The game action is related to the creation or design of ‘landscape’. For example, the computer-based game SimCity is focused on the immediate creation of landscape v1. The same applies for the game Civilization. Here, modification claims of landscape v1 are more strongly guided by strategic space control claims than in SimCity (Chapman 2013; Ford 2016; Kühne 2022c; Pobłocki 2002). Sound effects are of great importance here: They do not only form a soundscape that constitutes different parts of landscape v1 in the first place (what would a modern city be without the sounds of car traffic?), but also convey the acoustic feedback for the completion of certain game actions (such as the collapse of buildings, the clearing of forests, etc.). Playful self-efficacy contains here the (not alone in b-mode) expected expression.

The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer …

135

However, before we examine the game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps” against this background, we will briefly introduce the setting and plot of the game below and also draw on some reviews, which we will then include in the scenic interpretation.

4 The Game “Louisiana: the Secret of the Swamps” The crime adventure “Louisiana: The Mystery of the Swamps” from 2012 (Silver Play) is located in and around New Orleans spatially and in 1902 temporally. The young investigator Katie from Washington DC has to solve three murders undercover, which the local police previously failed to do. The game upgrades with variable gameplay, which was not common at the time, but also variable emotional relationships with the different relevant actors. In addition, the localization of the adventure in the southern states was relatively little present in computer games at the time (Glanznig 2013) which we will explore in more detail in the following section. But first, we will take a closer look at the game plot. The game plot is characterized by Katie interviewing people and collecting important objects. The actors approach her with varying degrees of sympathy, which can be positively influenced—for example, by gifts—which in turn can result in the disclosure of information. Despite the variable gameplay, the game’s plot hardly deviates from the linear scheme. The reviews of the game attest to a low degree of difficulty(Casual Maniacs 2013; Glanznig 2013; Kracker 2022), which is so low that the question of the target audience is raised: while the riddles were on a schoolchildrens level, the plot with brutal murders was not very suitable for such a target audience (Glanznig 2013). The situations of social interaction are sometimes carried out in an overstretching of the expected to the point of absurdity, such as when Katie enters a woman’s hotel room (without knocking), searches her room, steals objects, while the woman stands in the corner of her room with a deadpan expression. Two other examples: A prisoner is freed—with loud conversation—behind a policeman’s back, and a padlock on the door of a cabin in the swamps, where the protagonist finds herself locked in, is attached and locked on the inside. So, either the person who has locked her in must still be in the hut (which he or she is not) or must have gotten out of the hut by some other way—then the search for this way would be more promising than the search for hydrochloric acid to douse the padlock with. The game’s susceptibility to crashing is not the only thing that is problematized in the reviews; we were also confronted with it several times. In addition, there are numerous bugs in the game’s graphics, whether talking to a lamppost, or the protagonist hovering about a meter above the ground (Glanznig 2013) or, as in one of our playthroughs, a character suddenly had four arms and legs as well as two heads (Fig. 3). With that, we move on to dealing with landscape v1 of the game.

136

O. Kühne and L. Koegst

Fig. 3   Photo of a game scene projected on a wall in which Katie, on the left of the picture is confronted with a double person. (Own photo)

5 The Acoustic-Visual Construction of Landscape in the Game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps” The game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps” is organized along a sequence of spatial containers. The “container-ness” emerges clearly, because the depicted space v1 is three dimensionally closed, the spaces of movement end laterally at partly visible, partly invisible barriers. There is an omnipresent sepia filter over the depicted spatial arrangements, apparently to create a nostalgic atmosphere. Overall, arrangements of landscape v1 appear very orderly. The paving of streets and sidewalks in New Orleans show little signs of use, buildings are plastered and neatly painted, shrubs and trees are neatly trimmed or of upright growth, and gardens are welltended. New Orleans gives the impression of a freshly built and not yet populated (more on that later) city, albeit with historicized architecture, not like a city that has to contend with tropical storms and—also due to its location largely below sea level—also with flooding, both of which are inscribed in the city’s image (Campanella 2002, 2017; Colten 2006, 2017, 2022; Keim and Muller 1993).

The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer …

137

Even the depiction of the swamps is characterized by this urge for order: water areas are neatly separated from land areas, which in turn are dominated by a neatly trimmed lawn that builds up a certain tension with the patinated hut in which the protagonist is then locked in. The fact that the game’s plot assigns the landscape references more of a scenery-like significance becomes clear in this hut: the hut, built about half a meter above the water level, is equipped with a cellar that reaches down about three meters into the ground—without showing any signs of water penetration. A similar impression is conveyed by the gunboat that ran aground in the vicinity of the hut (probably from the Civil War era)—densely surrounded by trees whose age must be well over four decades. It also begs the question of how such a gunboat, with its considerable draft, was supposed to navigate through the swamps with their shallow water depths. The impression of order is further supported by the strongly generalized graphics, which do not show a too pronounced detail orientation, rather a landscape synthesis (mode c of the programming team) already inscribed in the graphics is evident. What is deemed to belong to a Louisianan landscape 1 is added—even without a credible spatiotemporal contextualization (this is evident in the gunboat). The order is also disrupted by the absence of wind or other weather phenomena that might upset the scene (rain or even thunderstorms). Even though the scene in and around the Hotel Beaumont (almost level with a large body of water, the thought that it could be the Mississippi River suggests itself) is bathed in glistening sunlight on the one hand, on the other the horizon seems to blur even at a short distance. A sign of high humidity, which (in view of the high solar radiation) not only in southern Louisiana tends to be discharged later in the day in thunderstorms. This tidiness of the scenery is not limited to the objects depicted not-as-living, but also to the human parts of the scenery: each of the appearing characters has a function: “‘Louisiana’ furthermore does not want to succeed in conveying the feeling of a halfway believable world until the end. The environment seems rigid and cold. There are mainly those few people standing around demonstratively who are important for the plot, and unfortunately there aren’t very many of them” (Glanznig 2013, w.p.). There is hardly any impression of urbanity in New Orleans, which was also densely populated at the time; the city remains deserted without this being justified in any way by the game’s plot. The few ‘significant others’ show no facial emotion when communicating with Katie (no other communications take place). The dialogue delivery and gestures are reminiscent of school students theater: “However, this is not so much due to a lack of professionalism on the part of the speakers as it is due to dialogues, many of which are awkwardly written” (Glanznig 2013, w.p.) to which a very limited treasure trove of gestures is added. For the most part, this is limited to raising and lowering the arms, largely independent of the content of the communication or the emotional status towards Katie. This asynchrony continues in the soundscape of the game. Dramatic music dominates, but it has no relation to the plot, as is also made clear in a review: “There was also some skimping on the dubbing and background music, because somehow the rather monotonous background music reminded me of Jaws. This creates more of a head shake than excite-

138

O. Kühne and L. Koegst

ment, especially in the adventure game. Especially since the exciting music also sounds when we walk normally along the street, ‘damm damm damm damm’” (Casual Maniacs 2013, w.p.). This onomatopoeic execution underscores the game’s dominant sound element besides the context-free playing of dramatic music: the sound Katie makes when she rushes (always leaving a slightly stressed impression) through the scenery, regardless of whether she’s moving through the streets of New Orleans or is in a cramped interior, whether she’s searching for an object or rushing towards the next rather reduced dialogue. Landscape v1 functions in the game “Louisiana” mostly in the form of a location of the game plot that conveys authenticity, rarely does landscape v1 have a constitutive meaning for the game, because only rarely does Katie intervene in the game space in such a way that it would be permanently changed. According to the meanings of game introduced above in the reduction of complication, of complexity in favor of the ability to generate contingency, the game “Louisiana” allows for the following interpretations: The reduction of complication occurs through the focus on a certain narrow temporal and spatial frame, the (in part variable) sequence of different container spaces, but also the reduced accessibility to certain spatial arrangements (for example, walking through borders or climbing trees are not provided). The reduction of complexity, in turn, is dictated by a small number of possible alternative actions. Since ultimately a single solution path, with some variations, is given, the possibilities of contingency increase remain largely unused in the game. Contingency is generated rather involuntarily and beyond the defined game framework: The game’s numerous crashes illustrate the fundamental contingency of a basic exit, a floating protagonist, a woman standing silently in the room when her belongings are stolen, or doubled persons could—for instance when ironically framed—increase the awareness of contingency, but these appear to be only—measured against what can be expected—logic flaws of the plot or programming errors.

6 Conclusion The game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps” illustrates precisely by its far distance from the successful mutual integration of landscape v1 and plot, how landscape, with its soundscape components is integrated in computer-based games. It is precisely the irritation generated when plot and landscape v1 do not correspond to the expected that offers reason to question the construction of ‘normality’ (Berger and Luckmann 1966; Garfinkel 1967). This deceiving of expectations is expressed, for example, in the depiction of an urban environment in which people hardly appear, urban soundscapes are absent, and an urban structure is presented that, in terms of its degree of order, appears as if model railroad houses had been freshly glued together and built next to each other. This also applies to the design and furnishing of the swamp, which hardly conveys any claim to credibility. This assessment can also be formulated more pointedly: “The story is illogical, so that it’s not even clear why it’s called Louisiana—Secret of the Swamps.”

The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer …

139

(Kracker 2022, w.p.). However, this lack of clarity is not without justification, because ultimately the plot is predominantly set in New Orleans, swamps form a secondary setting, and even the murders to be solved lack constitutive links to the swamps. The design of landscape v1 in the game clearly refers to the updating of common stereotypes. New Orleans consists largely of architecture that is now considered ‘typical’ of the French Quarter (Fig. 4), only freshly built/renovated in its entirety. The depiction of the swamps is similar. Spatial stereotypes are not questioned in the game, neither in their stereotypicality, nor whether the landscape v1 representations stood up to scrutiny against landscape 1 commonalities. The c-modal focus in generating the game seemed to have been more on programming, but not on the consistent construction of landscape v1. Accordingly, the schema from Fig. 2 partly changed into Fig. 5: It was not the construction of landscape v1 that was c-modal, but in our case, the interpretation against the background of the theory of the three landscapes and the knowledge available to date on the function of landscape in the game. Once again, the examination of landscape v1 has proven to be rewarding for landscape research, here to gain insight into the connections between visual and acoustic representations. Nonetheless, this is an exploratory work that shows that the topic has great potential for scholarly engagement with landscape, beyond traditional landscape

Fig. 4   Photographic examples of the architecture of the French Quarter in New Orleans that is now considered ‘typical’ of it. (Photographs: Lara Koegst May 2022)

140

O. Kühne and L. Koegst

Fig. 5   The scheme known from Fig. 2 known scheme of constructing a computer game landscape has been modified a little in our case, the b and c modes are swapped between alter and ego in this case. (Own representation)

m1 research. For example, different games could be compared with each other, either showing a state of development, or following the evolution of classic games, in order to trace how the construction of v1 landscapes with their acoustic and visual components has changed over the years. In addition, it would be of interest to explore the issue of combining sound and visuals in the construction of landscape v1 with game developers, not least to trace to what extent a b-modal, c-modal, or hybrid of both is present. And the experience of users of these games also awaits fuller investigation. Accordingly, the study of multisensory constructed game landscapes v1 can be said to have great potential with regard to the investigation of the generation and actualization of interpretations, valuations and categorizations in landscape 2 and 3 against the background of the ‘digital transformation’.

References Abraham, B. J., & Jayemanne, D. (2017). Where are all the climate change games? Locating digital games’ response to climate change. Transformations, (30, 74–94). http://hdl.handle. net/10453/121664. Beil, B., Freyermuth, G. S., & Gotto, L. (2015). New Game Plus. Perspektiven der Game Studies. Genres – Künste – Diskurse (Bild und Bit). Bielefeld: transcript. Beil, B., Hensel, T., & Rauscher, A. (Eds.). (2018). Game Studies (Film, Fernsehen, Neue Medien). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Anchor Books. Berr, K. (2023). Multisensuality versus visual primacy of landscape perception. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Burghardt, G. M. (1999). Conceptions of play and the evolution of animal minds. Evolution and Cognition, 5, (2, 115–123).

The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer …

141

Burghardt, G. M. (2005). The Genesis of Animal Play. Testing the Limits. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Burghardt, G. M. (2011). Defining and Recognizing Play. In A. D. Pellegrini (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Development of Play (pp. 9–18). New York: Oxford University Press. Campanella, R. (2002). Time And Place In New Orleans. Past Geographies In The Present Day. Gretna: Pelican Publishing Company. Campanella, R. (2017). Cityscapes of New Orleans. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Casual Maniacs. (2013). Louisiana. Das Geheimnis der Sümpfe. https://casual-maniacs.de/?gamereviews=louisiana-das-geheimnis-der-suempfe. Accessed: 12 July 2022. Chapman, A. (2013). Is Sid Meier’s Civilization history? Rethinking History, 17, (3, 312–332). https://doi.org/10.1080/13642529.2013.774719. Coccoli, M., Saverio, I., & Vercelli, G. (2015). Applying gamification techniques to enhance effectiveness of video-lessons. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 11, (3, 73–84). Colten, C. E. (2006). An Unnatural Metropolis. Wresting New Orleans From Nature. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Colten, C. E. (2017). Chicago and New Orleans: opposite ends of a great river. Labor & Engenho, 11, (2, 128–136). https://doi.org/10.20396/labore.v11i2.8649744. Colten, C. E. (2022). Basin Street blues: drainage and environmental equity in New Orleans, 1890–1930. Journal of Historical Geography, 28, (2, 237–257). https://doi.org/10.1006/ jhge.2001.040. Eberhardt, A. K. (2022). Urban Landscapes in Boardgames. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 109–126). Wiesbaden: Springer. Edler, D. (2020). Where Spatial Visualization Meets Landscape Research and “Pinballology”: Examples of Landscape Construction in Pinball Games. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, online first. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-020-00044-1. Edler, D. (2022). Taunting Landscapes in Pinball Games. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 149–161). Wiesbaden: Springer. Edler, D., & Dickmann, F. (2017). The Impact of 1980s and 1990s Video Games on Multimedia Cartography. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 52, (2, 168–177). https://doi.org/10.3138/cart.52.2.3823. Edler, D., & Dickmann, F. (2023). Geospatial Data Literacy: Considering the Multisensory Perspective. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2022). Aesthetics and Cartography: Post-Critical Reflections on Deviance in and of Representations. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 11, (10). https:// doi.org/10.3390/ijgi11100526. Edler, D., Kühne, O., Keil, J., & Dickmann, F. (2019). Audiovisual Cartography: Established and New Multimedia Approaches to Represent Soundscapes. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 69, (5–17). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-019-00004-4. Escher, A., & Zimmermann, S. (2001). Geography meets Hollywood. Die Rolle der Landschaft im Spielfilm. Geographische Zeitschrift, 89, (4, 227–236). Fontaine, D. (2017). Simulierte Landschaften in der Postmoderne. Reflexionen und Befunde zu Disneyland, Wolfersheim und GTA V. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Fontaine, D. (2020a). Landscape in Computer Games – The Examples of GTA V and Watch Dogs 2. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 293–306). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

142

O. Kühne and L. Koegst

Fontaine, D. (2020b). Virtuality and Landscape. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (267–278). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Ford, D. (2016). “eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, eXterminate”: Affective Writing of Postcolonial History and Education in Civilization V. Game Studies, 16, (2). http://gamestudies.org/1602/articles/ford. Accessed: 21 September 2020. Freud, S. (2013 [1920]). Jenseits des Lustprinzips. Ditzingen: Reclam. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology (10. printing). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Glanznig, M. (2013). Louisiana. Das Geheimnis der Sümpfe – Review – Adventure Corner. https:// www.adventurecorner.de/reviews/8669/louisiana-das-geheimnis-der-suempfe-review. Accessed: 12 July 2022. Gordon, G. (2008). What is Play? In Search of a Universal Definition. Play and Culture Studies, 8, (1–21). Gryl, I. (2022). Spaces, Landscapes and Games: the Case of (Geography) Education using the Example of Spatial Citizenship and Education for Innovativeness. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 359–376). Wiesbaden: Springer. Huizinga, J. (1938). Homo ludens. Versuch einer Bestimmung des Spielelementes der Kultur (3. Auflage). Basel: Akademie Verlagsanstalt Pantheon. Jenal, C., Kühne, O., Schäffauer, G., & Sedelmeier, T. (2021). Louisiana und seine Herausforderungen – eine regionalgeographische Kontextualisierung. In O. Kühne, T. Sedelmeier, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Louisiana – mediengeographische Beiträge zu einer neopragmatischen Regionalen Geographie (pp. 43–67). Wiesbaden: Springer. Keim, B. D., & Muller, R. A. (1993). Frequency of heavy rainfall events in New Orleans, Louisiana, 1900 to 1991. Southeastern Geographer, 33, (2, 159–171). Koegst, L. (2022a). Landscape and Equestrian Games. A Social Constructivist Approach. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 229– 244). Wiesbaden: Springer. Koegst, L. (2022b). Über drei Welten, Räume und Landschaften. Digital geführte Exkursionen an Hochschulen aus der Perspektive der drei Welten Theorie im Allgemeinen und der Theorie der drei Landschaften im Speziellen. Berichte Geographie und Landeskunde, 69, (3, 1–21). https:// doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2022-0012. Koegst, L., Baum, L., & Stintzing, M. (2022). Landscape in Action. The teaching of ‘landscape’ in innovative excursion formats using the example of the digital urban geography excursion in Stuttgart developed within the project ‘InExkurs’. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 337–357). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kracker, A. (2022, 12 July). Louisiana – Geheimnis der Sümpfe, Deep Silver. https://www.spieletest.at/videospiel/131902/Louisiana---Geheimnis-der-S%C3%BCmpfe. Accessed: 12 July 2022. Kühne, O. (2006). Landschaft in der Postmoderne. Das Beispiel des Saarlandes. Wiesbaden: DUV. Kühne, O. (2008). Distinktion – Macht – Landschaft. Zur sozialen Definition von Landschaft. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Kühne, O. (2013). Macht und Landschaft: Annäherungen an die Konstruktion von Experten und Laien. In M. Leibenath, S. Heiland, H. Kilper, & S. Tzschaschel (Eds.), Wie werden Landschaften gemacht? Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf die Konstituierung von Kulturlandschaften (pp. 237–271). Bielefeld: transcript. Kühne, O. (2015). The Streets of Los Angeles: Power and the Infrastructure Landscape. Landscape Research, 40, (2, 139–153). https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2013.788691.

The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer …

143

Kühne, O. (2018). Die Landschaften 1, 2 und 3 und ihr Wandel. Perspektiven für die Landschaftsforschung in der Geographie – 50 Jahre nach Kiel. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (3–4, 217 – 231). Kühne, O. (2020a). Landscape Conflicts. A Theoretical Approach Based on the Three Worlds Theory of Karl Popper and the Conflict Theory of Ralf Dahrendorf, Illustrated by the Example of the Energy System Transformation in Germany. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 12, (17, 1–20). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176772. Kühne, O. (2020b). The Social Construction of Space and Landscape in Internet Videos. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 121–137). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2021). Potentials of the Three Spaces Theory for Understandings of Cartography, Virtual Realities, and Augmented Spaces. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information), 71, (4, 297–305). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-021-00089-w. Kühne, O. (2022a). Foodscapes – a Neopragmatic Redescription. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, (online first, 1–21). https://doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2022-0016. Kühne, O. (2022b). Play between the modes, the categories and the media of landscape – on the model train journey from Wanne-Eickel Hbf to Wattenscheid Hbf. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 433–450). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O. (2022c). Representations of landscape in the strategy game Civilization. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (261–272). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O. (2023). The multisensory Florentine landscapes – an update after Georg Simmel. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., & Berr, K. (2021). Wissenschaft, Raum, Gesellschaft. Eine Einführung zur sozialen Erzeugung von Wissen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Edler, D. (2018). Multisensorische Landschaften – die Bedeutung des Nicht-Visuellen bei der sozialen und individuellen Konstruktion von Landschaft und Herausforderungen für ihre Erfassung und Wiedergabe. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (1, 27–45). Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2022). Cartographic Representations of Coastal Land Loss in Louisiana. An Investigation Based on Deviant Cartographies. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 2022, (4, 1–12). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-022-00120-8. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023). Land Loss in Louisiana. A Neopragmatic Redescription. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Schmitt, J. (2012a). Landschaft und Modelleisenbahn. Zur Erzeugung von Landschaft im Spannungsfeld von ästhetischen Präferenzen, Anpassung an das Vorbild und Technikbezogenheit. Zoll+. Österreichische Schriftenreihe für Landschaft und Freiraum, 22, (21, 108–111). Kühne, O., & Schmitt, J. (2012b). Spiel mit Landschaft – Logiken der Konstruktion von Landschaft in der Diskursgemeinschaft der Modelleisenbahner. Berichte zur deutschen Landeskunde, 86, (2, 175–194). Kühne, O., & Schönwald, A. (2015). San Diego. Eigenlogiken, Widersprüche und Hybriditäten in und von ‚America’s finest city‘. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Weber, F. (2015). Der Energienetzausbau in Internetvideos – eine quantitativ ausgerichtete diskurstheoretisch orientierte Analyse. In S. Kost, & A. Schönwald (Eds.), Landschaftswandel – Wandel von Machtstrukturen (pp. 113–126). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., Jenal, C., & Edler, D. (2020). Functions of Landscape in Games – A Theoretical Approach with Case Examples. Arts, 9, (4). https://doi.org/10.3390/arts9040123.

144

O. Kühne and L. Koegst

Kühne, O., Jenal, C., Schäffauer, G., & Sedelmeier, T. (2021). Louisianas Weg zum Bundesstaat der ‚multiplen Herausforderungen‘ – eine historische Kontextualisierung. In O. Kühne, T. Sedelmeier, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Louisiana – mediengeographische Beiträge zu einer neopragmatischen Regionalen Geographie (pp. 25–41). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O., Edler, D., & Jenal, C. (2021). The Abstraction of an Idealization: Cartographic Representations of Model Railroads. Die Abstraktion der Idealisierung – über kartographische Repräsentationen von Modellbahnlandschaften. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 71, (2, 207–217). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-020-00064-x. Kühne, O., Jenal, C., & Edler, D. (2022). Landscapes in Games. Insights and Overviews on Contingencies between Worlds 1, 2 and 3. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 77–87). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O., Edler, D., & Jenal, C. (2022a). Landschaften und Spiele. Von Virtualisierungen, Hybridisierungen und der Steigerung von Kontingenz. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 96, (3, 1–22). https://doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2022-0011. Kühne, O., Edler, D., & Jenal, C. (2022b). The cartographic representation of model railroad landscapes – theoretical considerations and empirical results from model railroad-related literature. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 127–148). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, Research fields, Methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Lahl, K. (2019). Angst- und Sehnsuchtsräume. Repräsentationen der Natur in Computerspielen. Arts & Humanitas, 13, (2, 285–299). https://doi.org/10.4312/ars.13.2.285-299. Liboriussen, B. (2008). The Landscape Aesthetics of Computer Games. Conference Proceedings of the Philosophy of Computer Games, Potsdam. http://pub.ub.uni-potsdam.de/volltexte/2008/2458/​. Accessed: 15 May 2021. Longan, M. W. (2008). Playing with Landscape. Social Process and Spatial Form in Video Games. aether – the journal of media geography, (2, 23–40). Lukinbeal, C. (2005). Cinematic Landscapes. Journal of Cultural Geography, 23, (1, 3–22). Lukinbeal, C. (2012). “On Location” Filming in San Diego County from 1985–2005: How a Cinematic Landscape Is Formed Through Incorporative Tasks and Represented Through Mapped Inscriptions. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102, (1, 171–190). https:// doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2011.583574. Mead, G. H. (1975 [1968]). Geist, Identität und Gesellschaft aus der Sicht des Sozialbehaviorismus (Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft, vol. 28, 2nd ed.). Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Oerter, R. (2007). Zur Psychologie des Spiels. Psychologie und Gesellschaftskritik, 31, (4, 7–32). Pánek, J., Gekker, A., Hind, S., Wendler, J., Perkins, C., & Lammes, S. (2018). Encountering Place: Mapping and Location-Based Games in Interdisciplinary Education. The Cartographic Journal, 55, (3, 285–297). https://doi.org/10.1080/00087041.2017.1386342. Papadimitriou, F. (2022). An Evaluation System for Games related to Geography and Landscapes in Education. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 315–335). Wiesbaden: Springer. Piaget, J. (1969). Das Erwachen der Intelligenz beim Kinde. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. Pobłocki, K. (2002). Becoming-state. The bio-cultural imperialism of Sid Meier’s Civilization. Focaal – European Journal of Anthropology, (39, 163–177).

The Multisensory Construction of Landscape—The Computer …

145

Popper, K. R. (1979). Three Worlds. Tanner Lecture, Michigan, April 7, 1978. Michigan Quarterly Review, (1, 141–167). https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/p/popper80.pdf. Accessed: 12 May 2020. Popper, K. R. (1996). Alles Leben ist Problemlösen. Über Erkenntnis, Geschichte und Politik. München: Piper. Popper, K. R., & Eccles, J. C. (1977). Das Ich und sein Gehirn. München: Piper. Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games Real Actors Play. Actor-Centered Institutionalism in Policy Research. Boulder: Routledge. Sedelmeier, T., & Baum, L. (2022). The Controversity about Colonialism in Board Games – illustrated by the Example of Santa Maria. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 91–107). Wiesbaden: Springer. Siepmann, N., Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2020). Soundscapes in Cartographic Media. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 247– 263). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Stintzing, M., Pietsch, S., & Wardenga, U. (2020). How to Teach “Landscape” Through Games? In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 333–349). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Sutton-Smith, B. (1997). The Ambiguity of Play. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Thomas, P. M. (2020). The Digitalizing Society – Transformations and Challenges. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 447– 456). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. van Vleet, M., & Feeney, B. C. (2015a). Play Behavior and Playfulness in Adulthood. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9, (11, 630–643). https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12205. van Vleet, M., & Feeney, B. C. (2015b). Young at Heart: A Perspective for Advancing Research on Play in Adulthood. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, (5, 639–645). https://doi. org/10.1177/1745691615596789. Varnelis, K. (Ed.). (2009). The Infrastructural City. Networked Ecologies in Los Angeles. Barcelona: Actar. Winkler, J. (2005). Raumzeitphänomen Klanglandschaften. In V. Denzer, J. Hasse, K.-D. Kleefeld, & U. Recker (Eds.), Kulturlandschaft. Wahrnehmung – Inventarisation – regionale Beispiele (Kulturlandschaft, vol. 14, pp. 77–88). Bonn: Habelt. Winkler, J. (2006 [1995]). Klanglandschaften. Untersuchungen zur Konstitution der klanglichen Umwelt in der Wahrnehmungskultur ländlicher Orte in der Schweiz. Basel: Akroama. Wojtkiewicz, W., & Heiland, S. (2012). Landschaftsverständnisse in der Landschaftsplanung. Eine semantische Analyse der Verwendung des Wortes „Landschaft“ in kommunalen Landschaftsplänen. Raumforschung und Raumordnung – Spatial Research and Planning, 70, (2, 133– 145). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13147-011-0138-7. Zimmermann, S. (2019). Filmlandschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 623–629). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

Dr. Dr. Olaf Kühne  is Professor of Urban and Regional Development at the Eberhard Karls University in Tübingen. MA Lara Koegst  is a research associate and doctoral candidate in the Urban and Regional Development Group at Eberhard Karls University in Tübingen.

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure to Landscapes of Fear Olaf Kühne, Karsten Berr, Florian Weber and Julia Dittel

Abstract

Landscape develops when physical objects, social conventions, and personal experiences overlap. Neither the social conventions of landscape, nor the individual constructions of landscape, nor their material foundations are stable. Rather, they are subjected to ongoing processes of change. These often take the form of dissonance, which means that changes in material space are often met with displeasure. This applies, for example, to physical manifestations of the energy transition, at times especially wind turbines. The displeasure is based on stereotypical landscape-aesthetic ideas, that are socially shared and individually updated. The formulation of this displeasure is based on sensory (besides optical also acoustic and olfactory) perceptions. In contrast phenomena, especially those associated with radiation, are beyond

O. Kühne (*)  Geographisches Institut, Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] K. Berr  Stadt- Und Regionalentwicklung, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] F. Weber · J. Dittel  Fachrichtung Gesellschaftswissenschaftliche Europaforschung, Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Germany e-mail: [email protected] J. Dittel e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_8

147

148

O. Kühne et al.

sensory perception. Their rejection is accordingly based less on aesthetic displeasure than on fear. We will explain and reflect on the respective interconnections exemplarily in relation to the negotiation processes surrounding the expansion of mobile networks in Germany. Keywords

Aesthetics · Landscape · Landscape aesthetics · Radiation · Mobile network expansion ·  Transmission towers

1 Introduction The social and individual construction of landscape involves, if nothing else, in large part aesthetic judgments. Even if the importance of aesthetic patterns of interpretation and evaluation is not constitutive in all understandings of landscape,1 Western common-sense understandings of landscape in particular are based on aesthetic approaches (among many: Bruns et al. 2015; Burckhardt 2006; Kirchhoff 2011; Kirchhoff and Trepl 2009; Kühne 2018b; Kühne and Jenal 2020; Kühne and Weber 2019; Linke 2019a, b; in this volume especially: Kühne 2023; Kühne, Berr et al. 2023, Kühne et al. 2023a, b). The individual construction and aesthetic judgment of landscape occur based on social conventions, but there is a need for individual sensory perceptions as a basis, in order to synthesize and evaluate landscape. While visual impressions may dominate, olfactory and acoustic (partly also gustatory and haptic) stimuli flow into the synthesis, too (Berr 2023; Bischoff 2007; Edler, Kühne et al. 2019; Edler and Kühne 2019; Endreß 2021; Kazig 2013; Kühne 2018c; Kühne and Edler 2018; Payer 2004; Raab 1998; Siepmann et al. 2020; in this volume: Endreß 2023; Fischer and Mahler 2023; Koegst and Kühne 2023; Kühne and Koegst 2023; Palat Narayanan 2023). The landscapes synthesised into physical spaces can meet or fail to meet the socially pre-shaped and individually updated aesthetic expectations. The situation is different with something that is not subject to sensory perceptibility, for example electromagnetic radiation, radioactive radiation, ultraviolet light, etc.: Here an aesthetic access is not possible or at least more difficult. After all the word ‘aesthetics’ originates from ancient Greek and signifies science of sensual perception (Aisthetike Episteme; Gilbert and Kuhn 1953; Majetschak 2007). Even if modern science with its ‘disenchantment of the world’ (Weber 2011 [1919]) has contributed to make ex-sensory phenomena accessible to the mind, they are nevertheless accompanied by a feeling of fear (Cuttler 2014; Mäntele 2021).

1 In

some disciplinary approaches, especially in the natural sciences, aesthetics takes a rather subordinate role.

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

149

In this paper, we take these reflections on landscape, aesthetic construction, and (ex) sensory approaches to the world as a starting point and turn first to the threefold dynamics of landscape. We then take an in-depth look at the aesthetic construction of the world and its sensory boundedness as well as the construction of the ex-sensory. We will then turn to an evaluation of our own study funded by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz, BfS) on the expansion of the 5G mobile network in Germany. We will conclude by combining theoretical considerations and empirical findings and provide possibilities for further scientific engagement.

2 Theoretical Preliminary Considerations On the Sensory Construction of Landscape in the Dynamics of the Three Levels of Landscape The starting point of our reflections is a theoretical conceptualisation of landscape: in derivation from Karl Popper’s three-world theory (Popper 1979, 2019 [1987]; Popper and Eccles 1977) landscape 3 can be understood as a landscape-related part of world 3, world of mental contents. Landscape 2, as a landscape-related part of world 2, comprises the individual understandings and interpretations of and about landscape. Landscape 1 (as part of world 1) is formed from those material objects that are synthesised into world 1 based on the constructions of landscape 2 and 3. Landscapes 3 and 1 are connected to landscape 2. Thus, by means of socialisation, the individual learns the patterns of interpretation, categorisation, and evaluation of landscape 3. For its part, it is able (under certain circumstances) to innovatively affect landscape 3. The outstanding importance of landscape 2 in particular and world 2 in general for the transmission between world 1 and world 3 lies in the fact that human beings are part of all three worlds. Thus, he has the possibility to intervene in world 1/landscape 1 by means of his body, but also to perceive the material world sensorially and, on the basis of these perceptions, to make comparisons to landscape-related contents of world 3 (more detailed on this approach of the three landscapes: Kühne 2018a, 2020, 2021a, b, 2022a; Kühne and Berr 2021). All three landscapes, like the exchange relationships between them, are dynamic: for example, the social understanding of the term ‘landscape’ in German has changed significantly since its first appearance in the Middle Ages. The tangible dimension was joined by an aesthetic, as well as a normative-moral one (positive connotations were given to material spaces that exhibited a pre-modern character; for more detail, see: Berr and Kühne 2020; Berr and Schenk 2019; Schenk 2017). These social interpretations and valuations of landscape (3) are subject to rapid change, for example with regard to the increase of positive attributions to old industrial objects, wild forests, or wind turbines (Jenal 2019; Kühne 2007, 2018c; Weber 2018, 2020). Landscape 2 is not least subject to a differentiated change, in that the individual is introduced to different social conventions about landscape (whether aesthetic, ecological or moral), but also devotes itself to

150

O. Kühne et al.

the experience of landscape 1. The spatial foundations of which, in turn, are subject to processes of change governed by their own laws but are also reshaped by humans (the three-world hybrid). Three modes can be distinguished in the construction of landscapes (Kühne 2019a, 2021b, 2022b): • In the a-mode, the ‘normative home landscape’ is generated. This is the result of the immediate experience of material space, especially during childhood, with a comparatively large importance of non-visual sensory stimuli. Inherent in the a-mode is a large emotional allocation of objects to which the norm of stability is directed. • The b-mode denotes an approach based on a common-sense understanding of landscape, depending on cultural background or education. This understanding is conveyed through films, the Internet, print media, and especially through school. Socially shared aesthetic and ecological norms are inherent to the b-mode. • The c-mode is formed by ‘expert special knowledge stocks’. These are usually acquired through landscape-related specialised study and differ greatly according to the different disciplines (Gailing 2014; Hunziker et al. 2008; Kühne 2008; Weber 2017; Wojtkiewicz and Heiland 2012). This is especially true with respect to normative content, which can diverge greatly not only between an agricultural economist and a landscape planner, but also between a cultural landscape conservationist and a successionist. Against this background, in the following we want to examine the question of the importance of the sensory for the interpretation and evaluation of spaces as landscapes.

From Landscapes of Aesthetic Displeasure to Ex-Sensory Landscapes of Anxiety Aesthetics, understood as the science of sensory perceptions in general and as a subdiscipline of philosophy in particular that deals with the reflection of aesthetic perception, has as its essential point of reference the concept of beauty. Thus, the development of aesthetics can also be understood as a history of “a constant reinterpretation of the concept of beauty”2 (Borgeest 1977, p. 100). In a nutshell, beauty is often understood as “unity in multiplicity” (Schweppenhäuser 2007, p. 63). What in turn is to be understood by unity as well as multiplicity is not subject to a uniform interpretation. There is also no agreement as to whether the unity of multiplicity is to be sought in the aestheticised object or in the ideas of the aestheticisers. An important contribution to the second

2 Citations

in this article have been translated to English by the authors.

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

151

interpretation is provided by Immanuel Kant, who understands ‘beautiful’ as that which is generally pleasing without a concept, i.e. there is no immediate (e.g. economic) individual or social interest in an object described as ‘beautiful’ (Kant 1959 [1790]). The concept of beauty is supplemented by that of sublimity. Thus the beautiful—according to Edward Burke (1989 [1757])—prompts love, the sublime on the other hand spurs to admiration. Sublimity is accordingly associated with large, impressive, or terrifying objects, such as volcanoes or forests that are difficult to penetrate. The reference is thus mostly to multisensory perceptible objects and constellations of objects (world 1) from the realm of the ‘natural’, as Berleant (1997, p. 28) points out. Kant turns away from the strong attachment of the sublime to material objects and moves man’s imagination (world 2) to the centre of interest: the ‘beautiful’ is thus “grounded in the harmonious interplay of understanding and sensuous imagination (‘Einbildungskraft’)” (Peres 2013, p. 38; cf. Graham 2005; Lothian 1999), while “he attributes the ‘sublime’ to a disharmonious interplay of reason and sensuous imagination” (Peres 2013, p. 38). Between the beautiful and the sublime, the picturesque occupies a mediating position, which gives it a comparatively high degree of complexity associated with irregularity and differentiation (Carlson 2009; Kühne and Weber 2019, pp. 15 ff.). Landscape painting (and later also landscape photography, filmic stagings, etc.) combines objects and object constellations connoted as ‘beautiful’ in the foreground (for example: flowers) and objects and object constellations connoted as ‘sublime’ in the background (for example: mountains or thunderclouds; e.g. Büttner 2006). This ‘aesthetic tripole’ (Seel 1996) is extended by numerous aesthetic attributions, especially concise for aesthetic communication is the category of the ‘ugly’. Compared to the sublime, the ugly, “does not evoke too strong movements of the mind—one pleases, the other does not, one produces pleasure, the other aversion, which as a sensation is arguably stronger than its positive counterpart, may also give rise to immediate reactions, but is rarely perceived as dramatic” (Liessmann 2009, p. 72). In his ‘Aesthetics of the Ugly’ (‘Ästhetik des Häßlichen’), Karl Rosenkranz (1996 [1853]) conceives of the ugly as the “negative beautiful,” assigning it a “secondary existence” (Rosenkranz 1996 [1853], pp. 14–15). The ugly is produced (again in an object-level conception) in three forms: 1. In the form of amorphousness, i.e. the formlessness or the indeterminacy of the form. The amorphous lacks a ‘nature-corresponding’ limitation or the unity in the necessary difference (see also: Pöltner 2008). 2. In the form of asymmetry, that is, the imbalance of opposites. 3. In the form of disharmony, that is, the disproportion between the part and the whole. A disunity takes the place of agreement, which creates false contrasts. Through (unconscious) exaggeration (which is again observer-dependent), the beautiful, the picturesque, the sublime, but also the ugly can transform into the kitschy, through liberation from pseudo-idealisations (such as through conscious exaggeration) into the comic (among many: Gelfert 2000; Illing 2006; Kühne 2019a; Liessmann 2002).

152

O. Kühne et al.

The conceptual separation between the aesthetic and the practical world, as it was done, for instance, by Kant, is contradicted by John Dewey (1958; Dewey 1988 [1934]) when he describes ‘beauty’ as thoroughly consumptive, as is evident, for example, in the practice of tourist devotion to landscape 1. Thus, an expansion of the aesthetic into spheres originally separated from it takes place (Dorschel 2003). This does not only concern the economic, something in the form of ‘design’, but also the political, which is subject to an aesthetic staging (Jain 2000). The expansion of the aesthetic, in turn, can be related to the fact that aesthetic experiences are “connected with immediate generating of meaning, since they convey the supposedly simple feeling of existing and of affirming this existence” (Bosch 2018, p. 25). From what has been said so far, it is clear that aesthetic interpretations of the world are not stable but are definitely subject to change. Objects and object constellations that were previously not subject to a preferred aestheticisation, such as old industrial objects, become positively aestheticised, sensory stimuli that were previously considered ‘normal’ become negatively connoted, such as olfactory stimuli from industrial manufacturing processes or the operation of automobiles, but also the presence of garbage (Hardy 2005). More generally: The change of landscape 1, which is connected with human existence in general and social modernisation in particular, is not necessarily subject to an appreciating framing by landscape 2 and 3. On the contrary, often partial social consensuses develop that explicitly reject changes of landscape 1, such as the construction of power lines, industrial plants, residential areas, but also those same (now) undesirable acoustic or olfactory stimuli, etc. (Bayerl 2005; Langer 2018; Leibenath and Otto 2014; Weber and Kühne 2020). In order to counteract undesirable side-effects of human existence, people have developed numerous strategies of de-sensualisation of the aesthetically undesirable (Kühne 2012, 2013): from separation (such as the establishment of undesirable land uses in spaces that lie outside the perceptual space of those with a higher endowment of ‘symbolic capital’ (Bourdieu 2012) to camouflage (for example, the form of a building no longer conveys its—disturbing—content) to discursive exclusion, by morally discrediting those who oppose the construction of facilities for certain uses (Berr and Kühne 2019; Kühne 2019b; Kühne et al. 2021). Associated with the context of the energy and information technology transformation of society are numerous manifestations that contradict classical a-, b-, and c-modal normative notions of landscape. Thus, the erection of wind turbines or power lines arouses displeasure as it contradicts the stability imperative of the a-mode, aesthetic stereotypical notions of the b-mode, as well as certain normative (certainly also aesthetically motivated) notions of a ‘historically evolved cultural landscape’ in the c-mode (Berr et al. 2019; Kühne et al. 2019; Kühne and Weber 2018 [online first 2017]). The potentials of desensualisation in relation to landscape 1 are very different: If power lines can be deprived of their visual presence by means of underground cabling, this is not possible for wind turbines—due to their constitutive dependence on moving air. The same applies to the transmitters of mobile telephony and mobile Internet. In comparison to the aesthetic displeasure of the elements of Landscape 1, which are described as ‘ugly’

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

153

because, for example, ‘a disproportion between the part and the whole’ is imputed to them (for example, by the high vertical presence of wind turbines in an otherwise horizontally structured Landscape 1), on the other hand, sensory imperceptible phenomena, especially in the form of electromagnetic and radioactive, less infrared ‘radiations’ are the 3object of fear occupation. And fear or fear regulation is an essential driver of human development: Thus, the history of mankind can also be traced as a history of dealing with fear. This history “reveals ever new attempts to manage, reduce, overcome, or bind fear” (Riemann 2009 [1961], p. 7). Despite efforts to regulate fear, the postmodern increase in uncertainties and insecurities is accompanied by an increase in the importance of fear (Bauman 2008), not least as a result of political instabilities, increasing pressure for economic change, and the disintegration of social structures (Gold and Revill 2003). In addition to these increased uncertainties, there are manifest fears (for example, regarding reactor catastrophes), but also latent fears. This is the case, for example, with regard to electromagnetic radiation, as we describe in more detail in the following section on the basis of empirical results. In doing so, we span the arc between sensory perception and lack of sensory perceptibility by humans, as well as associated evaluations, in order to contribute to a further conceptualisation.

3 Empirical Results—Between Displeasing Physical Manifestations and Anxiety-Producing Ex-Sensory Radiation In the following, we present results of a research project as an example. The study on the topic of “Past conflicts surrounding 5G networks as a lesson for future communication strategies” commissioned by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz, BfS) can exemplarily show how an invisible phenomenon (electromagnetic fields of mobile radio technology) can generate fear, lead to defensive reactions and the visible representatives of the invisible can become a symbol for this fearful defensive reaction. The mobile communications standard 5G is becoming increasingly widespread in Germany at the beginning of the 2020s and has been discussed more and more in the course of the discussion processes surrounding its introduction in recent years. Compared to, for example, negotiations about wind power or power grid expansion, this is currently a virulent field of (conflict) (see Fig. 1). The study aimed to investigate how mobile communication conflicts of the present have changed from those of the past and what possible consequences may arise for communication about 5G addressed to the target group. To this end, a triangulation was made

3 Here,

at least the exposure results from skin tanning to sunburn to skin cancer are present in everyday life.

154

O. Kühne et al.

7

Freuquency (per 1 million tokens)

6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2000

2005 Wind turbine

2010 Power line

2015 Photovoltaics

2020 5G

Fig. 1   Increase in reporting on ‘5G’ in German newspapers. (Source: Own representation, created according to DWDS)

of, first, a review of scientific and technical research and research trends on mobile networks, mobile communication, and 5G; second, a media discourse analysis that allows a comparison between public discourses during the roll-out phase of 3G networks at the turn of the millennium and during the 5G network roll-out in Germany starting in 2018; and third, qualitative interviews with relevant stakeholders. Regarding the importance of risk assessments, hazard assessments, and fear and concerns of the population about corresponding risks and dangers in contemporary societies, it is necessary to look at the constitution of modern societies. Modern societies are not only characterised by a high degree of complexity and diversity (Beck et al. 1996, p. 316 f.), but also by an increase in diverse experiences and corresponding knowledge. Such experiences and corresponding knowledge also relate to possible, probable and actual risks. Nevertheless, even today it is impossible to predict all risks (to this end Beck et al. 1996, p. 14 f.; Renn 2008). This is especially the case with novel civilisation risks, which often elude sensory perception (Beck 1986, p. 28). For example, risks from nuclear radiation are neither visible nor immediately perceptible. Moreover, in contemporary socalled ‘risk societies’ the invisible is no longer synonymous with the unreal, as could be positively assumed, for example, in a medieval metaphysics of God’s invisible activity in the natural and human world that extended far into modern times. Instead, in modern risk societies, the invisible is associated with a heightened degree of hazard potential (Beck 1986, p. 59).

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

155

In mass media coverage by newspapers, radio, television and social media, the information transmission of mobile communications is referred to across the board as ‘radiation’, although the correct technical term is ‘high-frequency electromagnetic fields’. This terminology incorrectly suggests a connection with radioactive radiation. Often the term ‘radiation’ is also replaced by the synonymous term ‘electrosmog’, which associates the negative connotations of the term ‘smog’ and in this way, like the term ‘electrosmog’, expresses negative associations. Since the incriminated ‘radiation’ is invisible, transmission towers and antennas as a physical image of the invisible electromagnetic fields become representative as the origin of a threat in negotiation processes around mobile network expansion to the target of diverse protests on the ground—at the beginning of the 2000s and likewise the 2020s. In the media analysis of national newspapers—here the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), the Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ) and the weekly magazine Der Spiegel (SP)—this evocation of the danger of invisible ‘radiation’ and the fear evoked by it is very clear (see Textbox 1). Textbox 1: Fear of health effects due to electromagnetic fields

FAZ_2002, March 30 Mobile communications antennas in the neighbourhood are now a thorn in the side of many residents. Those affected fear above all damage to health that could be caused by the electromagnetic fields of the installations. SP_2002, May 12 Around 1300 citizens’ initiatives are rebelling against mobile phone antennas on offices, schools and churches. While experts see no danger, fear of the rays is rampant. SZ_2001, August 02 Because a second radio mast was installed on the roof of a homeowner against the will of local residents, an initiative has been formed. […] “We fear for our health because no one knows what the long-term consequences of radiation are.” SZ_2001, September 18 A ghost is haunting us. Invisible, soundless and odourless. It can’t be touched either. And yet many people think they can feel it, and even fear that it will make them ill. We’re talking about cell phone radiation, the electromagnetic waves that a cell phone uses to exchange data with a cell phone operator’s transmitter. SZ_2002, September 13 Radiation causes fear. Many people and citizens’ groups fear that electrosmog could harm their health. FAZ_2020, April 21 This is not good news for the upcoming rollout of the new 5G mobile networks: Almost half of the Germans are afraid of radio masts. […]. This result is fed by a fear that has accompanied mobile communications for three decades: that electromagnetic radiation is harmful to human health. […]. The discussion about alleged

156

O. Kühne et al.

health hazards is as old as the first cell phones, and the fears of health hazards come up again with each new mobile phone generation. Thousands of scientific studies all over the world have shown that there is no health risk below the valid limits. SP_2020, April 06 Opposition to the rollout of the 5G network has existed for some time, including in Germany. Many opponents warn of alleged health risks, even though the 5G frequencies auctioned so far are considered well researched in terms of their radiation. SZ_2020, February 05 Finally, a few facts about 5G. 5G is a catchy abbreviation that is easy to write on banners. It’s new, and like most new things, it’s accompanied by fears. That’s how scraps of information turn into horror scenarios that don’t correspond to the facts. Source: Own compilation.

Transmitters as a visible manifestation of a potential, invisible threat or as a representative physical image of the high-frequency electromagnetic fields that elude sensory perception thus become a symbol of potential health hazards and a trigger of fears and worries in the population (see Textbox 2). Textbox 2: Mobile phone expansion as a trigger for fears and concerns in the population

FAZ_2001, July 12 Above all, the large number of antennas are criticised. However, they are necessary in order to expand and set up a total of ten different mobile communications networks—four according to the existing GSM standard, six according to the future UMTS standard. In view of these [sic], more and more residents feel that their health is being impaired; however, despite intensive research, there is no proof to date that these radio waves are harmful. SP_2002, May 12 Even today, many local residents feel threatened by the approximately 50,000 cell phone transmission towers: they tower into the sky on office and factory buildings, on schools, barracks and minarets. And at least 40,000 more stations are to be added in the coming years—for the operation of UMTS-generation cell phones. SZ_2002, February 21 And among the population, the growing forest of antennas is causing uncertainty and growing annoyance.

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

157

SZ_2002, October 26 However, the more antennas that are put up, the more heated the debate about the health effects of cell phone radiation becomes. FAZ_2019, September 04 Everyone wants fast Internet, but no one wants a cell tower on their doorstep. The principle is reminiscent of the discussion about wind turbines, except that the debate about the radiation from the masts is sometimes even more absurd. Farmers want 5G right down to the last milk can, but are already voicing the suspicion that their calves will die because of the radiation. Yet there is no 5G there at all, not even a reliable LTE connection. FAZ_2019, October 28 We urgently need standards in permitting and automated processes. In all of this, we need to address concerns in the population. Everyone wants 5G, but no one wants an antenna in their neighbourhood. […] Above all, we need education. There are also fears and resistance to wind turbines and power lines. We need to counter this as an industry and as a society. Not only because of alleged health risks. How do we deal with nature reserves? If we want area-wide grids, we must be allowed to build there, too. Or take the freeways. It is difficult to achieve seamless mobile communications coverage there if no cell towers can be erected 40 m to the right or left. Demand and reality often don’t match. FAZ_2020, April 21 Almost every German today has a smartphone in his or her pocket. However, half of Germany’s citizens don’t want a mast in their neighbourhood. As a survey has just shown, they would even start a citizens’ initiative or change their home if a new mast were to be built nearby. These are not good conditions for the development of the new mobile communications standard 5G, which will ultimately need many more masts because its radio has shorter ranges than its predecessor. SP_2019, June 07 The transport minister is therefore also appealing for more support at the local level: “We need the support of local communities to campaign for the urgently needed acceptance of citizens for new mobile phone installations,” he says. “Everyone wants a good network for cell phone calls everywhere. But that can’t happen without cell towers.” Source: Own compilation.

In view of these fearful danger scenarios, the proximity of masts to residential areas or the installation of antennas in residential areas is criticised. Opponents wish “to be spared further installations of such transmission masts in residential areas” (Tageszeitung Thüringer Allgemeine_04.12.2002) and therefore demand the selection of alternative locations. From this demand to erect masts in the periphery and thus at the greatest

158

O. Kühne et al.

possible distance from places of everyday life, the thesis can therefore also be derived that masts as a representative symbol of invisible radiation are perceived as particularly threatening. In interviews with key stakeholders, the (in)visibility of mobile communications technology was also frequently mentioned. This includes, on the one hand, the invisibility of the electromagnetic fields, which are negatively connoted as ‘radiation’ and ‘electrosmog’, and, on the other hand, the visibility of the transmitters in the form of antennas and transmission masts, which are seen as physical representatives and symbols of the invisible ‘radiation’. In the interviews, the evaluations were exclusively negative. Thus, “at the end of the day, it is always about the mast” that “you don’t want to have” (IP-06 mobile phone company), such as “a new antenna that is maybe 2, 3 m high on an open roof in my neighbourhood” (IP-04 expert). The “worst reactions” are to be expected if, for example, after a vacation, “suddenly there is a transmitting antenna at one’s own house” (IP-10 medicine) (cf. Textbox 3). Textbox 3: Masts as a symbol of technology to be rejected

IP-06 MOBILE PHONE COMPANY It’s mobile telephony as a whole, and at the end of the day it’s always about the pole […] that you don’t want to have. IP-04 EXPERT With network infrastructure, I don’t have that here, but then, suddenly, I have a new antenna that's maybe 2, 3 m high on an open roof in my neighbourhood. IP-10 MEDICINE The worst reactions you get are when you come back from vacation and there’s suddenly a transmitting antenna on your house. Source: Own compilation.

It is therefore not surprising that the phenomenon of wanting to make visible things (transmitters) invisible can also be observed in mobile communications technology, in order to get them out of the ‘line of sight and line of fire’ of possible criticism. This phenomenon is known from many other areas of undesirable technologies and can be conceptualised as an ‘invisibilisation strategy’ (Kühne 2014). For many of the interviewees, the tried and tested means of invisibilising 5G technology is fibre optic technology, which is discussed by some as a necessary foundation and by others as an alternative to radio masts and antennas. On the one hand, it is argued that “at least the masts, after all, also need the optical fibre” (IP-11 media representative). On the other hand, fibre optics could make 5G less relevant: “And that is now a mandate […] that in new settlements, you think about adding an empty pipe to the electricity and water network to create a fibre optic cable into the settlement, then you don’t need antennas at all” (IP-10 medicine).

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

159

A revealing result was also achieved with regard to the question of the significance of the (in)visibility of mobile communications technology in the context of the development of conflicts over mobile communications technologies, specifically, how diffuse interests can become conscious, reflected and thus manifest interests (Dahrendorf 1972). The decisive impulse comes primarily from the locally or regionally situated concern about or fear of radiation exposure in one’s own living environment. Accordingly, local and regional protests were increasingly formed around the turn of the millennium during the 3G expansion, especially with regard to transmitters as a visible manifestation of a potential, invisible threat. Their installation mobilised sections of the public to resist and protest (sometimes organised in citizens’ initiatives) against the siting of new masts and antennas, in the course of which demands were made, for example, that antennas not be mounted on the roofs of kindergartens, schools, hospitals and retirement homes. In the discussions about the 5G standard, a ‘considerate’ expansion is demanded, whereby location issues remain more diffuse here (cf. Textbox 4 with examples from regional newspapers: RZ = Rhein-Zeitung, SK = Südkurier, TA = Thüringer Allgemeine). Textbox 4: Negotiations around locations of masts and antennas

RZ_2000, May 17 Since optimal shielding is not possible, he said, the best protection would be to avoid placing mobile radio stations in the catchment area of homes, offices and near workplaces in the first place. RZ_2001, May 11 “We want to make people sensitive to the issue,” [anonymised] explains further, especially since the sports field is right next to the radio mast, where children often play. “At the same time, the German Medical Association has advised not to operate such systems near kindergartens or hospitals,” adds [anonymised], also a member of the initiative. RZ_2001, May 15 Whereby it is necessary to know that the farther such a mast is from the village it is supposed to serve, the stronger its power is. RZ_2001, June 19 “All of us are not mobile phone opponents,” [anonymised] emphasised. “We are concerned about the location of transmission towers within residential areas, which are often located next to schools, kindergartens, and playgrounds, and even on top of hospitals. Therefore, we demand: Mobile radio transmitters out of residential areas, drastic tightening of radiation limits and a public cadastre for transmitter sites!” Precautionary aspects would have to be increasingly taken into account by those responsible.

160

O. Kühne et al.

RZ_2019, April 23 Both sides agreed that it was not a matter of stopping technical progress or demonising mobile telephony or wireless Internet. At the same time, however, a great deal of attention must be paid to minimising the radiation exposure emanating from such systems, which no one seriously doubts today. SK_2002, August 02 Opponents of cell phone antennas, of course, don’t want to stop mobile phone calls, that must be clear, but it’s simply a matter of banning cell phone antennas from urban areas where they radiate into people’s bedrooms. SK_2002, October 18 The triumph of cell phones can no longer be stopped. Transmitters are part of it. But in order to protect the weakest members of the population—children, young people, the elderly and the sick—from unnecessary “electrosmog”, special protection is to be given in Friedrichshafen to kindergartens, schools, facilities for the elderly and the hospital: No mobile radio transmitters are to be set up there within a radius of 150 m. SK_2018, April 03 No one would want people to turn in their cell phones or not use them, he said, but transparency and extreme caution would be required when selecting sites for cell towers. And it must be clearly communicated to the public in advance—not after facts have been established—what reasons and considerations went into the decision-making, he said. TA_2001, November 28 The opponents of the plant criticise on the one hand the desecration of the listed church by the antennas. Above all, however, they fear a radiation hazard for the neighbouring Orlishausen kindergarten. TA_2020, October 09 “I don’t want to talk down anything, but we have to deal with opportunities and risks in the balance,” she told the audience. “It’s about the future viability of a city, as well as the question of radiation risks,” she said. [...]. The antenna expert [anonymised] explained in his presentation that the cost-benefit ratio speaks in favour of 5G. The new technology were probably not free of risks. But it were important to remain viable as a location for high-tech companies, he said. “There is no actual mass longitudinal test of 5G because it’s a new technology,” [anonymised] opined. “But already a lot of data and research material on 4G.”

Source: Own compilation.

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

161

4 Conclusion and Need for Further Research This paper has shown, both in theoretical-conceptual and empirical terms, that there is a difference between the rejection of sensory perceptible objects on the one hand and exsensory phenomena on the other. On the side of sensory perceptibility, liking or disliking is understood in terms of whether the perceived objects or object constellations are in accordance with normative expectations of the native normal landscape (a-mode), stereotypical (aesthetic or ecological) expectations of landscape 1 or professionally based normative ideas (c-mode), or not. In the latter case, ‘landscapes of displeasure’ emerge. In the case of phenomena that cannot be perceived sensorily, an attribution does not take place under the question of aesthetic liking or disliking, but rather in the medium of fear of the uncertain and invisible, that which eludes attention by means of human sensory equipment. We therefore speak of ‘landscapes of fear’. Even technical equipment for measuring these phenomena has hardly been able to contain the fear-producing uncertainty, since the phenomena appear to be difficult to comprehend sensorially. This connection between the ex-sensory phenomenon of electromagnetic fields (‘radiation’) and a fearful defensive attitude has been demonstrated by the case study. In addition, two further concomitants of this connection are revealing. First, the visible physical manifestations of the invisible (the ‘radiation’) as part of landscape, which can also be interpreted as visible symbols of the invisible, are occupied with fear and rejection. And it is against the visible specifically that the targeted protest of concerned and fearful people is directed. Secondly, in the face of fearful protests against the visible symbol and manifesto of the invisible danger, there is the attempt, known from other sources, to make this visibly invisible again, i.e., by means of fibre optic technology, to make ‘radiation’ technically superfluous and to remove it from any visibility. These results are also noteworthy in aesthetic terms for another reason. The relation of the visible to the invisible, for example, was understood more positively in the aesthetic tradition, such as in the Middle Ages. In a Christian worldview, the invisible work of God is made visible only through art by means of symbolic representation: ‘per visibilia ad invisibilia’ (cf. Czerwinski 2000). Also in modern art the task of art is often seen as the ‘representation of the unrepresentable’ (Lyotard 1987). According to Max Weber, modern science has contributed to the ‘disenchantment of the world’ (Weber 2011 [1919]), by making ex-sensory phenomena visible to the scientific as well as to the everyday mind and thus rationally comprehensible. In our view, therefore, additional research is needed to investigate what effects this relationship between the invisible and the visible can have on other social debates, as well as major political projects. One can think, for example, of climate policy, which also centres on something invisible: climate change, which is only made scientifically vivid through computer simulations and by visible natural phenomena (floods, storms,

162

O. Kühne et al. 45 40

Freuquency (per 1 million tokens)

35 30 25

20 15 10 5 0 1946

1956 Climate change

1966

1976

Climate protection

1986

1996

Nature Conservation

2006

2016

Environmental protection

Fig. 2   Increase in coverage of ‘Klimawandel’ (climate change), ‘Klimaschutz’ (climate protection), ‘Naturschutz’ (nature conservation) and ‘Umweltschutz’ (environmental protection) in German newspapers. (Source: Own representation, created according to DWDS 2022)

periods of heat, heavy rain, etc.), which evoke fear and incite protests against current national, European, international, or global climate policy. The described meaning of the invisible, for example in climate protection, is different from the meaning of the visible, which is linked to aesthetic liking or disliking—for example in nature conservation. In nature conservation, in the tradition of the German Heimatschutz (Körner 2006; Piechocki et al. 2007; Piechocki 2010) in contrast to climate protection, nature conservation is particularly concerned with the aesthetically pleasing visibility of ‘beautiful nature’ or ‘beautiful landscape’, which is to be protected precisely in its aesthetically positively valued visibility. In the meantime, there are increasing indications that climate protection—at least as a media topic and in the public attention in Germany—is gradually displacing nature conservation. This is shown, for example, in the following graph of the DWDS newspaper corpus, which shows how, since the mid-2000s, the topics of climate change (‘Klimawandel’) and climate protection (‘Klimaschutz’) have clearly overtaken the topics of nature conservation (‘Naturschutz’) and environment protection (‘Umweltschutz’), which had emerged since the 1960s, in reporting (see here Fig. 2). Which concrete consequences and side effects the mentioned trends can lead to, would have to be investigated in the future in the sense of scientific clarification (Kühne and

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

163

Berr 2021, p. 236). The use of virtual and augmented worlds currently offers further methodological possibilities for this kind of research, which can be used to selectively investigate social constructions of landscape and to communicate research results in a low-threshold manner (Edler et al. 2019; Koegst 2022; Kühne et al. 2020, 2021; Kühne and Edler 2022). Funding Reference and Acknowledgement  The R&D-project 3620S82476, on which this article is based, was carried out on behalf of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety and Consumer Protection. The responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the authors. We thank Marcus Kornek from the Federal Office for Radiation Protection for the successful cooperation. In addition, we thank Franziska Rück for editing the English-language version of this article.

References Bauman, Z. (2008). Flüchtige Zeiten. Leben in der Ungewissheit. Hamburg: Hamburger Edition. Bayerl, G. (2005). Die „Verdrahtung“ und „Verspargelung“ der Landschaft. Schriftenreihe des Deutschen Rates für Landespflege, 77, (38–49). Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Beck, U., Giddens, A., & Lash, S. (1996). Reflexive Modernisierung. Eine Kontroverse. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Berleant, A. (1997). Living in the Landscape. Toward an Aesthetics of Environment. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. Berr, K. (2023). Multisensuality versus visual primacy of landscape perception. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Berr, K., & Kühne, O. (2019). Moral und Ethik von Landschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 351–365). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Berr, K., & Kühne, O. (2020). „Und das ungeheure Bild der Landschaft …“. The Genesis of Landscape Understanding in the German-speaking Regions. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Berr, K., & Schenk, W. (2019). Begriffsgeschichte. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 23–38). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Berr, K., Jenal, C., Kindler, H., Kühne, O., & Weber, F. (2019). Heimaten gestern und heute. Von Flexibilisierungen und Hybridisierungen. Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, (2, 80–89). Bischoff, W. (2007). Nicht-visuelle Dimensionen des Städtischen. Olfaktorische Wahrnehmung in Frankfurt am Main, dargestellt an zwei Einzelstudien zum Frankfurter Westend und Ostend (Wahrnehmungsgeographische Studien, vol. 23). Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag. Borgeest, C. (1977). Das sogenannte Schoene. Ästhetische Sozialschranken. Frankfurt (Main): S. Fischer. Bosch, A. (2018). Die Schönheit der Welt als Lebensfrage. In A. Bosch, & H. Pfütze (Eds.), Ästhetischer Widerstand gegen Zerstörung und Selbstzerstörung (Kunst und Gesellschaft, pp. 25–35). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Bourdieu, P. (2012). Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital. In U. Bauer, U. H. Bittlingmayer, & A. Scherr (Eds.), Handbuch Bildungs- und Erziehungssoziologie (pp. 228– 242). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

164

O. Kühne et al.

Bruns, D., Kühne, O., Schönwald, A., & Theile, S. (Eds.). (2015). Landscape Culture – Culturing Landscapes. The Differentiated Construction of Landscapes. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Burckhardt, L. (2006). Warum ist Landschaft schön? (1979). In M. Ritter, & M. Schmitz (Eds.), Warum ist Landschaft schön? Die Spaziergangswissenschaft (pp. 33–41). Kassel: Martin Schmitz Verlag. Burke, E. (1989 [1757]). Philosophische Untersuchung über den Ursprung unserer Ideen vom Erhabenen und Schönen (Philosophische Bibliothek, vol. 324, 2. Aufl.). Hamburg: Meiner. Büttner, N. (2006). Geschichte der Landschaftsmalerei. München: Hirmer. Carlson, A. (2009). Nature and Landscape. An Introduction to Environmental Aesthetics. New York: Columbia University Press. Cuttler, J. M. (2014). Remedy for radiation fear - discard the politicized science. Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society, 12, (2, 170–184). https://doi.org/10.2203/doseresponse.13-055.Cuttler. Czerwinski, P. (2000). per visibilia ad invisibilia. TEXTE UND BILDER VOR DEM ZEITALTER VON KUNST UND LITERATUR. Internationales Archiv für Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Literatur (IASL), 25, (1, 1–94). https://doi.org/10.1515/iasl.2000.25.1.1. Dahrendorf, R. (1972). Konflikt und Freiheit. Auf dem Weg zur Dienstklassengesellschaft. München: Piper. Dewey, J. (1958). Experience and Nature. New York: Dover Publications. Dewey, J. (1988 [1934]). Kunst als Erfahrung (Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft, vol. 703). Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Dorschel, A. (2003). Gestaltung. Zur Ästhetik des Brauchbaren (2. Auflage). Heidelberg: Winter. DWDS (DWDS, Ed.). DWDS-Wortverlaufskurve für "Windkraftanlage · Windkraftanlage · Stromtrasse · Photovoltaik · 5G“. https://www.dwds.de/r/plot/?view=1&corpus=zeitungenxl& norm=date%2Bclass&smooth=spline&genres=0&grand=1&slice=1&prune=0&window=3 &wbase=0&logavg=0&logscale=0&xrange=1946%3A2021&q1=Windkraftanlage&q2=Str omtrasse&q3=Photovoltaik&q4=5G. Accessed: 18 January 2022. DWDS (DWDS, Ed.). (2022, 18 January). DWDS-Wortverlaufskurve für „Klimawandel · Klimaschutz · Naturschutz · Umweltschutz“. https://www.dwds.de/r/plot/?view=1&corpus=zeitu ngenxl&norm=date%2Bclass&smooth=spline&genres=0&grand=1&slice=1&prune=0&wi ndow=3&wbase=0&logavg=0&logscale=0&xrange=1946%3A2021&q1=Klimawandel&q2 =Klimaschutz&q3=Naturschutz&q4=Umweltschutz. Accessed: 18 January 2022. Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2019). Nicht-visuelle Landschaften. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 599–612). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Edler, D., Kühne, O., Keil, J., & Dickmann, F. (2019). Audiovisual Cartography: Established and New Multimedia Approaches to Represent Soundscapes. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 69, (5–17). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-019-00004-4. Edler, D., Keil, J., Wiedenlübbert, T., Sossna, M., Kühne, O., & Dickmann, F. (2019). Immersive VR Experience of Redeveloped Post-industrial Sites: The Example of “Zeche Holland” in Bochum-Wattenscheid. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information, 38, (3, 1–18). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-019-00030-2. Endreß, S. (2021). Beton, Parfüm, Fastfood – Geruchslandschaften. Phänomenologische Forschungsergebnisse eines Smellwalkes. Stadt+Grün, (6, 25–31). Endreß, S. (2023). Multisensory Landscapes – Smellscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Fischer, J., & Mahler, M. (2023). Multisensory approaches to a disaster place? – A Phenomenological Walk through Altenahr after the Flood Disaster. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

165

Gailing, L. (2014). Kulturlandschaftspolitik. Die gesellschaftliche Konstituierung von Kulturlandschaft durch Institutionen und Governance (Planungswissenschaftliche Studien zu Raumordnung und Regionalentwicklung, vol. 4). Detmold: Rohn. Gelfert, H.-D. (2000). Was ist Kitsch? (Kleine Reihe V und R, vol. 4024). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Gilbert, K. E., & Kuhn, H. (1953). A history of esthetics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Gold, J. R., & Revill, G. (2003). Exploring landscapes of fear: marginality, spectacle and surveillance. Capital & Class, 27, (2, 27–50). https://doi.org/10.1177/030981680308000104. Graham, G. (2005). Philosophy of the arts. An introduction to aesthetics (3rd ed.). London: Routledge. Hardy, A. I. (2005). Ärzte, Ingenieure und städtische Gesundheit. Medizinische Theorien in der Hygienebewegung des 19. Jahrhunderts. Frankfurt a. M.: Campus-Verlag. Hunziker, M., Felber, P., Gehring, K., Buchecker, M., Bauer, N., & Kienast, F. (2008). Evaluation of Landscape Change by Different Social Groups. Results of Two Empirical Studies in Switzerland. Mountain Research and Development, 28, (2, 140–147). https://doi.org/10.1659/ mrd.0952. Illing, F. (2006). Kitsch, Kommerz und Kult. Soziologie des schlechten Geschmacks. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft. Jain, A. K. (2000). Politik in der (Post-)Moderne. Reflexiv-deflexive Modernisierung und die Diffusion des Politischen. München. Jenal, C. (2019). „Das ist kein Wald, Ihr Pappnasen!“ – Zur sozialen Konstruktion von Wald. Perspektiven von Landschaftstheorie und Landschaftspraxis. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kant, I. (1959 [1790]). Kritik der Urteilskraft (Philosophische Bibliothek, Unveränd. Neudr. der Ausg. von 1924). Hamburg: Meiner. Kazig, R. (2013). Landschaft mit allen Sinnen – Zum Wert des Atmosphärenbegriffs für die Landschaftsforschung. In D. Bruns, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Landschaften: Theorie, Praxis und internationale Bezüge. Impulse zum Landschaftsbegriff mit seinen ästhetischen, ökonomischen, sozialen und philosophischen Bezügen mit dem Ziel, die Verbindung von Theorie und Planungspraxis zu stärken (pp. 221–232). Schwerin: Oceano Verlag. Kirchhoff, T. (2011). ‚Natur‘ als kulturelles Konzept. Zeitschrift für Kulturphilosophie, 5, (1, 69–96). Kirchhoff, T., & Trepl, L. (2009). Landschaft, Wildnis, Ökosystem: zur kulturbedingten Vieldeutigkeit ästhetischer, moralischer und theoretischer Naturauffassungen. Einleitender Überblick. In T. Kirchhoff, & L. Trepl (Eds.), Vieldeutige Natur. Landschaft, Wildnis und Ökosystem als kulturgeschichtliche Phänomene (Sozialtheorie, pp. 13–68). Bielefeld: transcript. Koegst, L. (2022). Über drei Welten, Räume und Landschaften. Digital geführte Exkursionen an Hochschulen aus der Perspektive der drei Welten Theorie im Allgemeinen und der Theorie der drei Landschaften im Speziellen. Berichte Geographie und Landeskunde, 69, (3, 1–21). https:// doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2022-0012. Koegst, L., & Kühne, O. (2023). Moving Baton Rouge – from cinematic representations, phenomenological approaches and historical developments of the 'multivillage Metropolis'. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Körner, S. (2006). Heimatschutz, Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung. In Institut für Landschaftsarchitektur und Umweltplanung – Technische Universität Berlin (Ed.), Perspektive Landschaft (pp. 131–142). Berlin: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag. Kühne, O. (2007). Soziale Akzeptanz und Perspektiven der Altindustrielandschaft. Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung im Saarland. RaumPlanung, (132/133, 156–160). Kühne, O. (2008). Distinktion – Macht – Landschaft. Zur sozialen Definition von Landschaft. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

166

O. Kühne et al.

Kühne, O. (2012). Stadt – Landschaft – Hybridität. Ästhetische Bezüge im postmodernen Los Angeles mit seinen modernen Persistenzen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2013). Landschaftsästhetik und regenerative Energien – Grundüberlegungen zu Deund Re-Sensualisierungen und inversen Landschaften. In L. Gailing, & M. Leibenath (Eds.), Neue Energielandschaften – Neue Perspektiven der Landschaftsforschung (pp. 101–120). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2014). Landschaft und Macht: von Eigenlogiken und Ästhetiken in der Raumentwicklung. Ausdruck und Gebrauch – Dresdner wissenschaftliche Halbjahreshefte für Architektur Wohnen Umwelt, (12, 151–172). Kühne, O. (2018a). Die Landschaften 1, 2 und 3 und ihr Wandel. Perspektiven für die Landschaftsforschung in der Geographie – 50 Jahre nach Kiel. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (3–4, 217 – 231). Kühne, O. (2018b). Landscape and Power in Geographical Space as a Social-Aesthetic Construct. Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing. Kühne, O. (2018c). Landschaft und Wandel. Zur Veränderlichkeit von Wahrnehmungen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019a). Landscape Theories. A Brief Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019b). Vom ‚Bösen‘ und ‚Guten‘ in der Landschaft – das Problem moralischer Kommunikation im Umgang mit Landschaft und ihren Konflikten. In K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Landschaftskonflikte (pp. 131–142). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2020). Landscape Conflicts. A Theoretical Approach Based on the Three Worlds Theory of Karl Popper and the Conflict Theory of Ralf Dahrendorf, Illustrated by the Example of the Energy System Transformation in Germany. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 12, (17, 1–20). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176772. Kühne, O. (2021a). Landscape Conflicts around the Energy Transition in Germany in the Light of Confict Theory and Popper’s Three Worlds Theory. In B. Castiglioni, M. Puttilli, & M. Tanca (Eds.), Oltre la convenzione. Pensare, studiare, costruire il paesaggio vent’anni dopo (pp. 1222–1232). Firenze: Società di Studi Geografici. Kühne, O. (2021b). Potentials of the Three Spaces Theory for Understandings of Cartography, Virtual Realities, and Augmented Spaces. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information), 71, (4, 297–305). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-021-00089-w. Kühne, O. (2022a). Foodscapes – a Neopragmatic Redescription. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, (online first, 1–21). https://doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2022-0016. Kühne, O. (2022b). Play between the modes, the categories and the media of landscape – on the model train journey from Wanne-Eickel Hbf to Wattenscheid Hbf. In D. Edler, O. Kühne, & C. Jenal (Eds.), The Social Construction of Landscape in Games (pp. 433–450). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O. (2023). The multisensory Florentine landscapes – an update after Georg Simmel. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., & Berr, K. (2021). Wissenschaft, Raum, Gesellschaft. Eine Einführung zur sozialen Erzeugung von Wissen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., & Edler, D. (2018). Multisensorische Landschaften – die Bedeutung des Nicht-Visuellen bei der sozialen und individuellen Konstruktion von Landschaft und Herausforderungen für ihre Erfassung und Wiedergabe. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde, 92, (1, 27–45). Kühne, O., & Edler, D. (2022). Georg Simmel Goes Virtual. From ‘Philosophy of Landscape’ to the Possibilities of Virtual Reality in Landscape Research. Societies, 12, (5, 122). https://doi. org/10.3390/soc12050122. Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2020). The Threefold ´Landscape Dynamics – Basic Considerations, Conflicts and Potentials of Virtual Landscape Research. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 389–402). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

167

Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023). The multisensory construction of landscape – the computer adventure game "Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps". In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., & Weber, F. (2018 [online first 2017]). Conflicts and negotiation processes in the course of power grid extension in Germany. Landscape Research, 43, (4, 529–541). https://doi. org/10.1080/01426397.2017.1300639. Kühne, O., & Weber, F. (2019). Hybrid California. Annäherungen an den Golden State, seine Entwicklungen, Ästhetisierungen und Inszenierungen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., Weber, F., & Berr, K. (2019). The productive potential and limits of landscape conflicts in light of Ralf Dahrendorf's conflict theory. Società Mutamento Politica, 10, (19, 77–90). https://oajournals.fupress.net/index.php/smp/article/view/10597. Accessed: 22 June 2020. Kühne, O., Jenal, C., & Edler, D. (2020). Functions of Landscape in Games – A Theoretical Approach with Case Examples. Arts, 9, (4). https://doi.org/10.3390/arts9040123. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., Zimmer, M.-L., & Schäffauer, G. (2021). “… Inconceivable, Unrealistic and Inhumane”. Internet Communication on the Flood Disaster in West Germany of July 2021a between Conspiracy Theories and Moralization – A Neopragmatic Explorative Study. Sustainability, 13, (20, 1–23). https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011427. Kühne, O., Edler, D., & Jenal, C. (2021). A Multi-Perspective View on Immersive Virtual Environments (IVEs). ISPRS – International Journal of Geo-Information, 10, (8, 1–22). https://doi. org/10.3390/ijgi10080518. Kühne, O., Berr, K., Weber, F., & Dittel, J. (2023). From multisensory to ex-sensory – from landscapes of displeasure to landscapes of fear. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Langer, K. (2018). Frühzeitige Planungskommunikation – ein Schlüssel zur Konfliktbewältigung bei der Energiewende? In O. Kühne, & F. Weber (Eds.), Bausteine der Energiewende (pp. 539– 556). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Leibenath, M., & Otto, A. (2014). Competing Wind Energy Discourses, Contested Landscapes. Landscape Online, (38, 1–18). https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.201438. Liessmann, K. P. (2002). Kitsch! oder Warum der schlechte Geschmack der eigentlich gute ist. Wien: Brandstätter. Liessmann, K. P. (2009). Ästhetische Empfindungen. Eine Einführung (UTB, vol. 3133). Stuttgart: UTB. Linke, S. I. (2019a). Die Ästhetik medialer Landschaftskonstrukte. Theoretische Reflexionen und empirische Befunde. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Linke, S. I. (2019b). Landschaftsästhetik. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 441–452). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Lothian, A. (1999). Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics. Is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder? Landscape and Urban Planning, 44, (4, 177–198). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00019-5.

168

O. Kühne et al.

Lyotard, J.-F. (1987). Das Erhabene und die Avantgarde. In J. Le Rider, & G. Raulet (Eds.), Verabschiedung von der (Post-)Moderne? (pp. 251–269). Tübingen: Narr. Majetschak, S. (2007). Ästhetik zur Einführung. Hamburg: Junius Verlag. Mäntele, W. (2021). Elektromagnetische Strahlung. In W. Mäntele (Ed.), Elektrosmog und Ökoboom. Ein naturwissenschaftlicher Blick auf populäres Halbwissen (Sachbuch, pp. 9–28). Berlin: Springer. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-662-63483-7_2.pdf. Accessed: 19 January 2022. Palat Narayanan, N. (2023). Street-food and multisensorial construction of cityscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Payer, P. (2004). Gerüche – zwischen Abfall und Stimulans. Ein olfaktorischer Streifzug durch Wiens Geschichte und Gegenwart. In I. Kossina (Ed.), Abfallwirtschaft von Wien (pp. 49–58). Neuruppin: TK Verlag Karl Thomé-Kozmiensky. Peres, C. (2013). Philosophische Ästhetik. Eine Standortbestimmung. In H. Friesen, & M. Wolf (Eds.), Kunst, Ästhetik, Philosophie. Im Spannungsfeld der Disziplinen (pp. 13–69). Münster: Mentis. Piechocki, R. (2010). Landschaft – Heimat – Wildnis. Schutz der Natur – aber welcher und warum? München: Beck. Piechocki, R., Eisel, U., Körner, S., Nagel, A., Wiersbinski, & Norbert. (2007). Die Vilmer Thesen zu „Heimat“ und Naturschutz. In Bundesamt für Naturschutz (Ed.), Heimat und Naturschutz. Die Vilmer Thesen und ihre Kritiker (Naturschutz und Biologische Vielfalt, vol. 47, pp. 9–18). Bonn-Bad Godesberg: Selbstverlag. Pöltner, G. (2008). Philosophische Ästhetik (Kohlhammer-Urban-Taschenbücher, vol. 400). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Popper, K. R. (1979). Three Worlds. Tanner Lecture, Michigan, April 7, 1978. Michigan Quarterly Review, (1, 141–167). https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/p/popper80.pdf. Accessed: 12 May 2020. Popper, K. R. (2019 [1987]). Auf der Suche nach einer besseren Welt. Vorträge und Aufsätze aus dreißig Jahren. München: Piper. Popper, K. R., & Eccles, J. C. (1977). Das Ich und sein Gehirn. München: Piper. Raab, J. (1998). Die soziale Konstruktion olfaktorischer Wahrnehmung. Eine Soziologie des Geruchs. http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/handle/123456789/11429/260_1. pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed: 20 December 2018. Renn, O. (2008). White Paper on Risk Governance. Toward an Integrative Framework. In O. Renn, & K. Walker (Eds.), Global risk governance. Concept and practice using the IRGC framework (International Risk Governance Council bookseries, vol. 1, pp. 3–73). Dordrecht: Springer. Riemann, F. (2009 [1961]). Grundformen der Angst. Eine tiefenpsychologische Studie (36. Auflage). München: Ernst Reinhardt Verlag. Rosenkranz, K. (1996 [1853]). Ästhetik des Häßlichen (2., überarbeitete Auflage). Leipzig: Reclam. Schenk, W. (2017). Landschaft. In L. Kühnhardt, & T. Mayer (Eds.), Bonner Enzyklopädie der Globalität. Band 1 und Band 2 (pp. 671–684). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schweppenhäuser, G. (2007). Ästhetik. Philosophische Grundlagen und Schlüsselbegriffe. Frankfurt (Main): Campus-Verlag. Seel, M. (1996). Eine Ästhetik der Natur (vol. 1231). Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Siepmann, N., Edler, D., & Kühne, O. (2020). Soundscapes in Cartographic Media. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 247– 263). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Weber, M. (2011 [1919]). Wissenschaft als Beruf (11. Auflage). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

From Multisensory to Ex-Sensory—From Landscapes of Displeasure …

169

Weber, F. (2017). Landschaftsreflexionen am Golf von Neapel. Déformation professionnelle, Meer-Stadtlandhybride und Atmosphäre. In O. Kühne, H. Megerle, & F. Weber (Eds.), Landschaftsästhetik und Landschaftswandel (RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, pp. 199– 214). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Weber, F. (2018). Konflikte um die Energiewende. Vom Diskurs zur Praxis. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Weber, F. (2020). ,Über Tage‘ – das Saarpolygon als Anker sich wandelnder Altindustrielandschaften im Saarland. In R. Duttmann, O. Kühne, & F. Weber (Eds.), Landschaft als Prozess (pp. 377–402). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Weber, F., & Kühne, O. (2020). Umbrüche und Verunsicherungen. Der Windkraft- und der Stromnetzausbau in Deutschland. In S. Engler, J. Janik, & M. Wolf (Eds.), Energiewende und Megatrends. Wechselwirkungen von globaler Gesellschaftsentwicklung und Nachhaltigkeit (Edition Politik, vol. 93, pp. 167–191). Bielefeld: transcript. Wojtkiewicz, W., & Heiland, S. (2012). Landschaftsverständnisse in der Landschaftsplanung. Eine semantische Analyse der Verwendung des Wortes „Landschaft“ in kommunalen Landschaftsplänen. Raumforschung und Raumordnung – Spatial Research and Planning, 70, (2, 133– 145). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13147-011-0138-7.

Dr. Dr. Olaf Kühne is Professor of Urban and Regional Development at the Eberhard Karls ­University of Tübingen. Dr. Karsten Berr  is a research associate in the Urban and Regional Development Working Group at the Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen. Dr. Florian Weber  is Junior Professor of European Studies with special reference on Western Europe and Border Regions at Saarland University. Julia Dittel  is a research associate in the European Studies Working Group at Saarland University.

Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes Sven Endreß

Abstract

This paper deals with the perception and interpretation of odors. First, there is a detailed discussion of the change in the meaning of odors in society and science. For this purpose, the historical development of the social and scientific relationship with odors in Europe over the last two thousand years is outlined. This is followed by a brief description of the current state of odor research. Afterwards, odors and thus also olfactory landscapes are embedded in a social constructivist concept of landscape, whereby Kühne’s landscape theory is discussed. In the process, it is first shown how olfactory landscapes can be classified in this model. This is followed by an examination of the social constructivist character of olfactory landscapes. The terms olfactory landscapes and smellscapes are used synonymously in this paper. Keywords

Smellscapes · Olfactory geography · Visuality paradigm · Social construction of smell

1 Introduction When we think of landscape, the first thing that appears in most people’s minds is a more or less clear image of various interacting physical objects. In Germany, associations with pre-industrial objects of a strongly rural society such as forests, meadows and farms S. Endreß (*)  Geographisches Institut, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_9

171

172

S. Endreß

seem to come to the fore (Kühne 2008, pp. 84–85). But are these images composed exclusively of visually perceptible objects? After a walk in the forest, we rave about the ‘fresh air’, the meadow enchants us with its flowery scent, and on the farm, the romanticization of rural life meets the harsh olfactory reality of manure and pigsties. All this is part of our experience of a space, which we then perhaps understand as landscape. From a phenomenological perspective, the different senses with which we perceive our environment, and thus also landscape, play an elementary role (Hasse 2005, p. 150), sensory impressions thus form the basis of all knowledge (Eberle 2021, p. 34). In relation to our sense of smell, it can be said that what our olfactory bulb perceives thus establishes a relationship between the perceiver and his spatial and social environment (Bischoff 2007, p. 43). From a social constructivist perspective, it could be argued that the ‘invisible’ is also subject to social construction and that our perception and interpretation of it is socially constructed. Looking at Cosgrove’s social constructivist theory of landscape, the formative sentence “Landscape is not merely the world we see, it is a construction, a composition of that world” (Cosgrove 1998, p. 13) can perhaps be extended to include the olfactory dimension, i.e. landscape is not simply the world we see and smell (all sensory impressions could be included here), but rather the construction, indeed composition, of these visual and olfactory (or more generally, sensory) impressions that make up ‘our’ world (see more on the topic of landscape theory in this volume: Berr 2023; Kühne, Berr, et al. 2023; Kühne et al. 2023a, b). In the following article, we will take a closer look at why the sense of smell still plays a subordinate role in scientific and social discourse compared to our sense of sight. Furthermore, it will be discussed whether, and if so, how the perception and interpretation of odors can be understood as a social construction and what this means for the scientific study of olfactory landscapes or smellscapes.

2 All Eyes on Me—How the Western Perspective Shifted In societies generally associated with the ‘Western world’, we can now look back on a millennia-old tradition of systematic neglect of the sense of smell as a means of gaining knowledge. Science seems to have largely submitted to the visuality paradigm, i.e. the assumption that the sense of sight is the most effective and only true access to knowledge. (Bischoff 2007, p. 33). Even in landscape research, the focus is often on “the argument of the eye” (Cosgrove 1998, p. 31), i.e. on what we can supposedly see ‘objectively’. In contrast, the sense of smell only plays a secondary role; as a lower-class sense, it is counted among the residual senses (Raab 1998, p. 6). Classen, who dealt with this development in detail, concluded that “no sense has suffered such a reversal of cultural fortune as smell” (Classen 1993, 15). This loss of significance is not only reflected in the scientific context. Today we live in an increasingly deodorised society (Lammes et al. 2018, p. 78; Porteous 2019, p. 44; Raab 1998, p. 264, 2021, p. 49). More and more of our areas of life are being subjected to increasing odor hygiene: stigmatized odors are

Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes

173

being driven out of our living environment, precise guidelines for personal hygiene are displacing unpleasant self-smell, work and living spaces are subject to ventilation and cleaning rituals, and not just since the corona pandemic (Raab 1998, p. 6). Raab aptly summarizes this when he reflects that it appears that the primary social goal is the domination, taming, exclusion and eradication of olfactory signs. At the center of this process smell is seen merely as a consumer commodity (Raab 1998, p. 6; see also in this volume: Fischer and Mahler 2023; Gerstlauer and Mahler 2023; Koegst and Kühne 2023; Kühne 2023). Let us now turn back the clock a few thousand years and look a little more closely at how the position of smell in society and science changed. For a more detailed look at this, please refer to the work of Classen et al. (1994) and Raab (1998). Let us not start with the earliest prehistoric times, even though it can be assumed that smells already had at least a sacral significance in early cultures (Raab 1998, pp. 69–70), but in antiquity, for which we have not only archaeological finds but also the first written testimonies. The ancient (European) world seems like an olfactory fever dream compared to our odor-managed world today, as if “an olfactory gulf lies between our own deodorized modern life and the richly scented lives of our forebears” (Classen et al. 1994, p. 13). The ancient world groaned for the sometimes exotic odorous substances from which a wide variety of perfumes could be made. Scents from ancient Egypt, Persia and the Arab world were particularly in demand, and with the caravans that brought cinnamon, myrrh and frankincense to the ports of the Mediterranean, for example, the olfactory customs of these countries also found their way into the world of the ancient Greeks and Romans (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 14–15; Raab 1998, p. 73). Initially, the use of odorous substances in Arabic, Egyptian, Greek and Roman cultures was mainly for sacred use. Fragrances were (largely) reserved for the gods (Raab 1998, p. 73). The spread and further development of these early cultures also changed the areas of application of odorous substances: what was initially reserved for the sacred sphere gradually also conquered hygienic and medical areas of application and thus also quickly became an important factor in people’s social (everyday) life (Raab 1998, p. 73). Those who could afford it perfumed themselves from head to toe, whether man or woman, with different odor profiles assigned to different parts of the body (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 16–17). The result was nothing less “than a complete olfactory wardrobe” (Classen et al. 1994, p. 17). But the use of scents went far beyond the body: the wealthy of the ancient Western world perfumed their living spaces, bathed in fragrant suds, and stored their clothing along with fragrant materials (Classen et al. 1994, p. 18). Even some pets experienced an olfactory makeover by their owners (Classen et al. 1994, p. 19). Outside the private sphere, the targeted use of smells also played an important role. At ceremonial banquets, for example, the focus was just as much on the olfactory accompaniment as on the gustatory success of the feast (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 20–26; Raab 1998, p. 76). Classen states that even for more ordinary occasions “perfume would be offered to a guest as naturally as we offer a visitor a cup of coffee” (Classen et al. 1994, p. 21). Skillful odor management was part of the good tone. This also made it a means of power. Wherever crowds

174

S. Endreß

gathered, whether in an amphitheatre or during triumphal processions, the spraying of odorous substances became a means of demonstrating power as well as creating a sense of belonging to a group (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 26–27; Raab 1998, p. 76). At the same time, different smells and smell attributions also subdivided ancient society. Those who were wealthy could afford a targeted odor management with exotic substances, those who lived in poverty were stuck with the uncovered stench of everyday life (Classen et al. 1994, p. 33). Likewise, olfactory distinctions and attributions were made between urban and rural populations (Classen et al. 1994, p. 34), freemen and slaves (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 34–35), men and women (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 35–37) and different occupational groups (Classen et al. 1994, p. 34). Smells were thus a clear distinctive feature of group membership. With the sometimes pompous reports of the perfumed ancient world, the contrasting olfactory angle should not be neglected. The ancient world was also strongly characterized by odors that could be classified as rather unpleasant. Last but not least, the massive use of various odorous substances is also due to hygienic aspects as well as the simple masking of unpleasant odors (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 19–20). It was not only (though very often) about the management of body odor (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 30–33). With a lack of sanitary facilities and a high density of inhabitants, the accommodation of poorer people was an olfactory firework in the negative sense (Classen et al. 1994, p. 33), the streets of the cities were permeated by the smells of public latrines and rotting food, a wide variety of odor-intensive trades, such as tanneries, could be sniffed out from afar (Classen et al. 1994, p. 17) and the excessive use of perfume in amphitheaters is not least due to the need to mask the smells of the bloody spectacles (Classen et al. 1994, p. 26). We thus get a very colorful picture of the ancient olfactory landscape, especially in the cities. Classen thereby summarizes the olfactory landscape of Rome in the first century AD engagingly when she describes that “one would encounter the stench of refuse rotting by the wayside, the piercing fragrance of burning myrrh emanating from temples, the heavy aroma of food being cooked by street vendors, the sweet, seductive scents of flowering gardens, the malodor of rotting fish at a fish stand, the sharp smell of urine from a public latrine and perhaps the incense trail of a passing procession honoring a god or hero” (Classen et al. 1994, p. 17). With such a social significance, it is hardly surprising that the ancient philosophers also dealt with this topic. The questions of the existence of odors themselves, their origin and classification or evaluation as well as their appropriate use were at the center of the discussions (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 48–50). At the same time, this process can also be seen as the beginning of the neglect of the sense of smell as a means of gaining knowledge: Aristotle took it upon himself to classify the human senses according to the meaning attributed to them. In doing so, he relegates the sense of smell to third place, behind the senses of sight and hearing (Hasse 2005, p. 38; Raab 1998, p. 36). In doing so, he was to lay the foundation for future philosophers in the classification of the senses, which we will look at in more detail later in this chapter.

Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes

175

With the collapse of the Roman Empire, many of the olfactory traditions there were forgotten (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 51–52). At the same time, new patterns of olfactory interpretation and perception emerged, especially through the spread of Christianity, which were to shape a new olfactory landscape. In the process, pagan olfactory customs were gradually adopted (Classen et al. 1994, p. 52), which had previously been used in a partly similar form in the Roman and Greek worship of the gods (see Classen et al. 1994, pp. 45–48). The olfactory world of European cities did not improve with the advent of the Middle Ages. The streets and rivers were used for the public disposal of all waste products, from rubbish and bodily excretions to blood and (animal) carcasses, everything ended up in the alleys of the cities and gave off an uninviting smell there (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 54–55). These odors also had a negative connotation in the cityscape at the time, but were accepted, also due to a lack of alternatives (Classen et al. 1994, p. 57). Really serious attempts at more precise purification usually only came into play in connection with epidemics, when the immediate threat to life and limb suddenly became tangible (Classen et al. 1994, p. 57; Raab 1998, pp. 81–82). In terms of the cause of the diseases, there seemed to be a consensus in the European cities of the Middle Ages: Foul odors or rotting smells seemed to play an important role in the transmission of disease (Classen et al. 1994, p. 59; Raab 1998, p. 81). If foul odors caused diseases, it seemed only logical to cover the disease odors with other odors. Foul smells were thus combated with non-foul smells and the solution to the diseases themselves also seemed to lie in the use of certain odor emitters (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 60–62; Raab 1998, pp. 81–82). In the houses of the Middle Ages, little had changed since ancient times. The smells of everyday life, coupled with a lack of sanitation and waste disposal facilities, were found in and around the houses. Those who could afford it tried to cover up these smells with fragrant plants or perfume. All in all, however, private spaces remained a battleground between stinking everyday life and the desire for olfactory purity (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 62–66; Raab 1998, p. 79). At the same time, people became accustomed to certain unpleasant smells, which were unavoidable due to the circumstances of life; the stench was simply part of everyday medieval life for rich and poor alike (Raab 1998, p. 79). Parallels to ancient customs also seem to continue with regard to the importance of smells at banquets and in private. While more and more spices were in demand among the wealthier people, who also liked to over-season (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 66–67), the simple smells of onions and cabbage mixed with those of sweat, blood and rotting meat dominated in the kitchens and at the dining tables of the simpler people (although it was probably not particularly different in the kitchens of the wealthier groups) (Classen et al. 1994, p. 66). The desired olfactory and gustatory splendor of this period only slowly took hold from the seventeenth century onwards with the rise of Puritan doctrines, which declared pleasure to be a sin or at least had a negative attitude towards it (Classen et al. 1994, p. 68). In terms of physical hygiene, the times up to the beginning of the Enlightenment were also much more odor-intensive than in later times. Cleaning with water was accused of

176

S. Endreß

having negative consequences for the physical and moral condition of humans (Classen et al. 1994, p. 70; Raab 1998, p. 82). Those who did not want to take this risk rarely or never washed and covered their own exhalations with fragrant fabrics (Classen et al. 1994, p. 71; Raab 1998, p. 83). Especially at the courts, a distinct perfume industry flourished (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 71–73). Again, Protestant Christians, especially those of the Puritan persuasion, called for moderation and the abandonment of such rampant olfactory practices (Classen et al. 1994, p. 73). The climax of the olfactory adventure in Europe’s cities was the age of industrialization. Factories were built, cities grew immeasurably and with them grew their mountains of waste and rubbish, in short: “the problem of waste and garbage disposal had become truly monumental” (Classen et al. 1994, p. 78; see also Raab 1998, pp. 84–89). The increasing stench, the recurring epidemics in the cities, and the beginning understanding of the origin and spread of diseases made the need for action clear, and the first far-reaching drainage and waste systems gradually emerged that banished some of the stench outside the cities (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 80–81). After the banishment of excrement and sewage, some industrial vapors were now also outsourced, society became more sensitive to odors perceived as unpleasant (Classen et al. 1994, p. 81; Raab 1998, p. 84). Classen describes this new relationship towards smells as nothing less than a revolution and “[t]his revolution in civic cleanliness was accompanied by a revolution in personal cleanliness” (Classen et al. 1994, p. 81). First, the upper and middle classes began to upgrade their personal hygiene through baths and the use of soaps (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 81–82; Raab 1998, pp. 91–93). This also led to the fact that the smell again contributed more to social distinction, as the hygiene ideas among the working people were to change much later. Hygiene was thus also declared to be a moral aspect: if you don’t stink, you can’t be a bad person (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 81–82). Raab sums this up aptly when he summarizes that the uncleanliness and olfactory conspicuousness of the people was henceforth contrasted with the cleanliness and deodorized health of the bourgeoisie (Raab 1998, p. 96). At the same time, perfumes became less important. Those who no longer stank no longer had to cover up stench. Moreover, partly due to the aftermath of the French Revolution, the lavish use of perfume as a sign of the aristocracy lost its social significance (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 82–83). Another olfactory revolution was the attribution of different (perfume) scents to different genders. It was now necessary to distinguish odors according to women’s and men’s fragrances, which has survived to this day (Classen et al. 1994, pp. 83–84). Smells and the sense of smell then lost all their significance in the twentieth century, when a functional, visual society ushered in, “the modern olfactory era […] in the West” (Classen et al. 1994, p. 84) in which smells tended to be avoided or tolerated only very selectively and to a limited extent. Now that we have looked at the social position of smell or the sense of smell over the last centuries, we should take another look at its standing in science. As already mentioned, the downgrading of the sense of smell as a means of gaining knowledge began at the latest with Aristotle’s classification of the senses in relation to their perceived impor-

Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes

177

tance (Hasse 2005, p. 38; Raab 1998, p. 36), whereby it should be emphasized that even his teacher Plato placed the sense of sight and hearing above the sense of smell, but did not establish an order of all the senses that has been adopted up to the present day (Raab 1998, pp. 35–36). For the majority of the influential philosophers who succeeded them in Europe, the role of the sense of smell was thus firmly established, and the influence of Plato’s and Aristotle’s reflections could, according to Raab hardly be overestimated (Raab 1998, p. 37). In addition to the devaluation by the ancient philosophers, the allpervasive preoccupation with religion during the Middle Ages also made it difficult to revalue the sense of smell. The sense of smell was on a level between the noble or higher senses, i.e. the sense of sight and hearing, and the lower or animal senses, i.e. the sense of taste and touch (Raab 1998, pp. 37–38; in this volume: Palat Narayanan 2023). Used correctly, it could bring the smeller closer to God, but it could also plunge him into his sinful ruin (Raab 1998, p. 38). A turning away from the religiously connoted evaluation of the sense of smell began with the age of rationalism. However, this did not mean an increased attention to the sense of smell, but rather a stronger focus on the sense of sight in gaining knowledge. The rationalist thinkers generally doubted the significance of sensory impressions; only what could be measured quantitatively and described mathematically, i.e. what stood up to reason, could lead to knowledge (Raab 1998, p. 39). In doing so, Descartes, as the forerunner of rationalism, benefited from being able to fall back on an already existing hierarchy of the senses, that of Aristotle (Raab 1998, p. 39). Thus, in the age of rationalism, the sense of sight continues to expand its dominance over the sense of smell. According to Raab, this paves the way for subsequent thinkers, whereby the continued disqualification and discrediting of the sense of smell reaches its climax in the Europe of the Enlightenment (Raab 1998, p. 39). The sense of smell seemed to be too imprecise, too fleeting to conduct an exact science with it, which is why a certain inherent hostility to enlightenment and science has sometimes been attributed to it (Raab 1998, p. 39). The eye now finally becomes the only access to knowledge. The sense of sight is now regarded as “pre-eminent means and metaphor for discovery and knowledge, the sense par excellence of science” (Classen et al. 1994, p. 84). This certainly also had to do with the social attribution of meaning and essence to the senses. The sense of sight was considered masculine, rational, explorative and understanding, while the sense of smell, categorized as feminine, was attributed more sentimental, emotional associations, which seemed to make it useless for scientific observation of the world (Classen et al. 1994, p. 84). For the Enlightenment thinkers and those who followed, this understanding initially remained largely intact (as some exemplary ‘critics’ of the sense of smell, reference can be made to Kant (Classen et al. 1994, p. 89; Raab 1998, pp. 40–41), Hegel (Raab 1998, pp. 41–43), Freud (Classen et al. 1994, p. 90), Ellis (Classen et al. 1994, p. 90) or Plessner (Raab 1998, p. 46) among others). Only a few philosophers adopted a neutral (e.g. Marx (Raab 1998, p. 43)) or even positive attitude towards the sense of smell (e.g. Nietzsche (Raab 1998, pp. 44–45)). Raab comes to the following, very clear conclusion in his detailed consideration of the discussion of the sense of smell by various thinkers: the closeness to the animalistic and to the

178

S. Endreß

instinct-driven remains with all thinkers, which ultimately entails its disqualification in comparison to the other senses and the discrediting of its intellectual, aesthetic and epistemological significance (Raab 1998, p. 46). So, what about the scientific study of the sense of smell in modernity and postmodernity? The scientific study of odors, their perception and interpretation still seems to be a relatively young and little researched field, even if some disciplines, such as psychology and (neuro)physiology, are notable exceptions (Eberle 2021, p. 34; Perkins and McLean 2020, p. 156; Porteous 2019, p. 22; Raab 1998, p. 28). For a long time, however, the social sciences did not deal with this topic in a dedicated way (Raab 1998, p. 7, 1998, p. 34). With regard to landscape research, reference can be made to Porteous, who still criticized the neglect or lack of preoccupation with odors in the field of urban research in the mid-1980s (Porteous 2019, p. 22). In recent years, however, this seems to have changed somewhat, sensory impressions besides the sense of sight seem to generate greater interest again, which is reflected, for example, in the emerging discussion about a sensorial turn in the (social) sciences (see Eisewicht et al. 2021). A wide variety of scientific disciplines have increasingly taken up olfactory topics in recent decades (Perkins and McLean 2020, p. 158; Xiao et al. 2021, p. 1). For example, a meta-analysis by Xiao et al. of publications in the field of smellscapes showed that the preoccupation with them has increased exponentially in the last ten years (Xiao et al. 2021, pp. 1–2). What can be said in summary about the development of the social and scientific significance of olfactory stimuli or their perception and interpretation in the Western world? It seems clear that a multitude of wanted and unwanted smells shaped life in Europe for millennia. Only in more recent times, i.e., in the last one, two, perhaps three hundred years, did people become more sensitive to their olfactory environment. The social goal seemed to be to either remove odors or at least tame them, domesticate them or simply banish them to the private sphere. This led us to today’s world, characterized by attempts at deodorization, in which odor management is demanded and promoted (Lammes et al. 2018, p. 78; Porteous 2019, p. 44; Raab 1998, p. 264, 2021, p. 49). In the sciences, smell has fared no better. For centuries, the sense of smell was denied its relevance as a means of gaining knowledge. Whereas at first the elusive and supposedly animalistic, then the (sinfully) seductive character seemed to be a problem, with the increasing rationalization of the sciences it had to give way to a supposedly more objective, more easily measurable, more accessible to reason, indeed, supposedly more scientific approach to the world, the sense of sight. But times seem to be changing: Today we see a re-engagement with the olfactory, possibly a small renaissance of this approach to reality, which is also the context in which this anthology is to be classified.

3 Smellscapes as Social Constructs Now that we have taken a closer look at how the preoccupation with odors, and indirectly also with olfactory landscapes, has fared in the past and continues to do so today, we will take a closer look at smellscapes, i.e., landscapes of smell. We will look at olfac-

Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes

179

tory landscapes from a social constructivist point of view. Landscape is therefore not a given, neither does it have an inherent essence, nor can it be measured positivistic. Landscape must be understood as an individual as well as a social construct (Aschenbrand 2017; Burckhardt 2015; Cosgrove 1998; Greider and Garkovich 1994; Kühne 2019b). Furthermore, we need to determine which model of social constructivist landscape theory we want to follow before extending it to include an olfactory component. For this purpose, we will refer to Kühne’s four dimensions of landscape (see Kühne 2018, p. 56). We thus assume that the attribution of landscape to a space is based on socially negotiated patterns of interpretation, which are conveyed to the individual in various socialization processes (see Berger and Luckmann 1966/1991, p. 150) (first dimension) (Kühne 2018, pp. 56–58). The first dimension of olfactory landscapes is therefore to be understood analogously as the level in which the socially negotiated patterns of interpretation and perception for olfactory landscapes are present, which are then conveyed in socialization processes (for example, in Germany the (cultural) olfactory landscape ‘Christmas’ is composed of the smells of cinnamon, oranges and candles) (see Endreß 2023). The second dimension of landscape, the individually actualized social landscape, is characterized by a reciprocal influence with the first dimension of landscape. It reflects the individual construction as well as the accompanying patterns of interpretation, whereby this individual attribution takes place against the background of the first dimension, i.e., with the knowledge, even if not actively perceived, about (partially) socially accepted and desired landscape constructions. At the same time, the individual’s personal experiences and knowledge flow into the construction undertaken. In this way, the individually updated social landscape emerges from personal and socially accepted knowledge about landscape (Kühne 2018, pp. 58–61). In terms of olfactory landscapes, this could look as follows: The individual composes his or her individually updated social olfactory landscape (in this case again of Christmas) from the social patterns of interpretation (e.g. orange and cinnamon scent) and personal experiences (e.g. the special perfume scent of an aunt that one only sees at Christmas) (see Endreß 2023). The third dimension is the external space. This represents the initial physical substrate in which the individual acts (Kühne 2018, p. 56). Here, external space according to Löw is understood as the basis of construction, which is based on the arrangement of living beings as well as social goods (Löw 2001, 159–160). The physical objects occurring in it are thus constructed into the external space of landscape (Kühne 2018, p. 63). This can be fundamentally understood in the same way for olfactory landscapes, here it is only important that we understand the odor molecules as this physical initial substrate (the perception of an odor is, after all, tied to the presence of odor molecules, which encounter the 20 to 30 million olfactory sensory cells in our nose (Eberle 2021, p. 37; Hatt and Dee 2009, pp. 46–47; Raab 1998, p. 25)). As the fourth dimension, the appropriated physical landscape connects the previous dimensions. It describes the synopsis of those (in)animate physical objects (3rd dimension) which are used by the individual for the construction of landscape on the basis of personal (2nd dimension) and (partial) social knowledge about the accepted construction patterns of landscape (1st dimension) (Kühne 2018, p. 64). In the same way, we may

180

S. Endreß

also apply this to olfactory landscapes: the appropriated (physical) olfactory landscape represents the smelling together of olfactorily perceptible physical objects (odor molecules), which are used by the individual on the basis of personal and (partial) social knowledge about the accepted construction patterns of olfactory landscapes for the construction of a certain olfactory landscape (e.g., the olfactory landscape of the village, city, alpine meadow or Christmas). But is our perception and interpretation of smells socially constructed at all, or is it ‘natural’? The simple answer from a social constructivist point of view would be yes, since it is assumed that each of our patterns of interpretation and perception is subject to social construction and that this cannot be any different for odors and, respectively, olfactory landscapes. Thus, we would define olfactory landscapes as previously described with reference to Kühne’s social constructivist understanding of landscape as follows: Olfactory landscapes represent social constructs that are constructed by the subject in the synopsis of smells, against the background of (sub)social patterns of interpretation and perception as well as personal experiences.

But let’s not make it too easy for ourselves, let’s go on an olfactory hunt! The first thing to notice is that people really do seem to divide smells into ‘good’ and ‘bad’ quite ‘instinctively’ (Raab 1998, p. 58, 2021, pp. 52–53). Some smells also seem to fall clearly into these categories cross-culturally: For example, it can be observed that one’s own smell almost always has a positive connotation (Raab 1998, p. 114), just like the scent of flower (Raab 1998, p. 51, 2021, p. 51), as well as that rotten smells tend to be evaluated negatively independent of any socio-cultural imprint (Raab 1998, pp. 50–51). Beyond that, however, the interpretation and perception of odors proves to be much less clearcut. For example, if we look at the perception of smells in cultural circles outside the Western world, we quickly notice clearly different patterns of perception and interpretation of different smells. In some Nepalese cults, basil, and thus its smell, is by no means just a tasty spice, but an essential component of death cults (Roubin 2006, 131–134), for the Serer people in Senegal, the scent of onions is a popular perfume (Classen et al. 1994, p. 104), in the culture of the indigenous Kisêdjê and Desana from South America, sexes and plants are each attributed pleasant and unpleasant odors respectively (Classen et al. 1994, p. 101) and the indigenous people of the Andaman Islands organize no less than their entire world view according to the coming and going of different smells (Classen 1993, pp. 126–131; Lammes et al. 2018, p. 62; siehe ausführlich: Pandya 1993; Raab 1998, p. 49). It can therefore be assumed that the interpretation and perception patterns of smells differ interculturally (just as this is true for the interpretation and perception patterns of landscape (see Kühne 2018, pp. 248–255, 2019a, p. 304). But other (social) affiliations within a cultural group also influence these patterns. Catholics, for example, associate the smell of incense differently from non-Catholics (Hatt and Dee 2009, p. 28; Raab 1998, p. 72), for Hindus, the smell of sandalwood has a different meaning than

Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes

181

for a perfumer (Verbeek and van Campen 2013, p. 138), construction workers and office workers interpret the smell of sweat and perfume differently (2006, p. 31), even air fresheners are evaluated differently depending on the ‘taste fraction’ of the person smelling them (Raab 1998, p. 253). To refer to Raab once again, it becomes apparent that the evaluation of odors depends on the affiliation to certain social categories—classes, milieus, lifestyles (Raab 1998, p. 273). So, if the perception and interpretation of odors seems to depend on the social conditioning of the individual’s environment, the patterns for the interpretation and perception of olfactory landscapes must also be socially constructed. Accordingly, there are (socially desired) stereotypical odors of different spaces and thus also of different olfactory landscapes. These expected olfactory landscapes (whether it really smells like this on site is not important for this (Largey and Watson 2006, p. 34)) can occur at different scales: This ranges from the expected smell of entire regions, landscapes and cities to the expected olfactory landscapes of individual rooms in a flat. A bathroom has to smell different from a bedroom, a smokers’ bar different from an operating room, a city tour in Berlin different from one in New Orleans (Raab 1998, pp. 137– 138; Strugnell and Jones 1999). Every room under consideration has a certain socially expected odor profile and is therefore evaluated on the basis of the learned stereotypical interpretation and perception patterns (Largey and Watson 2006, p. 38; Raab 1998, p. 136). This cannot only be applied to physically definable spaces. It shows that cultural olfactory landscapes, such as that of Christmas, also seem to be subject to different patterns of interpretation and perception in different cultural circles (in German-speaking countries, for example, people associate the scent of oranges with Christmas, whereas this does not seem to be the case in Italy) (see Endreß 2023). In addition to the finding that our interpretation and conception of odors or olfactory landscapes does indeed depend on social patterns, there are also indications that these are conveyed in a socialization process. Raab was already able to demonstrate that odor preferences for air fresheners seem to be transferred from the parents’ generation to the childrens generation (Raab 1998, p. 257). With regard to the transmission of patterns concerning the olfactory landscape of Christmas, it is also evident that it is above all the closer family environment that is involved in this socialization, with the mother as well as the grandmother in particular playing a special role (see Endreß 2023). These findings could thus also be placed in the context of an initial socialization of a native normal smell. Various studies come to the conclusion that we create our most intensive olfactory memories particularly in our early years (up to puberty, approximately) (see Chu and Downes 2002; Herz 2011; Porteous 2019; Willander and Larsson 2006). The home environment and thus also the olfactory backdrops with which we grow up thus become the resting point and ground zero of olfactory experience (Raab 2021, p. 55). Now that we have asked about native interpretation patterns and their socialization, we must consequently also briefly discuss the possibility of stereotypical olfactory landscapes, which would then be conveyed in secondary socialization. Basically, it has already been discussed that smells are subject to social patterns, so there seems to be

182

S. Endreß

something like the stereotypical (expected) smell of landscapes or spaces in general. It is not for nothing that some companies rely on the targeted use of a designed own odor for their companies (Lammes et al. 2018, p. 78). With regard to the socialization of these stereotypical olfactory landscapes, there are no decided research results so far. If we remain true to Kühne’s landscape model as a template, however, it becomes clear where and how socialization possibly takes place, namely via secondary information from various media (Kühne 2021, p. 247). We should distinguish between secondary information in two ways: On the one hand, we have information that tries to convey the smell via another sense, for example books or films. So, we have an indirect confrontation with the smell, we have to imagine it. Various studies support the picture that (some) people can imagine odors mediated by visual or auditory stimuli and thus “mental images of odors” (Djordjevic et al. 2004, p. 147) can be created (Stevenson and Case 2005). It can therefore be assumed that olfactory patterns of interpretation and perception can also be conveyed via ‘odorless’ media. This is limited to smells that have already been sensually perceived once before. Another interesting source of secondary information is a variety of household products, which often try to imitate or reproduce stereotypical smells and, when used, make them directly accessible, thus transforming between secondary and primary information. In Raab’s air freshener study, for example, the varieties ‘Côte d’Azur’ and ‘Siena’ stood out (Raab 1998, p. 201). Here, for example, it can be assumed that the users first visually perceive what kind of smell is being reproduced, then this smell is actively perceived during use, so that a pattern of interpretation can be created, even of places where one has never been oneself (such as Siena or the Côte d’Azur in this case). Something similar can be observed with shower gels, for example, which promise with their products to reproduce the olfactory landscapes of Bali, the Orient or wild, untouched nature and to bring them into the bathroom (see Endreß 2023).

4 Conclusion So, what can be said in conclusion about olfactory landscapes? It seems that the preoccupation with odors and their perception and interpretation is on the rise again in recent years after millennia of neglect in science. In the course of this, we are therefore also faced with the question of how to integrate the olfactory into a landscape concept. It turns out that this is quite possible via a social constructivist approach. If we understand olfactory landscapes as social constructs, which are constructed by the subject in the synopsis of smells, against the background of (partial) social patterns of interpretation and perception as well as personal experiences, then this opens up a fruitful access to this field of research. Since we are only in the early stages of (geographical) olfactory research, there are many questions to be answered in the future. We already have a very distinct understanding of socialization processes and prevailing patterns of interpretation and perception in various other areas, which has been further developed through studies

Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes

183

and decades of theoretical discussions. In social constructivist olfactory research, we are still almost at the beginning. It is now necessary to expand the sparsely available models, to question them and to rethink many aspects. At the same time, there is an enormous need for qualitative and quantitative studies to verify or falsify these models and considerations. There must also be a focus on new data collection methods; many things that seem practical for the study of acoustic and visual phenomena cannot simply be used for olfactory studies. All this should encourage us to go through the world with an open nose and to face this new olfactory territory.

References Aschenbrand, E. (2017). Die Landschaft des Tourismus: Wie Landschaft von Reiseveranstaltern inszeniert und von Touristen konsumiert wird. SpringerLink Bücher. Springer VS. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-658-18429-2. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1991). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Penguin. (Original work published 1966) Berr, K. (2023). Multisensuality versus visual primacy of landscape perception. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Springer Fachmedien. Bischoff, W. (2007). Nicht-visuelle Dimensionen des Städtischen: Olfaktorische Wahrnehmung in Frankfurt am Main, dargestellt an zwei Einzelstudien zum Frankfurter Westend und Ostend. Wahrnehmungsgeographische Studien: Bd. 23. BIS-Verlag der Carl-von-Ossietzky-Universität. Burckhardt, L. (2015). Why is Landscape Beautiful? DE GRUYTER. https://doi. org/10.1515/9783035604139. Chu, S., & Downes, J. J. (2002). Proust nose best: Odors are better cues of autobiographical memory. Memory & Cognition, 30(4), 511–518. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/ BF03194952.pdf. Classen, C. (1993). Worlds of sense: Exploring the senses in history and across cultures. Routledge. Classen, C., Howes, D., & Synnott, A. (1994). Aroma: The cultural history of smell. Routledge. Cosgrove, D. E. (1998). Social formation and symbolic landscape. University of Wisconsin Press. Djordjevic, J., Zatorre, R. J., Petrides, M., & Jones-Gotman, M. (2004). The Mind’s Nose: Effects of Odor and Visual Imagery on Odor Detection. Psychological Science, 15(3), 143–148. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.01503001.x. Eberle, T. S. (2021). Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion von Gerüchen. In P. Eisewicht, R. Hitzler, & L. Schäfer (Eds.), Erlebniswelten. Der soziale Sinn der Sinne: Die Rekonstruktion sensorischer Aspekte von Wissensbeständen (pp. 33–48). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Eisewicht, P., Hitzler, R., & Schäfer, L. (2021). Horizonterweiterung oder neue Scheuklappen? Zum Sensorial Turn in den Sozialwissenschaften. In P. Eisewicht, R. Hitzler, & L. Schäfer (Eds.), Erlebniswelten. Der soziale Sinn der Sinne: Die Rekonstruktion sensorischer Aspekte von Wissensbeständen (pp. 3–19). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Endreß, S. (2023 (expected)). Die soziale Konstruktion von Geruchslandschaften. Not yet published, in press. Best Masters. Springer Nature. Fischer, J., & Mahler, M. (2023). Multisensory approaches to a disaster place? – A Phenomenological Walk through Altenahr after the Flood Disaster. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler

184

S. Endreß

(Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Springer Fachmedien. Gerstlauer, S., & Mahler, M. (2023). To what extent are zoo landscapes staged? – A multisensory walk through the Wilhelma Zoo. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Springer Fachmedien. Greider, T., & Garkovich, L. (1994). Landscapes: The Social Construction of Nature and the Environment. Rural Sociology, 59(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.1994.tb00519.x. Hasse, J. (2005). Fundsachen der Sinne: Eine phänomenologische Revision alltäglichen Erlebens. Neue Phänomenologie: Vol. 4. K. Alber. Hatt, H., & Dee, R. (2009). Das Maiglöckchen-Phänomen: Alles über das Riechen und wie es unser Leben bestimmt (3. Aufl.). Piper. Herz, R. S. (2011). Odor-Evoked Memory. In J. Decety & J. T. Cacioppo (Eds.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of social neuroscience (pp. 265–276). Oxford University Press. Koegst, L., & Kühne, O. (2023). Moving Baton Rouge – from cinematic representations, phenomenological approaches and historical developments of the ‘multivillage Metropolis’. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O. (2008). Distinktion — Macht — Landschaft: Zur sozialen Definition von Landschaft. SpringerLink Bücher. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-53191152-6. Kühne, O. (2018). Landschaftstheorie und Landschaftspraxis: Eine Einführung aus sozialkonstruktivistischer Perspektive (2., aktualisierte und überarbeitete Auflage). Springer VS. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-19034-7. Kühne, O. (2019a). Die Sozialisation von Landschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 301–312). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Kühne, O. (2019b). Sozialkonstruktivistische Landschaftstheorie. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 69–79). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Kühne, O. (2021). Landschaftstheorie und Landschaftspraxis: Eine Einführung aus sozialkonstruktivistischer Perspektive (3., aktualisierte und überarbeitete Auflage). RaumFragen: Stadt – Region -–Landschaft. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-34746-8. Kühne, O. (2023). The multisensory Florentine landscapes – an update after Georg Simmel. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Berr, K., Weber, F., & Dittel, J. (2023). From multisensory to ex-sensory – from landscapes of displeasure to landscapes of fear. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Springer Fachmedien.

Multisensory Landscapes—Smellscapes

185

Lammes, S., McLean, K., & Perkins, C. R. (2018). Mapping the quixotic volatility of smellscape: A trialogue. In S. Lammes, C. R. Perkins, A. Gekker, S. Hind, C. Wilmott, & D. Evans (Eds.), Time for mapping: Cartographic temporalities (pp. 50–90). Manchester University Press. Largey, G., & Watson, R. (2006). The Sociology of Odors. In J. Drobnick (Ed.), The Smell Culture Reader (pp. 29–40). Berg. Löw, M. (2001). Raumsoziologie. Suhrkamp. Palat Narayanan, N. (2023). Street-food and multisensorial construction of cityscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes: Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Springer Fachmedien. Pandya, V. (1993). Above the forest: A study of Andamanese ethnoanemology, cosmology, and the power ritual. Oxford University Press. Perkins, C. R., & McLean, K. (2020). Smell walking and mapping. In S. M. Hall & H. Holmes (Eds.), Mundane methods: Innovative ways to research the everyday (pp. 156–173). Manchester University Press. Porteous, J. D. (2019). Landscapes of the Mind: Worlds of Sense and Metaphor. Heritage. University of Toronto Press. http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec https://doi. org/10.3138/9781487579548. Raab, J. (1998). Die soziale Konstruktion olfaktorischer Wahrnehmung: Eine Soziologie des Geruchs [Dissertation]. Universität Konstanz, Konstanz. Raab, J. (2021). Riechen und Wissen: Über die vorreflexive Ordnung von Wirklichkeit. In P. Eisewicht, R. Hitzler, & L. Schäfer (Eds.), Erlebniswelten. Der soziale Sinn der Sinne: Die Rekonstruktion sensorischer Aspekte von Wissensbeständen (pp. 49–64). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Roubin, L. A. (2006). Fragrant Signals and Festive Spaces in Eurasia. In J. Drobnick (Ed.), The Smell Culture Reader (pp. 128–136). Berg. Stevenson, R. J., & Case, T. I. (2005). Olfactory imagery: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(2), 244–264. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196369. Strugnell, C., & Jones, L. (1999). Consumer perceptions and opinions of fragrances in household products. Nutrition & Food Science, 99(4). https://doi.org/10.1108/nfs.1999.01799daf.002. Verbeek, C., & van Campen, C. (2013). Inhaling Memories: Smell and Taste Memories in Art, Science, and Practice. The Senses and Society, 8(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.2752/1745893 13X13589681980696. Willander, J., & Larsson, M. (2006). Smell your way back to childhood: Autobiographical odor memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(2), 240–244. https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03193837. Xiao, J., Aletta, F., Radicchi, A., McLean, K., Shiner, L. E., & Verbeek, C. (2021). Recent Advances in Smellscape Research for the Built Environment. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 700514. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.700514.

MA Sven Endreß  studied geography at the University of Tübingen.

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged?—A Multisensory Walk Through the Wilhelma Zoo Sven Gerstlauer and Melanie Mahler

Abstract

This article deals with the staging of zoo landscapes. The Wilhelma Zoo in Stuttgart was examined using a phenomenological approach. In particular, aspects such as the perception of zoo landscapes and atmospheres as well as the question of how the tourist experience is influenced by the staged theme worlds are examined. First, the history and development of zoological gardens is outlined. This is followed by the theoretical framing, which combines social constructivist landscape research, the concept of atmosphere, phenomenology, Foucault’s other spaces, theme worlds, landscape hybrids and the tourist experience towards the object of study. With the phenomenological approach, a strong interlocking of theory and empiricism is brought about. Therefore, the method of the phenomenological walk is also described in parallel, linked with theory and finally interpreted. In addition to the clearly more intensive engagement with the staged zoo landscapes due to the method, the focus on the tourist experience rather than on a realistic representation for the living beings is particularly

S. Gerstlauer (*) · M. Mahler  University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] M. Mahler e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_10

187

188

S. Gerstlauer and M. Mahler

noticeable. The representation of something different and an observable immersive effect are also aspects that will be discussed in more detail in this article. Keywords

Zoological garden · Phenomenological walk · Social constructivism · Staging of landscape · Tourist experience · Atmosphere · Hybridity · Theme worlds

1 Introduction

Der Panther Im Jardin des Plantes, Paris

The panther In the Jardin des Plantes, Paris

Sein Blick ist vom Vorübergehn der Stäbe so müd geworden, daß er nichts mehr hält. Ihm ist, als ob es tausend Stäbe gäbe und hinter tausend Stäben keine Welt.

His gaze has become so tired from the passing of the bars so tired that he no longer holds anything. He feels as if there were a thousand bars and behind a thousand bars no world.

Der weiche Gang geschmeidig starker Schritte, der sich im allerkleinsten Kreise dreht, ist wie ein Tanz von Kraft um eine Mitte, in der betäubt ein großer Wille steht.

The soft gait of supple, strong steps, that turns in the smallest of circles, is like a dance of power around a centre, in which a great will stands stunned.

Nur manchmal schiebt der Vorhang der Pupille sich lautlos auf –. Dann geht ein Bild hinein, geht durch der Glieder angespannte Stille – und hört im Herzen auf zu sein.

Only sometimes does the curtain of the pupil slides open silently –. Then an image enters, passes through the tense silence of the limbs— and ceases to be in the heart.

Rainer Maria Rilke, 06.11.1902, Paris

Rainer Maria Rilke, 06.11.1902, Paris (translated by author) Rainer Maria Rilke, 06.11.1902, Paris

One human’s sorrow is another human’s joy. As early as 1902, Rainer Maria Rilke described the emotional world of animals in enclosures in his poem The Panther. For people, on the other hand, viewing such animals is linked to a tourist experience. Thus, between landscape and tourism, the curiosity of attraction unfolds. But what decides which landscape is considered valuable for tourism and which tourist stereotypes are used? To what extent are certain representations of landscape used to achieve added tourist value and what influence does this staging generate within the viewer? A multisensory approach to this field makes it possible to bring individual experience to the fore. The perception influenced by visual, auditory and olfactory factors stimulates at the

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged? …

189

same time the perception of these very representations of landscape. The questions about the construction of touristic added value as well as touristic stereotypes can thus be made answerable. This phenomenon will be addressed in the following by using the Wilhelma Zoological Garden in Stuttgart, Germany as the object of study. Zoological gardens can be seen as an accumulation and representation of different sections of the landscape. The Wilhelma zoological garden in particular is a space where various species of plants and animals are presented, both indigenous and exotic. Especially in the context of a social constructivist landscape research, a more intensive immersion into this topic is suitable. For a better understanding, we first draw on a brief overview of the development and history of zoos. The keeping of animals by humans is as old as human history itself, and animals were originally symbols of wealth and power (Kisling Jr. 2001). The zoological garden underwent numerous changes from an initial keeping of exclusively native animals to a change to more exotic animals. Thus, a change in function took place from providing for people to entertaining them (Baratay and Hardouin-Fugier 2000, pp. 27–30). Because of the long-term symbolic act of a zoo, it also came under social criticism early on (Rieke-Müller 2012, pp. 17–18). The nineteenth century then ushered in the process of scientification, with education and pleasure taking centre stage from then on. Due to a boom in the founding of zoos, there was an increased focus on the strengthening middle classes (Baratay and Hardouin-Fugier 2000, pp. 58–59 and 95–96). With the zoo’s intention to act as an educational institution as well as a place of leisure and recreation, the economic factor is now also gaining attention and more attractions are being created that are explicitly designed for the tourist experience (such as restaurants, feedings, fireworks, concerts, gardens and shops; Wessely 2008, pp. 158–160). The extent of the tourist offers casts a shadow over the enclosures, which now represents cages lined up next to each other, sorted by species and lineage (Baratay and Hardouin-Fugier 2000, pp. 34–38 and 136–137). The grids and bars and the resulting stereotypes can be found in Rainer Maria Rilke’s poem. Then, during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, growing criticism brings new forms of enclosure and presentation to light. Enclosures and their surroundings are designed to be more realistic, and larger outdoor enclosures and cultural panoramas are integrated in the form of communal enclosures (Baratay and Hardouin-Fugier 2000, pp. 137–138). Eliminating bars or other obstructive boundaries ensures a barrier-free design. Another approach involves the use of geometric shapes to form an abstract, even artistic, staging of landscape (Baratay and Hardouin-Fugier 2000, pp. 210–211). During the twentieth century, zoos made the protection of nature and species their main task, alongside even newer concepts for the design of enclosures. With immersive landscapes, the public should be able to walk through the landscape (Coe 1994, pp. 4–5). Nevertheless, zoos have come under increasing criticism in recent years due to inadequate animal husbandry, space and appropriated stereotypes (Baratay and Hardouin-Fugier 2000, pp. 188–191). The fundamental question of how it can be justified to keep animals in human captivity, as well as a critical examination of the protection of nature and species in zoos, will not be pursued in the following.

190

S. Gerstlauer and M. Mahler

Rather, the characteristic of this work will be to achieve the broadest possible empirical approach, which includes an interpretation of all sensory systems. Phenomenology as a methodological approach lends itself particularly well to focusing on subjective experience and perception. In particular, we would like to explore the question of the staging of zoo landscapes. Further questions to be clarified will be: What becomes visible through the zooscapes? Which atmospheres are revealed to us? What influences the tourist experience in relation to the staged theme worlds? In the following, a theoretical framing is provided that lays the social constructivist foundation and clarifies relevant terminology in order to ensure a well-founded presentation of the results. The subsequent phenomenological approach makes it possible to link empiricism with theory. Finally, this work is completed with a résumé of what has gone before, and an outlook is given.

2 Social Constructivism and Theme Worlds as Theoretical Framework Social constructivist landscape research has become increasingly prominent in the last two decades. To conduct landscape research in this sense means to consider landscape as a social construct and to understand its development process based on social patterns of interpretation and evaluation (Kühne 2013, 2019b). The assumption of this social constructedness thus stands in contrast to positivist as well as essentialist landscape research. The constructivist patterns of interpretation and evaluation are socially defined and applied to the individual in the socialization process. The social constructivist perspective is particularly concerned with the emergence of the meaning of physical objects as well as the mode of communication about these meanings (Kühne 2013, pp. 1–2). Social constructivist approaches draw heavily on the phenomenological sociology of Alfred Schütz. The social construction of landscape is thus linked to experience and goes hand in hand with a perceived lifeworld as the “epitome of a reality that is experienced, witnessed and suffered” (Schütz and Luckmann 2003 [1975], p. 447, translated by author). This experienced reality is subject to a typification process through which familiar things, into which meanings have already been socially inscribed, are linked with the perceived and together added to the constructed world. This processual construction is then institutionalized as objectivation (Berger and Luckmann 1980). The fact that the phenomenological perspective on landscape focuses on individual experience (Kühne 2019b, p. 135) and the common phenomenological roots (following Alfred Schütz) of social constructivist and phenomenological landscape research make it possible to link these two approaches in the further empirical procedure. However, it is important to point out the differences that exist between the two approaches: Phenomenology, for example, sees itself primarily as an approach to the world, whereas social constructivism is a social science theory. Another difference lies in the phenomenologi-

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged? …

191

cal focus on a material understanding of landscape, such as on practices of appropriation and change of landscape (Kühne 2019b, p. 139). The goal of phenomenological attention is a subjective gain in knowledge, which in turn depends on personal knowledge as well as moods of the experiencer (Kühne 2019b, pp. 136–137). Together with the multisensory experience of phenomenological landscape research, this affect- and perception-based approach focuses on atmospheres. The concept of atmospheres primarily implies “rethinking the perception of landscape” (Kazig 2019, p. 456, translated by author). For this reason, it is particularly suitable within the context of social constructivist landscape research to create a perspective awareness and to reflect and question the given. Furthermore, the concept of atmospheres refers to the interconnectedness of people with their environment, which in turn makes it impossible to view the environment from a neutral position. Rather, there is a reciprocal influence that dissolves the dichotomy between people and their surroundings (Kazig 2019, p. 455). Since landscape perception occurs according to an atmosphere, it is assumed that there is a dynamic process of perception that changes with the nature of the immersive effect of the landscape (Thibaud 2003). Since the phenomenological approach allows for the uncovering of these underlying phenomena and mechanisms, it is particularly suitable for finding out which means a zoological garden uses to create atmospheric immersive landscapes and thus actively influence the interaction between the viewer and the to-be-viewed. Phenomenological perspectives are not only particularly interesting with regard to efforts to create atmospheres, but also with regard to the hybridisation of cultures (Kühne 2019b, p. 139). Since the individual enclosures and spaces in the zoological garden are an accumulation of different cultures and worlds as well as a placement of other cultures into one’s own, a hybrid character already precedes this. In this sense, the hybridisation of landscape is also theoretically included. The term does not imply a mere blending of cultures, but rather linkages through which something new emerges and differences nevertheless remain visible (Zapf 2002, pp. 55–56). Since this new emergence concerns the respective enclosures and areas in the zoological garden, it is relevant to first discuss the understanding of space used here, crystallised out of the large repertoire of spatial theories. Michel Foucault uses the term heterotopia for special spaces. Special spaces in the sense that these so-called counter-spaces are simultaneously outside of society and yet in the midst of it and function according to their own logic (Foucault 1993, pp. 38–39). In its original understanding, the term comes from the medical field and refers to tissue that is located in a place where it does not normally occur (Pschyrembel and Dornblüth 2002). In this context, these spaces by no means stand on their own, but are rather to be understood as separations and in relation to the rest of the space. Foucault (2005) defines principles for these particular spaces that fall under the term heterotopology. These principles indicate, among other things, that heterotopias are several heterogeneous and seemingly incompatible spaces that are linked. Furthermore,

192

S. Gerstlauer and M. Mahler

these spaces are not always freely accessible, but separated from the rest of the environment by closing times. According to Löw (2012), in this constellation of relationships, space is “a network that brings people, things or actions into an order or expresses an order” (p. 148, translated by author). This at the same time anticipates an attribution of the rest of space. Furthermore, the act of staging already implies action by actors (Löw 2012, pp. 149– 150). Regarding this, the question arises to what extent the mode of attention according to Kazig (2007) is consciously guided by the staging and what effects these have on the tourist experience. In order to deal more specifically with the mechanism of arranging and presenting things and to conceptually frame the space described, the concept of theme worlds, which was established by Steinecke (2009) in leisure and tourism studies, is introduced last. This term is particularly suitable in the following because it can be used as a term that is not too narrowly defined due to its rather purposeless character—unlike, for example, experience worlds, which in short focus on the experience. Thus, theme worlds initially only stand for an entity that delimits a thematic space in terms of constellation and representation (Steinkrüger 2013). Theme worlds are more specifically presentations of a representation—i.e. extracts— of something else. The constellation of thematic worlds expresses this otherness quite directly by representing this otherness in the form of a space. At the same time, this otherness is accompanied by an interest in tourism, since “[t]he construction of an Alpine world in the world of the Alps […] could possibly be seen by the public as no more eventful and interesting than a desert park in the Nevada desert” (Kagelmann 1998, p. 87, translated by authors). Difference and a process of distinction thus lie in the very notion of thematization of worlds. An attempt has been made to theoretically frame the empirical results presented below. Due to the phenomenological character of this study, attention was mainly paid to highlighting concepts that can be used in the further course of the work and to describe what was experienced. Since the phenomenological approach already brings about a strong interlocking of theory and empiricism, the explanation and interpretation of the results in the next chapter are also interlocking. Particular attention is paid to the atmospheric effects of the constructed thematic worlds as well as to the influence of certain spatial characteristics on the viewers (more on landscape theory in this volume: Kühne et al. 2023a, b).

3 A Phenomenological Walk Through Wilhelma Zoo In order to cover the multisensory perception and the staging of landscape from the perspective of tourists in a phenomenological way, a phenomenological walk is a suitable method. As already explained, the aim of such walks is to gain subjective knowledge of

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged? …

193

the object of investigation. The phenomenological exploration of landscape starts with the individual experience of landscapes and transfers the research to storytelling. The combination of a phenomenological-social constructivist approach sets itself the task, in the form of the walk, of opening up sensory perceptions of the surroundings or of a space that are taken for granted. Despite criticism of this approach due to its pronounced intersubjectivity, it is gaining more and more popularity (Finlay 2012; Kazig 2007, 2019; Kühne 2019a, b; in this volume also: Endreß 2023; Fischer and Mahler 2023; Kühne and Koegst 2023). The zoo Wilhelma in Stuttgart is ideal for the implementation of the walk due to its geographical proximity. We tried to follow the route indicated on the Wilhelma homepage (2022a), with the intention of not overlooking certain sections of the zoo. We also aim to incorporate the purpose of the given route into our experience. However, following the route turned out to be almost impossible. Closed animal houses and restaurants, construction sites blocking our way, unoccupied enclosures (due to the time of year, winter) and the time factor prevented us from following it. The talking signatures on the site plan made us question the selection of animal and plant species, knowing that Wilhelma presents around 1200 animal and 8500 plant species (Wilhelma 2022b). This suggests a stereotyping of animal and plant species and raises the question about the decision of this selection. In the following, the position in the field of the two authors is defined. This serves to secure and clarify the previous knowledge and influencing factors for the implementation of the phenomenological walk. The authors have never visited the zoo Wilhelma before, which makes it possible to carry out the walk without bias or prejudice. The knowledge of the behaviour of certain animals in the wild allows a direct comparison of the behaviour of the zoo animals. In addition, the zoo is studied much more attentively due to the scientific background of the authors. Nevertheless, the perspective of the implementation of the phenomenological walk is from the tourist’s point of view. The following chapter looks at and describes the phenomenological walk. It simultaneously describes and attempts to interpret what was experienced and perceived.

4 Our Subjective Gain in Knowledge as Tourists We get off the train and without any clues that would have alerted us to the zoo, we suddenly find ourselves standing in front of the entrance to Wilhelma. It is fresh with wintry temperatures and there are scattered rays of sunlight coming through the cloud cover. Behind us, the noise of the traffic, we see the inconspicuous-looking entrance, which is surrounded by construction site fences, information signs about Covid-19 and, due to this, only has room for one door gap (Fig. 1). The revolving doors are out of order, and we are greeted by two people standing on the small square directly in front of the entrance, checking our contact details and entrance tickets. The next moment we are already in the zoo and feel like we have been thrown in at the deep end. After a short

194

S. Gerstlauer and M. Mahler

Fig. 1   Inconspicuous entrance right next to the S-Bahn tracks; own photograph 2021

period of uncertainty and confusion about this abrupt change of scene, we agree that now our tourist journey through Wilhelma begins. A comprehensive view shows us a spacious meadow, scattered enclosures on the horizon and a shop in close proximity where tourists can buy a souvenir. To our left is the entrance to the first building. As we want to follow the given map, but cannot find it at first try, we go back to the cashiers and ask. After we pass through the door of the first building, the next abrupt change of scene occurs and we enter a tunnel-like building with glass fronts. Our altered sensory perception begins with the fact that the temperatures are significantly higher and a dry climate is staged. The low building as well as the narrow corridor create an immediate immersive effect compared to the vastness of the outside we come from. The floor is paved and we feel that a sandy floor would suit the Sahara-like design adequately. However, we conclude that the tourist experience is in the foreground in this staging and with it the walkability through this passage. On the wall we see cacti in a glass box and are automatically tempted to take the position of the observer and look through the glass at the cacti. The

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged? …

195

heat lamps inside the box make us understand that there is a different climate inside than around us and influences our power of imagination regarding climatic differences. The next rooms are similar in terms of access: First we have to open a door, whereupon we find ourselves in a different ecosystem, which differs in terms of temperature and humidity. Sensory factors also influence our perception of the individual rooms, including acoustic (the splashing of water) and olfactory (the smell of plants) aspects. Signs on the doors give insight into which theme world is behind them. The effect of walking through the door has an immersive effect on us, like in the film The Chronicles of Narnia. Spaces where nature obviously encroaches on the path, such as aerial roots, moss growing on the path or trees growing at an angle, influence the atmospheric character of the theme world. On the other hand, man-made objects such as Christmas decorations, pots, wires, paved open and wide paths and watering staff have the opposite effect (Fig. 2). Each plant also has a small tag associated with it, which shows its name and is marked with a colour. Knowing the colour assignment to continents requires selfeducation, as we had not noticed any sign pointing this out before. This in turn leads to our own gain in knowledge, which creates a positive feeling due to the self-education. At the same time, from a tourist perspective, this triggers a degree of curiosity that keeps the tension and our attention high. Although certain factors and objects repeatedly limit the immersive character of the staged landscape, when we leave the elongated plant building, we suddenly become aware of the immersion in thematic worlds. We are greeted by running machines, zoo employees, a view behind the scenes and a cold front that makes us aware of the here. The park that follows places the focus strongly on the tourist recreational aspect, as it offers seating, which we do not notice due to the low temperatures. As we continue, we repeatedly encounter difficulties in keeping to the planned route, on the one hand due to

Fig. 2   Christmas decorations accompany us all the way (Kaktus with Christmas hat); own photograph 2021

196

S. Gerstlauer and M. Mahler

construction sites and on the other hand due to current preparations for Christmas Garden, a Christmas event that takes place in the zoo in the evening. Finally, a glance to the horizon shows us the city that surrounds us and, in combination with the sounds of an urban construction site, finally takes us out of the peaceful plant world staged in the zoo. However, we realise that this moment is short-lived when we then enter a house again, behind whose door a world of plants and birds has been constructed. This time, it is not only the acoustic perception of the birdsong that leads us to perceive a different environment, but also the simultaneous absence of the noise of road traffic and other environmental sounds taking place outside. Likewise, the olfactory change contributes to an immersive effect. Moreover, this mode of action becomes apparent in any situation in which we are drawn out of our conversation because a particularly beautiful animal suddenly appears or something else catches our attention. The effect on us of a peacock suddenly appearing—outside again—in front of us on the path is striking (Fig. 3). This unforeseen event arouses our curiosity for further experiences and sets itself apart from the previous observations, as there is no fence or the like separating us. Further on, we enter a monkey enclosure, where we are particularly struck by the design of the enclosure. It has no resemblance to the natural environment of a monkey but is obviously designed as a tourist attraction. This is achieved through swings, ropes and metal bars protruding from the wall, which contribute to the monkey putting on a potentially tourist-attractive show. There is a strong focus on the tourist experience, rather than an effort to construct a naturalistic environment that would also benefit animal welfare. We become particularly aware of this when we then pass an outdoor enclosure for ibex. On the one hand, the design of the enclosure is staged in such a way that the onlooker looks down on the animals from above, and on the other hand, the construction of the enclosure is supposedly geared towards the display of feeding actions, for

Fig. 3   A peacock crossing our path, stalls for Christmas Gardening in the background; own photograph 2021

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged? …

197

Fig. 4   Community husbandry at Wilhelma Zoo, a monkey sits on an ibex; own photograph 2021

example. This in turn alludes to the tourist experience, as stone slabs that can be walked on by humans are used instead of steep slopes, which would offer ibexes a more natural habitat. In addition, this enclosure is a communal enclosure with monkeys. Bringing together different species of animals, which, as a glance at the information board shows, do not live together in their natural environment, reinforces our assumption that this serves the visitor’s experience factor, as Fig. 4 illustrates. This constructed connection again reinforces our view that the human component as a tourist outweighs the animal component. After we continue along the concrete path that separates the respective enclosures, we come across the jaguar enclosure, which changes the atmosphere abruptly. The jaguar’s sublime and fearsome appearance is only overshadowed by the relatively small area at its disposal. Our joy at seeing such an animal is counterbalanced by our dismay, which is reinforced by the information sign: It refers to the advancing clearing of the rainforest and the resulting shrinking of the jaguar population. The staging of the jaguar in the enclosure obviously goes hand in hand with pointing out current social events. When we see the lion enclosure the next moment, our enthusiasm takes over again and we can’t see enough. The large platform placed in the middle of the enclosure, on which the lion lies, is intuitively associated with the film The Lion King. The link is emotionally charged and the experience makes it close to us. A raven circles around the lion and witnessing an interaction between creatures that would not come into contact in this way in their natural environment makes us more aware of the staging of it all. Before our eyes fall on the next enclosure, an acrid smell already makes itself felt. We see elephants standing close to the concrete wall waiting to be let in and the influence of humans becomes noticeable (Fig. 5). A similar behaviour, indicating the construction of a living environment and the influence of humans, are the forest dogs running in circles in the enclosure next door, their visibly worn route showing a frequently used behaviour.

198

S. Gerstlauer and M. Mahler

Fig. 5   Elephant stands with its head to the wall waiting for food, own photograph 2021

Because of the almost non-existent fence separating us from the forest dogs, we perceive the closeness to the animal more intensely. At the same time, we become aware of our isolated position as observers, as the animal does not react to us in any way. Furthermore, we notice how strongly the number of bystanders standing around us affects our position in the field. Thus, we increasingly take the position of the bystander compared to the moments when we stand alone in front of the enclosure and our perceptions are guided solely by our observations in the enclosure. We have a similar perception when we look down on the animals because of the design of the enclosure. We also notice that there are various vantage points around the enclosures that allow us to fully grasp the enclosure as well as the animals. As we continue, the problem of finding our way around is again made clear to us. There is also a string of empty enclosures and buildings closed due to the pandemic, where animals are normally also seen. Our path leads us up a hill, which allows us to have a view of the entire zoo complex and, beyond that, of the city that encircles the zoo. We think the view of the pigs in front of us and from a chimney smoking on the horizon grotesque (Fig. 6). The cold and the loud noises of another construction site finally take us out of the tourist experience. Leaving the construction site behind us, we are greeted by wide pastures with animals that are common in Germany. Being familiar with these animals clearly weakens the tourist experience factor compared to the previous observations. Next, we are in the monkey house and experience a strong sensory scene change the moment we enter the building. We experience various sensory perceptions that immediately have a strong immersive effect on us. The smell of excrement enters our nostrils, the volume of both human and monkey sounds builds up into an enormous soundscape and we perceive a rise in temperature. Immersed in this themed world, we stand in front of a glass front and immediately behind it we can observe an intimate moment between two bonobos. With us, many people crowd in front of the glass pane and the position of

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged? …

199

Fig. 6   Animal enclosure with the industry of Stuttgart in the background, own photograph 2021

the observer as well as the one waiting for the attraction settles in with us. Furthermore, the design of the enclosures as well as the food distribution, which takes place directly behind the glass pane, is also designed for the tourist gaze. At the same time, the focus on the animals’ behaviour becomes noticeable, as the animals’ natural environment often gives way to a barren concrete landscape. Once again, a deliberately staged link between humans and animals becomes clear as we look at images of monkeys and humans interacting together in the next moment. Handprints of silverbacks embedded in the floor, inviting us to put our own hand in as a comparison, also testify to the attempt to establish an emotional connection. This guided interaction means that we no longer find ourselves fully in the observing role. With the time pressure we feel due to the zoo’s imminent closure, we quickly step out of the building and walk around it to see the meerkats. We notice a sign explaining that meerkats fall asleep more often than the otherwise alert animals and that the onlookers need not worry. This suggests that the zoo feels compelled to justify itself because of possible criticism. Back on the right track, we are suddenly taken in by a loud lion roar. The moment is special since it is not we as spectators who have made the decision to enter the next themed world, but the lion a few enclosures away. At the same time, the awareness of the danger posed by a lion contributes to the fact that our perceived safety briefly becomes fragile. The next building we enter contains, among others, giraffes crammed together, eating from a feeding trough hanging from the ceiling. In contrast to the other enclosures, the giraffes stand on a platform and we look up at them from below. This staging serves to make the giraffes appear even larger. A special moment occurs when we come into interaction with a desert fox in the next enclosure. This again reminds us of our mainly observational position and again highlights the different nature of the experience with the animal.

200

S. Gerstlauer and M. Mahler

Leaving the building, we pass a vantage point that provides a view of much of the zoo and highlights the juxtaposition of different enclosures. We walk along a cage and startle as just at that moment an eagle owl flies against the bars several times. A feeling of trepidation spreads through us, as this shows us that the eagle owl is trapped in a cage that is too small. Because of the time pressure, we decide to leave the route and take the shortest way to the aquarium and terrarium world, which closes before the zoo. We enter the building and see a darkened room. The luminous aquariums, set side by side in the wall, attract the eye because of these differences in light (Fig. 7). The individual aquariums are initially divided into standing and flowing waters and fish in BadenWürttemberg. This constructs a regional approach and we observe ourselves looking for familiar things. In the further course, the division into ecosystems takes place and occasionally only one species is shown in the aquarium. In such aquariums, where several species live together, it is difficult to assign the individual species and to find them. We feel the urge to search for all the species on the information signs displayed and immediately feel a positive feeling after successfully completing this search. The highlight in terms of scenic presentation for us is the next display case, which shows a cross-section not only of the underwater world, but also of the landscape above it. The fact that a more realistic overall picture is created by depicting both sections of life (i.e. both above and below the water surface) impressively reinforces this immersive character of the landscape staging. The simultaneous diversity of the depicted nature also invites the viewer to intensively engage with the landscape and contrasts with the previous depicted landscape sections, which were clearly sparser. Unfortunately, however, we cannot follow this urge due to lack of time. At the end we see a large wooden wall announcing the new building measures, supported by the Wilhelma’s sponsoring association. This sug-

Fig. 7   Dark room with bright and glowing aquaria, own photograph 2021

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged? …

201

gests that Wilhelma is actively involved, in addition to the frequent appeals for donations. An abrupt transition leads us through a metal curtain into a fenced-off area of the terrarium adjacent to the underwater world. We have to walk past a large crocodile head and suddenly find ourselves in a bright glass house with high ceilings and plants. The atmospheric contrast overwhelms us at first and we have to get used to the light, which seems glaring after the tunnel-like underwater world. The soundscape also changes abruptly from background human voices to a pleasant lapping of water. Under the footbridge we walk on, which forms a small circuit, we see crocodiles in the water. Bordered by two grids from this pool and visible through the central opening of the walkway, we spot turtles that seem relatively unimpressed by the lurking danger. Back in the dark terrarium, we stand in front of a display case with lizards. Outnumbered in this box are grasshoppers, but they are not mentioned on the adjacent information board and are thus presented as a triviality. We wonder about the extent to which decisions are made about which animals are considered important or unimportant. The next moment we are standing in awe of a large python and talking about a friend keeping this species as a pet when a woman joins our conversation. Her surprise and curiosity at this statement makes us pause briefly in an interaction with her. The woman’s astonishment highlights the otherness of the snake as well as the unimaginable connection between the two worlds. Continuing through the tunnel-like building, we next find ourselves in front of an aquarium with a display for electrical charges. While searching for the electric eel inside, we are literally startled when we realise that this eel takes up the entire basin. The display, which gives a live indication of the volts emanating from the electric eel, reflects the immediate danger posed by the animal and makes it approachable. This also reinforces the proportionality between the size of the aquarium and the electric eel. Moreover, we are glad that a pane of glass separates us from each other. In the next aquarium, we are thrilled by the sight of the two fish known from the film Finding Nemo, Nemo and Dory, but realise shortly afterwards that it is only Nemo. However, we catch ourselves enjoying supposed emotional links to our experiences. The path then leads us in front of a seahorse pool where they hold on to plants with their tails. We ask ourselves whether this mechanism serves to prevent them from drifting away during sleep and whether we are observing a behaviour of the seahorses that they also practise in their natural environment. However, the awareness of the landscape productions, which are not actual depictions of the natural habitat, makes us critically question to what extent the observed behaviours of the animals correspond to the actual ones. Delighted with this beautiful underwater world experience, we are about to leave the building when we notice an installation placed centrally at the exit. It points out the plastic pollution in the sea and the resulting destruction of the natural habitat of the animals we had previously marvelled at. With a feeling of dismay, we now leave the building and are greeted by a loudspeaker announcement from the zoo, alerting us to the imminent closure.

202

S. Gerstlauer and M. Mahler

Due to time constraints, we decide to leave the remaining enclosures unattended and only go to the snow leopards. On the way there, we realise that compared to the aquariums and terrariums, where there was always something to see, there are very few animals in the outdoor enclosures that we could observe. We also become aware of the disproportionate size of the enclosures, which is particularly evident in the case of birds and big cats, to which we would assign a claim to large-scale enclosures. The next moment we notice an electricity box not completely covered by a grass mat and smile at this attempt to embed it in the landscape. In addition, images of animals wrapped in tinsel accompany us along the way, which seem comical against the backdrop of the immersive landscape. Arriving at our personal climax, we see an enclosure that borders directly on the road with parked cars (Fig. 8). The view of a snow leopard lying on a tree trunk and the city in the background symbolises the grotesque character of this juxtaposition. Nevertheless, we think the enclosure is relatively large and enjoy this tourist attraction of seeing four snow leopards in a pile. Apart from the many different perspectives on the enclosure, one thing in particular catches our eye: A stone-lined tunnel that becomes increasingly narrower and at the end literally directs our gaze through a glass pane to what we are observing. For the last few minutes, we rush past various enclosures and buildings and feel slightly frustrated that we don’t have the opportunity to experience this. Leaving the unspectacular exit behind us, we feel equally thrown on the other side and transported into a different atmosphere as we did at the entrance. This abrupt change of scene seems unreal, which, against a social constructivist background, highlights the immersive landscapes experienced in an interesting way. Now we wait for the train, the soundscape of rush hour traffic around us, and we slowly leave the experience behind.

Fig. 8   Snow leopard lying on a tree trunk, cars parking in the background; own photograph 2021

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged? …

203

5 Conclusion and Outlook Due to the juxtaposition of different cultural representations and thematic worlds designed for tourism, the zoological garden enabled a broad access to staged landscapes. The phenomenological walk, which also enabled a wide range of perceptions to be experienced in terms of subjective knowledge, made it possible to absorb the diversity of the constructed zoo landscapes in their entirety. This in turn has the consequence that the results obtained are also numerous. Nevertheless, accumulations of the same occurrences as well as strongly noticeable stagings can be brought together to form an overall view of essential results. In general, it was possible to work out that the staged zoo landscapes are increasingly oriented towards the tourist experience instead of representing an actual depiction of the natural environment of the creatures. The construction of the enclosures, for example, suggests that more attention is paid to possible access by staff, who can thus potentially provide tourist shows such as feedings. The monkey enclosure in particular symbolises this enforced mechanism through the fact that we see swings and metal bars instead of a realistically designed landscape. Furthermore, the numerous tourist attractions as well as the embedding of Christmas decorations throughout the zoo are indicative of this tourist focus. In addition, it appears that emotional connections are actively included in the construction of the enclosures. These are intended to make the experience more approachable based on the viewer’s own memories and to create a more enjoyable experience for the viewer. The choice of speaking signatures on the site plan as well as the general highlighting of an animal species, which in turn applies categorically to many different species, also suggest that a link is consciously made to the familiar and that this familiar linking is then used as a supercategory. It is also interesting to note the ignorance of native animal species—from a tourist perspective—in comparison to the more exotic species. Tourist fascination, it can be deduced, is preceded by the representation of something different. Moreover, this experienced otherness runs through the entire zoo experience. The very fact that tourists look at something—usually from a higher position, through a pane of glass or by architecturally guiding the direction of view—causes a process of distinction between the observer and the observed. This difference between one’s own and the other is also forced by various staged environmental conditions. Increases in temperature and humidity as well as certain room designs lead to the awareness of being in a different world. These mechanisms and abrupt changes of scene also contribute to a strong immersive effect that creates a distinction between the ‘here’ and the ‘elsewhere’. The intensity with which the difference of the thematic worlds is perceived enables in a particular way an immersion in the corresponding landscape construction. The feeling at the end of the zoo visit of having travelled once around the world supports these representations. On the other hand, forms of hybridisation result in perceiving the immerse as grotesque when, for example, the city circling the zoological garden can be seen in the background of a landscape representation. Mechanisms like these usually led to a backlash of the immersive effect. Observations

204

S. Gerstlauer and M. Mahler

such as the interaction between creatures of different cultural origins illustrate the staged juxtaposition as well as a manufactured mixing of different cultures. At the same time, this causes something new and unique to emerge. In summary, it can be said that the constructed immersive landscapes achieve a strong effect. Zoological landscapes are thus exemplary for the fact that representations of something different also imply a certain pair of glasses from which one looks at what is represented. This perspective also unites social values and normatives. The phenomenological approach forces a sharpening of the senses, so that due to the given setting, more attention is paid to the surroundings. In this sense, a phenomenological methodology can contribute to gaining diverse insights from everyday moments and is therefore recommended for the scientific approach.

References Baratay, E. & Hardouin-Fugier, E. (2000). Zoo. Von der Menagerie zum Tierpark. Berlin: Wagenbach. Berger, p. L. & Luckmann, T. (1980). Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit. Eine Theorie der Wissenssoziologie. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer. Coe, J. C. (1994). Landscape Immersion – Origins and Concepts. In J. C. Coe (Ed.), Convention Proceedings, American Zoo and Aquarium Association, 1–7. Endreß, S. (2023). Multisensory Landscapes – Smellscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Finlay, L. (2012). Debating phenomenological methods. In N. Friesen, C. Henriksson, & T. Saevi (Ed.), Hermeneutic phenomenology in education. Method and practice 4, 17–37. Fischer, J., & Mahler, M. (2023). Multisensory approaches to a disaster place? – A Phenomenological Walk through Altenahr after the Flood Disaster. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Foucault, M. (1993). Andere Räume. In K. Barck (Ed.), Aisthesis: Wahrnehmung heute oder Perspektiven einer anderen Ästhetik (pp. 34–46). Leipzig: Reclam. Foucault, M. (2005). Die Heterotopien. Der utopische Körper. Zwei Radiovorträge, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Kagelmann, H. J. (1998). Erlebniswelten. Grundlegende Bemerkungen zum organisierten Vergnügen. In M. Rieder, R. Bachleitner & H. J. Kagelmann (Ed.), ErlebnisWelten. Zur Kommerzialisierung der Emotionen in touristischen Räumen und Landschaften 4, 58–94. Kazig, R. (2007). Atmosphären – Konzept für einen nicht repräsentationellen Zugang zum Raum. In R. Pütz & C. Berndt (Ed.), Kulturelle Geographien. Zur Beschäftigung mit Raum und Ort nach dem Cultural Turn (pp. 167–187). Bielefeld: transcript. Kazig, R. (2019). Atmosphären und Landschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr & C. Jenal (Ed.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 453–460). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kisling Jr., V. N. (2001). Ancient Collections and Menageries. In V. N. Jr. Kisling (Ed.), Zoo and Aquarium History. Ancient Animal Collections to Zoological Gardens (pp. 1–47). New York: CRC Press. Kühne, O. (2013). Landschaftstheorie und Landschaftspraxis. Eine Einführung aus sozialkonstruktivistischer Perspektive, 2. aktual. u. überarb. Auflage. Wiesbaden: Springer.

To What Extent are Zoo Landscapes Staged? …

205

Kühne, O. (2019a). Landscape Theories. Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O. (2019b). Phänomenologische Landschaftsforschung. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr & C. Jenal (Ed.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 135–144). Wiesbaden: Springer. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023). The multisensory construction of landscape – the computer adventure game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps”. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Löw, M. (2012). Raumsoziologie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Pschyrembel, W. & Dornblüth, O. (2002). Pschyrembel Klinisches Wörterbuch. Berlin: Gruyter. Rieke-Müller, A. (2012). Fürstliche Menagerien – Wandermenagerien – Zoologische Gärten. Schaustellungen von lebenden exotischen Tieren im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert. In: S. Nessel & H. Schlüpmann (Ed.), Zoo und Kino (pp. 12–28). Frankfurt am Main: Stroemfeld. Rilke, R. M. (1902). Der Panther. http://rainer-maria-rilke.de/080027panther.html. Accessed 3 February 2022. Schütz, A., & Luckmann, T. (2003 [1975]). Strukturen der Lebenswelt. Konstanz: UVK. Steinecke, A. (2009). Themenwelten im Tourismus. Marktstrukturen – Marketing-Management – Trends. München: Oldenbourg. Steinkrüger, J.-E. (2013). Thematisierte Welten. Über Darstellungspraxen in Zoologischen Gärten und Vergnügungsparks, Bielefeld: Transcript. Thibaud, J.-P. (2003). Die sinnliche Umwelt von Städten. Zum Verständnis urbaner Atmosphären. In M. Hauskeller (Ed.), Die Kunst der Wahrnehmung. Beiträge zu einer Philosophie der sinnlichen Erkenntnis (pp. 280–297). Kusterdingen: SFG. Wessely, C. (2008). “Künstliche Tiere etc.”. Zoologische Schaulust um 1900. Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Wissenschaften, Technik und Medizin 16 (2), 153–182. Wilhelma (2022a). Geländeplan. https://www.wilhelma.de/fileadmin/pdf/Angebote/2019/Web_ Wilhelma-Faltplan_2019.pdf. Accessed 3 February 2022. Wilhelma (2022b). Tiere und Pflanzen. https://www.wilhelma.de/de/tiere-und-pflanzen.html. Accessed 3 February 2022. Zapf, H. (2002). Dekonstruktion des Reinen. Hybridität und ihre Manifestationen im Werk von Ishmael Reed. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.

Sven Gerstlauer studied business administration at the University of Applied Sciences in Kempten and for his final thesis he analysed the external communication of technically skilled companies in the B2B sector, whereupon he developed a cross-media B2B communication strategy for MdynamiX AG. He is currently studying human geography at the University of Tübingen. Melanie Mahler  studied sociology and philosophy at the University of Tübingen and examined gender stereotypes and their discursive negotiation processes for her bachelor’s thesis. She is currently studying human geography at the University of Tübingen and is a research assistant at the Chair of Urban and Regional Development.

Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place?—A Phenomenological Walk Through Altenahr After the Flood Disaster Julia Deborah Fischer and Melanie Mahler

Abstract

After the flood disaster of July 2021, the Ahrtal is seemingly exclusively linked to it. The mass media representation of the place can be recognized as morally charged; the representation of the landscape characterized by destruction. Assuming this interpretation of this space, this article attempts to answer the question of how the flood-affected place of Altenahr affects individual experience and to what extent this experience challenges the narrative of Altenahr as a place of disaster. With the method of a phenomenological walk, it was investigated how the perception of the physical structures of Altenahr is experienced by visiting persons. For this purpose, a framework of constructivist landscape theory, phenomenology, and the concepts of atmospheres and hybridity will be applied. The empirical results will be related back to the framework, thus demonstrating the complexity of landscape synthesis and highlighting the added value of phenomenology as an approach to landscape via the multisensory experience of being-in-the-world to support the description of physical space referred to as landscape/place beyond complexity-reducing stereotyping. This seems to be especially applicable for the investigation of disaster places, since they are highly emotionally charged and involve diverse unexpected constellations of phenomena.

J. D. Fischer (*) · M. Mahler  Geographisches Institut, Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] M. Mahler e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_11

207

208

J. D. Fischer and M. Mahler

Keywords

Social constructivism · Phenomenology · Phenomenological walk · Landscape · Flood ·  Disaster place · Aesthetics · Morality · Stereotypical landscape · Atmospheres

1 Introduction Events commonly referred to as natural disasters usually involve sudden and drastic changes in physical and material space. A disaster is defined as “a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society involving widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses and impacts, which exceeds the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources” (UNISDR 2009). Discursively, such a disaster becomes a natural disaster when it is causally attributed to the construct of nature, although these attributions are increasingly shifting (Picou and Marshall 2007, p. 10). The flood on July 14 and 15, 2021, around the Ahr River in North Rhine-Westphalia and Rhineland-Palatinate was classified as just such a disaster, killing 186 people and causing immense damage by destroying existing infrastructure. The district of Ahrweiler, to which our place of interest also belongs, is considered the most severely affected: 133 people lost their lives there alone. The catastrophic flood was interpreted as a marker of the vulnerability of the appropriated physical world to climate change and was at the time strongly present in the media as a serious humanitarian catastrophe. Equally present was the portrayal of the affected places, which was underscored by striking visuals. One of the places over which destroyed landscape was portrayed was Altenahr, where the Ahr gauge was located, which was destroyed during the flood. The fact that the Ahrtal, like Altenahr, was known as a tourist destination before the flood, especially as a wine region with what was considered as an idyllic landscape, is part of the reporting around the flood, but plays a subordinate role in the media construction of Altenahr at the time of the study (December 2021). Based on this tendency of an unambiguous interpretation of the Ahrtal and in this article more specifically of Altenahr as a flood-disaster landscape/place, the aim is to expand this interpretation through a phenomenological approach with a focus on the bodily experience of Altenahr. This will also integrate multi-sensory impressions such as sounds and smells. The focus of our work is therefore the subjective experience and perception of landscape, which is why a phenomenological framework is particularly suitable. The central questions are: How do we experience and perceive Altenahr? Which atmospheres and impressions do we perceive and which associations do they evoke? In the following, we will concretize the theoretical considerations that frame the present investigation: For this purpose, we will introduce constructivist, more specifically social constructivist landscape theory and complement it with phenomenological considerations that are guiding for our empirical access to Altenahr. From this we lead to our methodological approach, the phenomenological walk, which will be described after-

Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place? …

209

wards. Finally, the multisensory access is reflected and the results of the investigation are presented and discussed with reference to the framework we have presented.

2 Social Constructivist Understanding of Landscape and Phenomenology Over the last decades, alternative perspectives have been established away from the essentialist interpretation of landscape as an essentially given entity, which theoretically include observers as an elementary and constitutive variable in the production of landscape. These constructivist approaches unite that landscape (or place) is not simply found in the world in a thing-like, presuppositionless, and unambiguous way, but rather is to be understood as a construction (Kühne 2014, p. 75). The construction can be understood as a selection of impressions, in which culturally mediated instructions in the sense of prior knowledge about the world are resorted to (Burckhardt 2015, p. 231). Landscape can thus be understood as a way of seeing the world, or more precisely: the way in which objects and object constellations are looked at together to form a unity and are assigned with aesthetic and moral evaluations (Kühne 2021, p. 31; also 2019b). The socially mediated prior knowledge about the world flows into every perception: “One sees that which one has learned to see” (Burckhardt 2015, p. 267). In confirmation routines, the individual draws on previously learned, socially differentiated ideas of landscape and evaluates them according to the corresponding landscape ideas. Less familiar physical space is thus evaluated more strongly according to stereotypical societal-landscape conceptions than familiar space and “produced in particular for those spaces in which the landscape-constructing subject has not yet been physically present” (Kühne 2021, pp. 247–248, translated by the authors). These stereotypical conceptions of landscape are closely linked to aesthetic categories as an evaluation framework: thus, the beautiful, the sublime, and the ugly (as negation of the beautiful) are included in the construction of landscape (Linke 2017). Societal landscape conceptions and images are also particularly mediated by the media, for example through newspapers, news, or video platforms, whereby landscape constructions in new media with the possibility of communicative interaction are supplemented by different landscape interpretations as well as resulting interpretive conflicts by users (Kühne et al. 2021). The medial construction of landscape thus participates as part of the perception of the physical-material world and is actualized in confrontation with it. The example of Altenahr, the subject of our study, shows that the media construction of landscape after the flood was dominated by the flood as a natural disaster and that corresponding visual expectations as well as instructions for landscape appropriation were formed: in social networks, there was a call for solidarity through donations or help with the repair work, and in general (also on Altenahr’s website), there was an appeal not to stay in the crisis area, unless one belonged to the residents or helpers. Here it becomes clear that landscape is morally charged and is also constituted by norms, the disregard of which threatens the loss of

210

J. D. Fischer and M. Mahler

social recognition. Disaster tourism can possibly be classified as such a disregard: “The disaster tourist travels to a disaster scene not to help but to look with interest at the devastation” (Miller 2008, p.118). In particular, the strong emotional impression made by the disaster sites is stated as an incentive (Miller 2008, p.118). In our investigation, against the background of the aforementioned aspects of landscape construction, the focus is on a bodily approach to Altenahr, in which we explicitly focus on multisensory perceptions and which we profitably frame phenomenologically. A phenomenological approach to landscape refocuses on the material and can be categorized as a “more-than-represenational” approach (Kazig and Weichhart 2009; Kühne 2019a, p. 135). This is concerned with how phenomena, which include entities, things, events that present themselves in the world, are described and understood by an experiencing subject (Kühne 2019a, p. 136). With the epistemological focus on embodied, subjective experience and thus linked to multisensory impressions, physical presence in the landscape under investigation is recommended, which thus becomes the starting point (Kühne 2019a, p. 138). Since it is about the subjective construction of the experiencing individual, the approach is strongly linked to his personal knowledge and affects (Kühne 2019a, p. 136). The experience of landscape can also be understood as characterized by atmospheres, a concept introduced by Jürgen Hasse (Kazig 2007, p. 167; see also Kazig 2008, 2013, 2019; Hasse 2002, 2012). The concept places the perceiving subject at the center of what is perceived, thus resembling the phenomenological position and attempting to provide an alternative to the dichotomous model of perception based on the cartesian separation of body/soul (Thibaud 2003, p. 9). For the resolution a third is introduced: the atmosphere as medium and background of perception, which can be distinguished from the object-like, but rather represent an implicit background: a perception is made possible according to a certain atmosphere, which mediates the relation of subject and object (Thibaud 2003, pp. 10–11; see other contributions with a phenomenological approach in this volume: Endreß 2023; Kühne and Koegst 2023). In addition, we use the figure of thought of the hybrid: Due to the flood, there was a sudden change of the place, so that something new was brought forth. With the context of Altenahr as a place formerly constructed primarily touristic as well as now a flood disaster place, it is also obvious that one-sided typifications cannot adequately describe, but rather Altenahr can be understood as a hybrid space in which new links between differentiable things emerge (Schönwald 2017, p. 163). In addition, hybrids are already evident in the effects of natural disasters: “The transitory state of suspension that occurs is not only characterized by a hybrid aesthetic of remnants and losses, but also by the felt and experienced field of tension between memories of ‘what was’ and fears but also expectations of ‘what will come’” (Bruns and Münderlein 2017, p. 313, translated by the authors; concerning landscape theories, see in this volume: Kühne et al. 2023a, b).

Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place? …

211

3 Landscape Access by Phenomenological Walk With the focus on the multisensory perception of Altenahr and the aim of collecting the subjective impressions of the object of investigation, the method of the phenomenological walk was used. Adherents of the phenomenological approach aim—despite differing views in specifics—at complex and rich descriptions of embodied and experienced meanings (Finlay 2012, p. 6; see also Wylie 2005). The phenomenological walk represents a method of uniting embodied experience and understanding in a processual way (Ljunge 2013, p. 142). Christopher Tilley describes the phenomenological walk as follows: “It is an attempt to walk from the inside, a participatory understanding produced by taking one’s own body into places and landscapes and an opening up of one’s perceptual sensibilities and experience. Such a walk always needs to start from a bracketing off of mediated representations of landscapes and places. It is an attempt to learn by describing perceptual experiences as precisely as possible as they unfold during the course of the walk” (Tilley 2008, p. 269).

Further, Tilley describes that writing should be done during the walk because “to be able to write, one must look, listen, smell, and feel that which is in reach” (Tilley 2008, p. 269). In our approach, we decided to use a voice recording in order to have the possibility to exchange with each other, which on the one hand limited the method, but on the other hand extended it. Our initial research design was inspired by video footage of the Ahr-Rotweinstraße, showing a car ride from Altenahr to Dernau both before and after the flood. With this diverse approach, which included a phenomenological walk in Altenahr and Dernau as well as a phenomenological car ride, we aimed to put two places of the flood in context with each other and to complement this with the car ride in order to set up the range of our impressions from the beginning. Further research on the homepage of Altenahr, however, led us away from our original design, as it was pointed out on the homepage that only helpers as well as residents have access to the Ahr-Rotweinstraße. In addition to this ethical limitation, difficult conditions due to the weather and time resources (available daylight) led to a reduction of our project. This led to conducting a phenomenology walk only in our planned starting location Altenahr, which lasted a total of 2.5 h and was conducted by the authors of this paper together. The focus was on verbalizing our impressions of the phenomena within reach, and this verbalization sometimes took interactive conversational form, relating to the other walker, and sometimes was merely descriptive without a conversational connection, but of course with selection for social desirability influencing what was said. Regarding our position in the field, it has to be added that our access was already predetermined due to our prior media research on what had happened (this included both the daily news after the catastrophe as well as videos of those affected). On the one hand, we had not been to Ahrtal before, on the other hand, we started our project with visual expectations corresponding to a crisis site.

212

J. D. Fischer and M. Mahler

On the day of our walk, we spontaneously used a parking lot located directly at the Ahr as the starting point of our project. We had not set a route in advance, but wanted to be guided by impressions, and it turned out that our selection during the walk was oriented to river proximity. Due to this, we felt that the possibility of walking on both sides of the Ahr from this point was suitable. At the same time, the main road bordered the parking lot, from which we were guided on our following walk, in addition to the chaos to be found. Our intention to be guided showed itself early in a saturation of material. The relatively short route as well as the double walking of the same route on our way back, on which we nevertheless met new observations, strengthen this.

4 A Phenomenological Walk Through Altenahr Chronological Story We started our route on December 17, 2021, at 12:30 in Altenahr from a parking lot located immediately next to a bridge that crosses the Ahr (for the route, see Fig. 1). The weather is cool and damp, characteristic of a typical day in winter. It is quiet and not very busy on the streets. A wandering glance over the parking lot reveals a few parked cars with license plates from outside the FRG as well as from outside the region. Our expectation that these could be crisis tourists is confirmed by our first interaction. We are approached in the parking lot by two people from Holland who mention this disaster place as the reason for their visit, but are disappointed by the fact that all the cafés and restaurants are closed and the red wine trail is closed. We have the feeling that we are also perceived as crisis tourists, when we are then shown a map of the place with

Fig. 1   Route of the phenomenological walk through Altenahr with starting point parking lot (red marking). (Own map)

Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place? …

213

indications of walkable and non-walkable localities. After this conversation, we first let the surroundings take effect on us. Altenahr is located in the middle of steep slopes, which we now look up to. The view impresses us and seems sublime as well as drenched in history. A ruined castle on the horizon conveys a romantic flair in the midst of nature. Lowering our heads again, we look at a wide, desolate area directly on the Ahr, which resembles a construction site due to discarded building materials and porta-potties. At the same time, this makes visible the infrastructure that otherwise remains hidden. The transitions to the river have largely been broken off and the ground on which we are standing has also been destroyed towards the Ahr (see Fig. 2). This hybrid juxtaposition of devastation and sublime beauty of the mountain range impresses us, and at the same time we control what we see and perceive by raising as well as lowering our gaze. On the one hand, we feel a sense of trepidation, triggered by the sight of the destroyed landscape and the idea of the effects the catastrophe must have on the inhabitants. On the other hand, we feel an uncomfortable feeling, triggered by the perceived breach of social expectations (not only our expectations, but also the official homepage stated that visits are not wanted at the moment) about how this place should be dealt with, when the next tourists arrive. Opposite us, there is a bus stop with the inscription “helper stop”, which was built provisorically. This presence of helpers was already made clear to us as we drove into the town by a large banner with the inscription “Thank you”. Altenahr seems to be extinct, rarely than occasionally we see a car passing by or a person walking by. Our expectations of crisis areas are confirmed by the silence and the perceived extinction. At the same time, we are surprised by the low level of activity in the town, since a parallel reconstruction of houses is visible, we perceive the place as a transitional state and thus expect this processuality as a station on the way to something new. We cross Altenburger Straße, the main road that runs through the entire town, and staying on the same side of the Ahr, we walk along the river towards the car tunnel. Only later do we notice that this non-asphalted area on which we are walking is the train station. The station house with the tourist information is marked by devastation, overturned

Fig. 2   View from the parking lot. (Photos: own photographs, taken on December 17, 2021)

214

J. D. Fischer and M. Mahler

streetlamps, bent signs, stones lying around and destroyed windows lead us to try to imagine how the catastrophe must have happened. The fact that we don’t know what the place was like before stimulates our imagination and we often find ourselves contouring and supplementing what we saw with an imagination of what happened before. We arrive at the broken platform and have to watch where we step to not fall over, which focuses our perception and gaze on the ground at this point. We hear a hammering that briefly breaks the silence but have difficulty locating it as it echoes through the village and is reflected off the steep slopes. Walking along the Ahr, we now intensively perceive the sound of the water. On the opposite bank of the Ahr we recognize a small memorial place prepared with candles and flowers (see Fig. 3). Adjacent to it we look at devastated buildings and those being worked on and disorderly debris lying around. We recognize a schoolboy at this moment making his way across a pile of rubble and climbing over a destroyed wall. The scene seems bizarre and almost funny, as the boy with a school satchel that is much too large in relation to his body seems to take this path as a matter of course in order to get to the targeted house entrance. The self-evident ordinariness of this scene in what for us is the everyday remains a lasting impression. Immediately behind this scene we see a person cleaning a grill on a balcony. Next to it, we notice people working on the construction of a house. This contrasting sight has a grotesque effect on us. We see a juxtaposition of the ordered as well as the disordered and the abandoned as well as the new/recurring and the destroyed as well as the sublime, in between the provisional as a transitional stage. We become aware of the disproportion between our walked distance and our collected impressions, when after half an hour we are still near our starting point. In addition, the perceived changeability of the place becomes noticeable as we continue walking and immediately notice that we have walked on a former platform, which now lies partly destroyed, partly preserved in front of us. Now walking on this platform, we recognize to the right of us the railroad tracks, which are also partially destroyed. Following them, we arrive at a place, adjacent to the Ahr, where the asphalt path ends and does not continue, because the bridge with the tracks in front of us has collapsed (see Fig. 4). The place is devastated, we recognize tracks of large vehicles and trees torn out of the ground are lying around. The ground below us is muddy and everything looks soggy. We try again to reconstruct what has happened as well as the landscape and we realize that we are standing our body height deep under the ground that was here before. The force of nature that caused this overwhelms us. We let this place affect us and perceive smells of earth, churned up rubble and iron similar to a building site. Parallel to this, the broken bridge against the background of the mountain range and the tunnel seems to us to be appropriate for this landscape. Similar to the ruined castle, which was already visible on the horizon at the beginning of our walk on the mountain range, we also evaluate what we see here with aesthetic glasses and an aesthetic vocabulary by thinking something historically romantic into the destroyed. Immediately in front of us is the Ahr, directly behind it a newly paved road, and we do not know whether this road serves as a temporary means for the construction vehicles or whether we are

Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place? …

215

Fig. 3   Devastated train station, destroyed houses and a memorial site on the other side of the Ahr. (Photos: own photographs, taken on December 17, 2021)

216

J. D. Fischer and M. Mahler

Fig. 4   Broken platform, broken tracks and the destroyed bridge in front of the car tunnel. (Photos: own photographs, taken on December 17, 2021)

Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place? …

217

already looking at something newly created, which will continue to shape the landscape of Altenahr in the near future. Also visible is an arrangement of various objects that stand for the processuality of the place and at the same time reflect the atmosphere of a construction site. We become aware of how strongly the context (the destruction of large parts of Altenahr by a flood disaster) of this landscape influences our perception and lets our mood of the seen images vary strongly. We turn back again, walk along the Ahr back in the direction of the parking lot and suddenly notice a strong atmospheric change in our surroundings, which we perceive in particular aurally. Not only is the rushing water of the river audible again, but the place is now characterized by a high level of activity and we hear and see people working on the reconstruction of individual houses. We feel transported to another place and at the same time we realize that the lunch break was the reason for the initially perceived extinction of the place, which we had willingly accepted as a permanent condition, since it fit our idea of a destroyed place. This fallacy amused us. The perceived trepidation that accompanied it gradually disappears due to the now perceived busyness as well as the increasing noise in the place. We get back to the main road and cross the Ahr by walking over the bridge. Immediately next to the bridge is a broken street lamp. The railing of the bridge, destroyed on one side by the flood, has been replaced by barriers. The railing left standing on the other side is decorated with flower boxes and Christmas decorations. In the center of the bridge in a small indentation is a decorated Christmas tree with an attached note containing words of encouragement as well as Christmas greetings and thank-you notes from the helpers to the residents (see Fig. 5). We perceive the Christmas decorations and lights, which can also be seen on several house walls and roadsides, as an attempt to maintain everyday life and bring back the beauty in parts. Continuing on the bridge, we reach the other side of the Ahr and now find ourselves between rows of houses that run along the Altenburger Straße leading into the town. On almost all the walls of the houses, below the windows on the first floor, we discover traces of mud, which indicate that the water had been at a high level. Our imagination of how the flood must have happened is stimulated and we imagine how the water masses entered the houses through the now destroyed windows and must have left the mud traces due to the sinking of the water level. Due to the frequent lack of windows and doors, we also have glimpses into various houses and the no longer existing boundaries of privacy tempt us to look inside. We look into a room that has been completely emptied, but the devastation left behind can still be seen through the mud-smeared surfaces. A dusty and musty smell rises intensely in our noses. The crisis tourism in the back of our minds, we feel a break with our social role in this place when we look inside. We try to avoid being perceived as crisis tourists by lowering our volume and our behavior in order to comply with the perceived code of behavior in this place triggered by the catastrophe. We continue walking along the main street and see various interior rooms, whose open windows and doors let us see chaff hanging from the ceiling, shovels and buckets lying around, and barrier tapes serving as door substitutes (see Fig. 6). As a disaster place, this place determines the prevailing atmosphere; at the same time, it reflects

218

J. D. Fischer and M. Mahler

Fig. 5   Bridge with yellow barriers, a letter on the Christmas tree and the view from the bridge towards the car tunnel. (Photos: own photographs, taken on December 17, 2021)

processuality, since the aforementioned objects do not remain as they are, but are used to build something new. Cleaned exterior facades and elevators as well as renewed doors and windows directly demonstrate this hybrid juxtaposition of old and new. We walk past a hotel with a banner announcing that it will reopen in half a year. We are surprised to see a dentist’s office open to patients and it reinforces our perceptions of the hybrid juxtaposition of old and new, the everyday and the extra-ordinary. This in

Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place? …

219

Fig. 6   Mud marks below windows, devastated interiors and destroyed doors and windows. (Photos: own photographs, taken on December 17, 2021)

turn is supported by the new window and door frames and painted house facades that can now be seen more frequently. Lights burning in shop windows and recognizable plants as well as people talking to each other on the street seem somewhat grotesque next to the destroyed and dirty, but at the same time they make it possible to distinguish between the inhabited and the uninhabited. Occasionally, cars drive past us and the sight of them also reinforces our mode of reconstruction, because we recognize mud tracks that partially cover half of the cars. We realize that we intuitively change the side of the street several times, because more often garbage cans are placed in the middle of the sidewalk, construction debris and materials are lying around and the sidewalk is broken

220

J. D. Fischer and M. Mahler

away or blocked off. The sidewalk itself on our route is mostly very dirty and muddy or newly made. We often recognize objects placed close to the walls of the houses, such as concrete blocks or broken equipment. The passing cars are also restricted by the difficult infrastructure and move only very slowly. We also walk past several new buildings and wonder at what time they were built. Our glances searching for clues out of the urge to reconstruct what happened make us realize that these new buildings must have been completed just before the catastrophe. We listen for the Ahr and realize that no sound of water reaches us. Rather, the atmosphere is now dominated by the sounds of construction sites and moving cars, as well as the smell of smoke. We now reach the vicinity of the tunnel through which the currently closed red wine hiking route leads. Although cars occasionally drive through it, a sign indicates that only helpers and residents currently have access to it, which again makes us aware of our role. In front of us is a large exposed area immediately adjacent to the Ahr, with scattered parked cars and the ground flattened by heavy construction vehicles. There is a somewhat chaotic juxtaposition of porta-potties, barriers, and construction debris, and a tree is decorated with a homemade colorful object. Also to be seen are various objects highlighted with a neon color. Immediately behind them is the newly paved road in front of the Ahr. Looking even further out, the demolished bridge can be seen. In the background of this is the epic-looking rock wall (see Fig. 7). Overall, what is seen appears very rich in contrast and contradiction: dichotomies of old and new as well as old and modern can be found in the landscape. At the same time, this strong hybridity breaks with the tourist landscape narrative of the Ahrtal in the sense of tradition, idyll and vineyards. Even the sounds of nature expected when looking at the rock face are overshadowed by typical construction site noises and thus break with our expectations of an idyllic landscape. Once again we notice how the unfamiliarity with this place leads to an increase in our imagination of what has happened as well as what has gone before. Our imagination and immediate perception function as interrelated modes of experience. The now noisy background in comparison to the beginning of our stay also has a habituation effect on us, so that contrary to the catastrophe, the everyday life as well as the perceived drive of the people in this place increase in importance. The catastrophe, which is thus less taken into account, gradually weakens the classification of our perception of Altenahr as a catastrophe area. We turn around and walk back the same way. On our way back, we notice new features that we had missed before. Our focus is now more on the houses along the road and contrary to our expectations we realize that many houses are inhabited or open as stores. In the distance on the cliff we see a country road traveled at regular intervals, which reinforces our perceived busyness of the place. We cross the bridge again and walk past the parking lot further along Altenburger Straße. We find the air pleasant, it becomes remarkably quiet again, and we become increasingly aware of the nature around us. The street and sidewalks are cleaned and the local landscape does not betray anything of the catastrophe that happened. Walking further, we are convinced of the opposite when we see several drinking water canisters placed next to each other on the opposite side of the road, again making visible the now non-functioning infrastructure. We pass a drive-

Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place? …

221

Fig. 7   View from the other side of the Ahr to the broken bridge, in the background the rock wall, tree decoration and objects marked with neon color. (Photos: own photographs, taken on December 17, 2021)

way whose walls are covered with handprints made of mud. A little further on, we turn into a small square where a container, thought to be a provisional savings bank, stands. Here, too, we perceive a strong juxtaposition of the destroyed and the intact, as we see destroyed windows covered with tarpaulins and next to them an inhabited building with Christmas lights. The simultaneous perceptible absence gives rise to the association of the dystopian and in turn leads to an increase in our ideas about the past. We follow the main street again and see a sign with a punning suggestion: “You’ll nevAHR walk alone”—a solidarity movement on Facebook, as can be read on further posters. A bus stop is provisionally built on the side of the road with wooden pallets, and a Christmas tree stands next to it. Suddenly, a cemetery is in front of us, whose graves are clearly visible due to its low walls. Partially destroyed gravestones lie around, the rest seems comparatively colorful and orderly, more in line with the visual habits of those we know. After this sighting we turn back and turn left into Schulstraße. The street has something desolate, directly adjacent to it is a construction area and we wonder to what extent the house demolished on it has something to do with the flood disaster. The cold and desolation are underlined by the biting cold of the air. Immediately next to it is a renovated house, in which we recognize a beer bench, a drying machine and various soft drinks in plastic bottles in one room. This picture is also characterized by a juxtaposition of the abandoned and the revitalized, the old and the new seemingly connected by the provisional, and here, too, we can only speculate as to whether the flood disaster contributed to these renovations. The Christmas decoration in and around the house, which can also be recognized, we feel here even more strongly as a mode of maintaining everyday life. What we see at the end of the street shows us drastically the effects of the flooding, when

222

J. D. Fischer and M. Mahler

we look at a tree, in whose crown hangs a tarpaulin, which must have been brought in by the water. We turn right onto the cable car road and walk between a wall of houses and a large meadow area. Bordering on this road we come to a small house that represents the entrance to a wine cellar. The doors are open, so that we look in and see a second closed entrance, which is dirty with mud and garbage carried here (Fig. 8). After a good two hours back at the parking lot, we end our phenomenological walk.

Reflection on the Multisensory Approach In the subsequent analysis of the collected text material, it became apparent that despite the active effort to focus more on non-visual impressions in the acoustic and olfactory dimension, our access to Altenahr was primarily visual. This became especially clear in the quantitative evaluation of our voice recording: the verb ‘to see’ (and forms of it) was

Fig. 8   Temporary container savings bank, handprints made of mud from the flood, entrance to the wine cellar. (Photos: own photographs, taken on December 17, 2021)

Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place? …

223

Fig. 9   Quantitative evaluation of our voice recording. (Own illustration)

used almost twice as often with 119 mentions as the next most frequent verb ‘to find’ with 64 mentions (Fig. 9). This evaluation of our verbalized impressions points in the direction of Berr’s thesis of visual primacy in the perception of landscape (Berr 2022, in this anthology). Furthermore, it became clear in the evaluation that we sought to confirm the medially conveyed visual expectation of Altenahr as a ‘flood-disaster place’ especially by means of the traces and damages of the houses, whereby here the frequencies diverged less strongly. The context of the mentions showed above all that the houses could be compared intuitively on different criteria such as being affected by damage, construction work, abandoned/occupied or Christmas decoration. Four of the five most frequent mentions of nouns were houses, street, bridge and window and underline our orientation towards material objects in our landscape access to Altenahr.

5 Conclusion In our phenomenological walk through a part of Altenahr near the river, diverse and rich impressions could be gained, which we put together as a complex collage of manifold connections and perceptions. Particularly striking was the contrast between the initial impressions of Altenahr as an extinct, abandoned place, created by the eerie silence and the few visible people (and thus we thought our visual expectations of a place of catastrophe confirmed, without including the context of daytime), and the atmosphere of everydayness that emerged more and more in the course of the walk. The perceived ordinariness immediately led to viewing the place as a processual transitional stage towards something newly emergent. Perceptual dichotomies opened up that permeated the walk, including: Disaster/Everyday Life, Stagnation/Process, Enlivened/Abandoned, Old/New, Private/Public. The atmosphere was one of trepidation mixed with everyday busyness. We felt this trepidation due to the social rupture over appropriate behaviors in this place. In the olfactory dimension, a strong smell of those typical of a construction site, such as earth, churned rubble and iron on the one hand and the fresh, cold winter air on the other hand stood out. Auditorily, the hammering of the construction sites, which reflected on the rock walls, as well as the rushing water of the Ahr were outstanding. The Christmas

224

J. D. Fischer and M. Mahler

atmosphere, which should be conveyed by the Christmas decorations, remained rather subordinate, left parallel, however, also the perceived intention of the maintenance of the everydayness. The rocky cliffs surrounding the valley, as well as the castle ruins on the horizon, conveyed a romantic-idyllic flair. The partially windowless, muddy houses, broken streets, knocked-down street lanterns and a broken bridge conveyed devastation. The bright yellow construction barriers, construction cranes and scaffolding again conveyed a construction site atmosphere as well as something provisional and in process. However, the control over what we saw as well as perceived by raising and lowering our gazes enabled us to take in this diverse juxtaposition also separately. These impressions form in various hybrid constellations to the Altenahr we perceived. From our perspective, the phenomenological approach seems to be particularly suitable for objects of investigation framed as disaster sites, since these are associated with high emotional charge and physical object constellations that break with expectations of order. Additionally, a phenomenological walk allows a broad access in immediate experience, which is not only focused on certain aspects, but takes into focus everything that comes within reach. This enables a multifaceted impression of a place or landscape, which can also be profitably linked to other research perspectives to further illuminate the object of research. In the context of disaster research, however, it is advisable to consider the research ethics of when such access should be conducted after a disaster has occurred.

References Berr, K. (2022). Multisensuality versus visual primacy of landscape perception. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne & D. Edler (Ed.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Bruns, D.& Münderlein, D. (2017). Kulturell diverse Landschaftswertschätzung und Visuelle Kommunikation. In O. Kühne, H. Megerle & F. Weber (Ed.), Landschaftsästhetik und Landschaftswandel (pp. 303–318). Wiesbaden: Springer VS (RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft). Burckhardt, L. (2015). Why is Landscape Beautiful? The Science of Strollology. Basel: Birkhäuser. Endreß, S. (2023). Multisensory Landscapes – Smellscapes. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Finlay, L. (2012). Debating Phenomenological Methods. In N. Friesen, C. Henriksson & T. Saevi (Ed.), Hermeneutic Phenomenology in Education. Method and Practice 4, 17– 37. Hasse, J. (2002). Die Atmosphäre einer Straße. Die Drosselgasse in Rüdesheim am Rhein. In J. Hasse (Ed.), Subjektivität in der Stadtforschung. Frankfurt a. M.: Selbstverlag Institut für Didaktik der Geographie, 61–113. Hasse, J. (2012). Atmosphären der Stadt. Aufgespürte Räume. Berlin: Jovis-Verlag. Kazig, R. (2007). Atmosphären – Konzept für einen nicht repräsentationellen Zugang zum Raum. In C. Berndt & R. Pütz (Ed.), Kulturelle Geographien. Zur Beschäftigung mit Raum und Ort nach dem Cultural Turn (pp. 167–187). Bielefeld: transcript. Kazig, R. (2008). Typische Atmosphären städtischer Plätze. Auf dem Weg zu einer anwendungsorientierten Atmosphärenforschung. Die Alte Stadt, 35, (2, 148–160).

Multisensory Approaches to a Disaster Place? …

225

Kazig, R. (2013). Einkaufsatmosphären. Eine alltagsästhetische Konzeption. In H. Schmid, & K. Gäbler (Eds.), Perspektiven sozialwissenschaftlicher Konsumforschung (Geographie, vol. 16, pp. 164–179). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Kazig, R. (2019). Atmosphären und Landschaft. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr, & C. Jenal (Eds.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 453–460). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kazig, R. & Weichhart, P. (2009). Die Neuthematisierung der materiellen Welt in der Humangeographie. Berichte zur deutschen Landeskunde 83 (2), 109–128. Kühne, O. (2014). Wie kommt die Landschaft zurück in die Humangeographie? Plädoyer für eine ‚konstruktivistische Landschaftsgeographie‘. Geographische Zeitschrift 102 (2), 68–85. Kühne, O. (2019a). Phänomenologische Landschaftsforschung. In O. Kühne, F. Weber, K. Berr& C. Jenal (Ed.), Handbuch Landschaft (pp. 135–144). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2019b). Landscape Theories. A Brief Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O. (2021). Landschaftstheorie und Landschaftspraxis. Eine Einführung aus sozial-konstruktivistischer Perspektive, 3. aktual. u. überarb. Auflage. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., Zimmer, M.-L., Schäffauer, G. (2021). “… Inconceivable, Unrealistic and Inhumane”. Internet Communication on the Flood Disaster in West Germany of July 2021 between Conspiracy Theories and Moralization – A Neopragmatic Explorative Study. Sustainability 13 (20), article 11427, pp. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011427. Kühne, O., & Koegst, L. (2023). The multisensory construction of landscape – the computer adventure game “Louisiana: The Secret of the Swamps”. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Linke, S. (2017). Ästhetik, Werte und Landschaft – eine Betrachtung zwischen philoso-phischen Grundlagen und aktueller Praxis der Landschaftsforschung. In O. Kühne, H. Megerle & F. Weber (Ed.), Landschaftsästhetik und Landschaftswandel (pp. 23–40). Wiesbaden: Springer VS (RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft). Ljunge, M. (2013). Beyond ‘the Phenomenological Walk’: Perspectives on the Experi-ence of Images. Norwegian Archaeological Review 46 (2), pp.139–158. Miller, D. S. (2008). Disaster tourism and disaster landscape attractions after Hurricane Katrina. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 2 (2), pp. 115–131. https:// doi.org/10.1108/17506180810880692. Picou, J. S. & Marshall, B. K. (2007). Introduction. Katrina as Pradigm Shift: Reflections on Disaster Research in the Twenty-First Century. In D. L. Brunsma, D. Overfelt & J. S. Picou (Ed.), The Sociology of Katrina. Perspectives on a modern catastrophe (pp.1–20). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Schönwald, A. (2017). Ästhetik des Hybriden. Mehr Bedeutungsoffenheit für Landschaften durch Hybridisierungen. In O. Kühne, H. Megerle & F. Weber (Ed.), Landschaftsästhetik und Landschaftswandel (pp. 161–175). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Thibaud, J.-P. (2003). Die sinnliche Umwelt von Städten. Zum Verständnis urbaner Atmosphären. In M. Hauskeller (Ed.), Die Kunst der Wahrnehmung. Beiträge zu einer Philosophie der sinnlichen Erkenntnis (pp. 280–297). Kusterdingen: SFG-Servicecenter Fachverlage.

226

J. D. Fischer and M. Mahler

Tilley, C. Y. (2008). Body and image. Explorations in landscape phenomenology 2. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press. UNISDR (2009). Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction. https://www.undrr.org/ publication/2009-unisdr-terminology-disaster-risk-reduction. Accessed 13 October 2022. Wylie, J. (2005). A single day’s walking: narrating self and landscape on the South West Coast Path. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 30, (2, 234–247). https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2005.00163.x.

Julia Deborah Fischer  studied sociology and philosophy at the University of Tübingen. Currently she studies human geography—global studies at the University of Tübingen and works as a research assistant at the Chair of Urban and Regional Development. Melanie Mahler  studied sociology and philosophy at the University of Tübingen and examined gender stereotypes and their discursive negotiation processes for her bachelor’s thesis. She is currently studying human geography—global studies at the University of Tübingen and is a research assistant at the Chair of Urban and Regional Development.

Geospatial Data Literacy: Considering the Multisensory Perspective Dennis Edler and Frank Dickmann

Abstract

The competence applied to the selection, (critical) evaluation and usage of modern spatial data resources (geospatial data literacy) is of increasing importance in cartography and geographic information science. A high level of geospatial data literacy is required if people want to construct and visualise landscapes in a high level of detail and on the basis of current software (solutions). This paper aims to present current geospatial data resources. Their potentials for 3D landscape visualization are indicated. Finally, against the background of the possibilities and characteristics of these resources, the requirements for geospatial data literacy in multisensory 3D landscape visualisation are derived and discussed. Keywords

Geospatial Data Literacy · Geodata Literacy · Landscape · 3D Cartography · VGI ·  OpenStreetMap · Virtual Reality · Multisensory

D. Edler (*) · F. Dickmann  Geographisches Institut, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany e-mail: [email protected] F. Dickmann e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_12

227

228

D. Edler and F. Dickmann

1 Introduction Geospatial data is associated with digital representations of spatial structures and processes. Phenomena on the earth’s surface can thus be described approximately with the help of geographic information systems and 2D/3D cartographic visualisations. The results are models with which spatial reality can be explained or even shaped (Dickmann 2018, p. 13). Modern forms of visualisation (GIS-based, virtual reality, augmented reality etc.) can only be used as information repositories, but primarily as interactive analysis and communication tools (Dickmann 2021). The analysis and visualisation of landscapes require geographers and cartographers who have increasing expertise in critically reflecting and using geospatial data (including ethical standards). The competence to be able to acquire, select and process (incl. analyse and visualise) geospatial data in a problem-oriented manner is referred to as geodata literacy or geospatial data literacy (see e.g. Edler and Kühne 2022; Jürgens 2020), following the concept of data literacy (e.g. Koltay 2016; Mandinach et al. 2015; Wolff et al. 2016). The increasing relevance of geospatial data literacy is accompanied and influenced by a growing availability of various geospatial data resources that are created, edited and published by different institutions and communities. In particular, developments from the worldwide (online) connected gaming community have led to an expansion of available data sets. Since the mid-2010s, they have been used for deriving and creating high quality and up-to-date digital geospatial data products, such as infographics, maps and 3D landscape (re)constructions. This article first presents basic current geospatial data sources. These refer to geospatial data from official data-holding agencies, voluntarily collected geodata (Volunteered Geographic Information, VGI) and 3D visualisations from the gaming community. Based on several examples, their current potentials for the geospatial data community are indicated and discussed. The offers of commercially available geospatial data are also considered in this article. However, due to its lack of access options, commercial geospatial data is not put in the focus. At the end of the article, the multisensory dimension of 3D landscape visualisation and its significance for geospatial data literacy are emphasised. In this contribution, the concept of landscape, in the ‘classical’ sense of cartography, is based on a positivist understanding (Kühne et al. 2021; more details about landscape theory in this volume: Kühne et al. 2023a, b).

2 Official Geospatial Data In the history of the development of geospatial data or geospatial data resources and infrastructures, geospatial data are often associated with the publishing bodies of official geodata-holding agencies. National agencies, such as the United States Geological Survey (USGS), Ordnance Survey (OS; in the UK) or the Federal Agency for Cartography

Geospatial Data Literacy …

229

and Geodesy (BKG; in Germany), are considered geospatial data sources with (different) public duties and functions. Since the 1980s, this state mandate for the institutional management and maintenance of geospatial data has been addressed by representatives of Critical Cartography (e.g. Crampton and Krygier 2005; Glasze 2009; Harley 1989; Wood 1992; see also Edler and Kühne 2022; Kühne 2021. The management and maintenance of geospatial data and the publication of derived products, such as official maps with their own recording and generalisation criteria, was interpreted as the preservation and perpetuation of power structures and state monopolisation, while at the same time cartography was proposed as a participatory process involving many stakeholders. A look at current approaches to geospatial data publication by official data-holding agencies (in Western countries) makes it clear that many data is made available to the public, without vastly restricting licensing conditions. For example, this refers to digital terrain models that could be further processed in different scenarios, such as a 3D simulation of water-flow behavior in mountaneous areas (Fig. 1). In addition, textures from high-resolution aerial photographs enable more realistic impressions of the terrain surface. 3D city models are also available as open data in order to apply 3D landscapes to (large-scale) geographical research questions in urban space, such as heavy rainfall problems, disaster prevention and population protection, the flow behaviour of warm and cold air or planning scenarios in neighbourhood development.

Fig. 1   A 3D model of the Zillergrund (side valley of the Zillertal in Austria) is based on official geospatial data, and it is used to recreate the existing topography or relief structure (in the game engine Unity)

230

D. Edler and F. Dickmann

Due to their property of ‘being official’, geospatial data of official agencies are subject to high quality and up-to-dateness standards within professional practice. The realiability of this data is very high. Additional quality assurance initiatives conducted by the users before the further processing of the data (on-site inspections, data reconciliation, etc.) become rather irrelevant. The legal embedding of official geospatial data regulates their characteristics and properties. It also explains and justifies their purpose for the public. There is potential for expansion through their currently increasing publication as open data sets with unrestricted licence models, such as the “Data Licence Germany—Zero—Version 2.0”. This licence allows that data (including metadata) can “be copied, printed, presented, altered, processed and transmitted to third parties; be merged with own data and with the data of others and be combined to form new and independent datasets; be integrated in internal and external business processes, products and applications in public and non-public electronic networks” for commercial and non-commercial purposes. (GovData 2022). These licence conditions, which are currently valid for the official geospatial data of the surveying and cadastral administration in North Rhine-Westphalia, among others, not only increase flexibility in further data processing, but also encourage creative extensions by the users. This approach is reminiscent of structures that were already established and represented at earlier times by volunteering communities for the collection of open geospatial data (especially OpenStreetMap).

3 Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) Voluntarily collected geographic data and information (Volunteered Geographic Information—VGI) have been an increasingly important resource in the geo(information) sciences for several years, with a clear impact by Michael F. Goodchild (2007) (see, for example, Bill et al. 2022; Brandeis and Carrera Zamanillo 2017; Forsch et al. 2022; Keil et al. 2022; Rienow 2022). Current priority projects on basic research, such as in cartography (cf. Burghardt 2022), illustrate the importance of “Citizen Empowered Mapping” (Leitner and Arsanjani 2017), also accompanied by “Citizen Science” (Fritz et al. 2019). Closely related to the developments on VGI is the project OpenStreetMap (operated by the OpenStreetMap Foundation). Since 2004, It has pursued the goal of making open geospatial data available worldwide, while the collection and further development has been driven by volunteering mappers, in the sense of crowdsourcing. The OpenStreetMap project can be seen as a counterpart to proprietary and governmentally institutionalized projects offering geospatial data. Based on different methodological approaches, users can process OSM data, beyond retrievable map services. For example, download services on their own project websites or via QGIS extensions offer the possibility of spatially filtering individual data and downloading them in modern, above all open geodata formats (e.g. GeoJSON). The webbased data mining tool Overpass turbo, for example, offers the possibility to query and

Geospatial Data Literacy …

231

download geospatial data from OpenStreetMap according to content and spatial criteria. The semantic diversity of the data and information (attributes or properties) linked to standard geometries (primarily points, but also lines and areas; cf. Knura and Schiewe 2022) depends on the content fed in by the voluntary OSM mappers. Figure 2 gives an example of a restaurant in Herne, for which semantic properties on WiFi access and barrier-free use with wheelchairs, for example, is also stored. These descriptive (additional) details cannot be found in official geodata, especially, since there is currently no public mandate to maintain a comprehensive (official) cadastre of pub locations. The selected case study indicates the potential for storing additional semantic information on geoobjects. It should also be emphasised that the timeliness and accuracy of the data do not meet the standards that can be expected of official geodata. The same applies to 3D geodata (Fig. 3), which can also be derived from OSM data and processed in modern 3D graphics software and game engines. The collection of established kinds of VGI also includes big data from social media. Various research projects (see, among others, Mukherjee et al. 2022; Zahtila and Knura

Fig. 2   Selected point geometries from the OSM project, pub locations in Herne, via https://overpass-turbo.eu/. (©OpenStreetMap Contributors)

232

D. Edler and F. Dickmann

Fig. 3   3D building models of the Ruhr University Bochum campus, edited in Blender. (©OpenStreetMap Contributors)

2022; Suarez and Clarke 2022) are based on analyses and also visualisations of corresponding social media data. Even if only a small part of the data fed into social media is geotagged or location-based, there is a daily growing pool of data that is based on voluntary activities and is generally not bound to any public duties. In addition, innovations in sensor technology make it possible to capture and process other kinds of VGI. Smartphones and (other) GPS-based devices support the collection of spatial or location-based information (Huang and Gartner 2012). Mass-market (ultralightweight) drones can also be used to acquire 3D geospatial data and derive photorealistic textured (virtual reality compatible) building models (Weißmann et al. 2022). Figure 4 gives an example of a 3D model of a post-industrial landmark (wage hall from the mining era in the Ruhr area) captured and created with an (ultra-lightweight) drone.

4 (3D-)Objects from the Gaming Community In the previous chapter, it was already indicated that VGI, such as self-collected drone data, can lead to 3D objects in VR environments that are technically and methodologically based on the possibilities of game engines. Since the mid-2010s, it has become obvious that the worldwide online-connected gaming community is increasingly sharing data. The possibility of formerly proprietary software which can now be freely accessed,

Geospatial Data Literacy …

233

Fig. 4   3D model (incl. 3D recording points) of the old wage hall on the grounds of the Bonifacius colliery in Essen, captured with the ultra-light and foldable drone quadcopter DJI Mini 2. (Created by Marco Weißmann & Dennis Edler)

such as the game engine Unreal Engine, invites, in addition to (commercial) developer companies, interested hobby modellers to create their own 3D models. They are invited to translate their private interest in leisure activities into individually created (VR compatible) 3D landscapes. The can offer, share and discuss their models using their own websites or via other online exchange platforms that are connected to the game engines. This “homebrew data”, as long as they are based on voluntary activities and non-commercial interests, can be considered a relatively young, specific kind of VGI (Edler et al. 2021). Even if these modelled data are not based on a unique (geo-)coordinate key, the unique spatial reference of these data is often available, such as for known and clearly identifiable (urban) landmarks. Unique (geo)spatial references can also be established in 3D environments for objects that can occur at different locations on earth, e.g. vegetation types, buildings with certain architectural styles or built-up areas of certain urban structure types. Examples of such freely available 3D objects can be found in thematic object collections (assets), e.g. on the Marketplace associated wit Unreal Engine. The 3D objects provided can be used, for example, to create 3D forest landscapes, including water bodies and moss, herb, shrub and tree layers (Edler 2022). Water flow behaviour can also be visualised and simulated (at least to some extent) on the basis of “physics engines” interacting with game engines (Fig. 5).

234

D. Edler and F. Dickmann

Fig. 5   3D forest landscape based on free assets in the Unreal Engine Marketplace. (Created by Timo Wiedenlübbert & Dennis Edler)

5 Geospatial Data Literacy in 3D Landscape Visualisation The current geospatial data resources presented above pose specific challenges to the “creators” and their geospatial data literacy in the application field of 3D visualisation. 3D landscapes, such as VR-supported environments, are linked to the fact that ‘classic’ cartographic method and process mechanisms of generalisation (in the sense of simplification of the represented content, adapted to the viewing scale or in the case of 3D representations to the viewing perspective) cannot be used regularly due to the variable viewing scale and the level of detail required. In the construction of 3D landscapes, it must be ensured (for the achievement of a high-quality product and also for promoting immersion during use) that a high (photorealistic) level of detail is available. This becomes particularly clear with 3D landscapes in VR when users explore the 3D landscape from the first-person perspective as an ‘avatar’ (human alter ego, including movement behaviour; see Keil et al. 2021a). Accordingly, the VR creator’s knowledge must be large in terms of applicable (geospatial) data that are available in appropriate quality. Compared to (generalised) 2D cartography, the amount of data to be processed is usually fundamentally higher. Due to the required level of detail, the (open and free) use of already existing, elaborately modelled 3D objects becomes attractive—given there is a certain available

Geospatial Data Literacy …

235

Fig. 6   Section of the VR landscape of the post-industrial area of the Holland Colliery in BochumWattenscheid (see Edler et al. 2019a). (Created by Melvin Sossna, Timo Wiedenlübbert & Dennis Edler)

(project) time frame for 3D landscape visualisation. The requirement to model all details newly and independently often requires many working hours, which might possibly lead to a reduction of project efficiency. The 3D geospatial data sources for terrain representation (official data) and for 3D building or city modelling (official 3D city models, OSM 3D data and 3D “homebrew data” from the gaming community) become particularly relevant. The most accurate, i.e. spatially precise, relief representation and high-quality 3D building models become criteria for data selection. In addition, there is expertise on how to operate modern software solutions (in game engines). At present, input data are often still not VR-compatible, so that users must be aware of further steps of geodata processing (cf. Edler et al. 2019a; Keil et al. 2021b; Lütjens et al. 2019). In addition, there are necessary competences for aspects, such as animation, interaction and illumination. This is required for the further processing of the geospatial data or 3D objects used for a realistic and immersive real-time setting. An example combining the various current geospatial data resources in a game engine-supported VR project is shown in Fig. 6. The VR landscape is based on official geodata for terrain topography, on 3D building objects from OpenStreetMap and on free assets from the gaming community (cars, trees, animated (walking) people). The 3D landmark (shaft tower) was based on individual modelling within the project.

236

D. Edler and F. Dickmann

6 Geospatial Data Literacy: The Multisensory Layer Beyond the potentials of 3D landscape visualisation, geospatial data literacy also leads to the consideration of further analytical questions of geography and landscape research. The creation of immersive 3D transformations in virtual reality can lead to ‘standardised’ simulations of ‘physical-material landscapes’. These (3D cartographic) media can be used in (quantitative and qualitative) empirical settings of social research. The potentials for social constructivist landscape research, such as the derivation of individual spatial interpretation and evaluation patterns of post-industrial landscapes (cf. Fig. 6) from immersive VR environments, have already been discussed in first examples (Edler et al. 2018). Moreover, these (3D cartographic) media have the advantage of a standardization (equal conditions) in empirical tests or data collection processes. Individual disturbing influences which may occur on-site can be omitted, which may contribute to the robustness of empirical data. This also contributes to an analytical-methodological expansion potential from physiological research in cognitive sciences. Standardised and, at the same time, realistic settings of (lab-based) VR research can be expanded with VR-compatible hardware equipment. For example, smart watches and other modern measuring devices for electrodermal activity can be used to physiologically determine or analyze stress (cf. Fabrikant et al. 2012, see also Fish 2021). In VR-based studies, behavioural data of (study) participants can be coupled with eye-movement data and their physiological data. This interplay of (quantitative) measures, with additional expansion potential to qualitative data, can help to support, for example, the detailed detailed planning in sustainable urban development. The standardization of a simulated 3D landscape, which can be immersively experienced, also includes multisensory stimuli. Beyond the visual dimension, the soundscape can be created (in a standardised sequence). In VR environments, acoustic disturbances can be prevented and sounds or sound sequences oriented to the research problem can be emphasised. In this way, the acoustic dimension (soundscape) can be more strongly oriented towards a specific geographical problem, e.g. well-being with certain natural sounds in urban green spaces (river sounds, birdsong) or well-being in smart city scenarios (including a reduced traffic noise due to more electric vehicles; Fig. 7). Thus, Intensity parameters of the soundscape (e.g. volume or directions) can also be integrated and tested in a more targeted manner. The potentials of immersive 3D soundscapes through virtual reality bring additional demands on geospatial data literacy for VR creators. The design fields of sound creation and sound processing are becoming more relevant for 3D landscape creation (beyond established 2D approaches of audiovisual cartography; cf. Edler et al. 2019b; Krygier 1994; Lakso and Sarjakoski 2010). Sound integration in VR landscapes also needs to be mastered in software terms. Beyond the issues of processing auditory (geospatial data), multisensory geospatial data literacy includes knowing and selecting sources, such as free online sound databases (e.g. https://freesound.org/). Comparable to geospatial data projects from the field of VGI (cf. OpenStreetMap), sound sequences from differ-

Geospatial Data Literacy …

237

Fig. 7   An urban traffic situation including sound-omitting cars. The users experience a scenario with a reduced loudness and more electric cars. (Created by Marco Weißmann & Dennis Edler)

ent users are stored and shared here, which can be further processed (following different licence models). The competence to identify and process high-quality sounds and sound sequences is a rather new and very creative field of geospatial data literacy in order to create modern immersive 3D landscapes. While sound is a default parameter in VR software (game engines), the integration of olfactory stimuli is rather in its beginning (e.g. Micaroni et al. 2019). The future levels of geospatial data literacy are thus leaving the, so far, almost exclusive orientation towards ‘classic’ geospatial data resources, but are increasingly opening up to interdisciplinary potentials. This includes sensory expansion, such as auditory and olfactory geospatial data (cf. Dodt et al. 2017; Hamburger and Knauff 2019; Kühne and Edler 2022; McLean 2021). In general, there are also promising prospects for social constructivist and (positivistic) cognitive psychological research with new methodological approaches and spatial ‘follow-up data’ for analytical evaluation.

References Bill, R., Blankenbach, J., Breunig, M., Haunert, J.-H., Heipke, C., Herle, S., Maas, H.-G., Mayer, H., Meng, L., Rottensteiner, F., Schiewe, J., Sester, M., Sörgel, U. & Werner, M., (2022). Geospatial Information Research: State of the Art, Case Studies and Future Perspectives. PFG – Journal of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Geoinformation Science 90, 349–389. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s41064-022-00217-9. Brandeis, M.-N. W. & Carrera Zamanillo, M. I. (2017). Finding Meaningful Participation in Volunteer Geographic Information and Citizen Science: A Case Comparison in Environmental Application. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 44 (6), 539–550. https://doi.org/10.1 080/15230406.2016.1221779.

238

D. Edler and F. Dickmann

Burghardt, D. (2022) Editorial: Special Issue “VGI and Geovisualisation”. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 72 (3), 185–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-02200118-2. Crampton, J. & Krygier, J.B. (2005). An introduction to Critical Cartography. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 4 (1), 11–33. Dickmann, F. (2018). Kartographie. Braunschweig: Westermann. Dickmann, F. (2021). Aktuelle Ansätze landschaftlicher Repräsentationen in Karten. In W. Kreisel, P.H. Marsden & T. Reeh, T. (Eds.), Die Landschaft interpretieren: Interdisziplinäre Ansätze; Interpreting Landscape: Interdisciplinary approaches (pp. 85–106). Göttingen: Universitätsdrucke Göttingen. https://doi.org/10.17875/gup2021-1603. Dodt, J., Bestgen, A.-K. & Edler, D. (2017). Ansätze der Erfassung und kartographischen Präsentation der olfaktorischen Dimension. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 67 (5), 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03545321. Edler, D., Kühne, O., Jenal, C., Vetter, M. & Dickmann, F. (2018). Potenziale der Raumvisualisierung in Virtual Reality (VR) für die sozialkonstruktivistische Landschaftsforschung. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 68 (5), 245–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF03545421. Edler, D., Keil, J., Wiedenlübbert, T., Sossna, M., Kühne, O. & Dickmann, F. (2019a). Immersive VR Experience of Redeveloped Post-Industrial Sites: The Example of “Zeche Holland” in Bochum-Wattenscheid. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 69 (4), 267–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-019-00030-2. Edler, D., Kühne, O., Keil, J. & Dickmann, F. (2019b). Audiovisual Cartography: Established and New Multimedia Approaches to Represent Soundscapes. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 69 (1), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-019-00004-4. Edler, D., Keil, J. & Dickmann, F. (2021). From Na Pali to Earth – An ‘Unreal’ Engine for Modern Geodata? In D. Edler, O. Kühne & C. Jenal (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 279–291). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-30956-5_15. Edler, D. (2022). Von der Waldfunktionenkarte zum interaktiven und animierten 3D-Modell in immersiver Virtual Reality (VR)? Aktuelle Möglichkeiten zur Visualisierung von Wäldern mit offenen Geodaten. In K. Berr & C. Jenal (Hrsg.), Wald in der Vielfalt möglicher Perspektiven. Von der Pluralität lebensweltlicher Bezüge und wissenschaftlicher Thematisierungen (pp. 425– 439). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-33705-6_20. Edler, D. & Kühne, O. (2022). Deviant Cartographies: A Contribution to Post-critical Cartography. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 72 (2), 103–116. https://doi. org/10.1007/s42489-022-00110-w. Forsch, A., Amann, F. & Haunert, JH. (2022). Visualizing the Off-Screen Evolution of Trajectories. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 72 (3), 201–212. https://doi. org/10.1007/s42489-022-00106-6. Fabrikant, S.I., Christophe, S., Papastefanou, G., Lanini-Maggi, S. (2012). Emotional Response to Map Design Aesthetics. GIScience 2012: Seventh International Conference on Geographic Information Science, Columbus, OH, 18–21 September 2012. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-71701. Fish, C.S. (2021). Elements of Vivid Cartography. The Cartographic Journal 58 (2), 150–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/00087041.2020.1800160. Fritz, S., See, L., Carlson, T., Haklay, M., Oliver, J., Fraisl, D., Mondardini, R., Brocklehurst, M., Shanley, L., Schade, S., Wehn, U., Abrate, T., Anstee, J., Arnold, S., Billot, M., Campbell, J., Parker, A., Gold, M., Hager, G., He, S., Hepburn, L., Hsu, A., Long, D., Masó, J., McCallum, I., Muniafu, M., Moorthy, I., Obersteiner, M., Weissplug, M. & West, S. (2019). Citizen Science and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Sustainability 2 (10), 922–930. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0390-3. Glasze, G. (2009). Kritische Kartographie. Geographische Zeitschrift 97 (4), 181–191.

Geospatial Data Literacy …

239

Goodchild, M.F. (2007). Citizens as Sensors: The World of Volunteered Geography. GeoJournal 69, 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-007-9111-y. GovData (2022): DL-DE->Zero-2.0. https://www.govdata.de/dl-de/zero-2-0. Zugegriffen: 1. Oktober 2022 Hamburger, K. & Knauff, M. (2019). Odors Can Serve as Landmarks in Human Wayfinding. Cognitive Science. A Multidisciplinary Journal 43 (11), e12798. https://doi.org/10.1111/ cogs.12798. Harley, J.B. (1989). Deconstructing the Map. Cartographica 26 (2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3138/ E635-7827-1757-9T53. Huang, H. & Gartner, G. (2012). Collective Intelligence-based Route Recommendation for Assisting Pedestrian Wayfinding in the Era of Web 2.0. Journal of Location Based Services 6 (1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17489725.2011.625302. Jürgens, C. (2020). Trustworthy COVID-19 Mapping: Geo-Spatial Data Literacy Aspects of Choropleth Maps. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 70 (4), 155–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-020-00057-w. Keil, J., Edler, D., O’Meara, D., Korte A. & Dickmann, F. (2021a). Effects of Virtual Reality Locomotion Techniques on Distance Estimations. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 10 (3), 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10030150. Keil, J., Edler, D., Schmitt, T. & Dickmann, F. (2021b). Creating Immersive Virtual Environments Based on Open Geospatial Data and Game Engines. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 71 (1), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-020-00069-6. Keil, J., Edler, D., Dickmann, F. & Kuchinke, L. (2022). Uncertainties in Spatial Orientation: Critical Limits for Landmark Inaccuracies in Maps in the Context of Map Matching. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 72 (3), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-022-00105-7. Knura, M. & Schiewe, J. (2022). Analysis of User Behaviour While Interpreting Spatial Patterns in Point Data Sets. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 72 (3), 229–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-022-00111-9. Koltay, T. (2016). Data Governance, Data Literacy and the Management of Data Quality. IFLA Journal 42 (2), 303–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035216672238. Krygier, J.B. (1994). Sound and Geographic Visualization. In A.M. MacEachren & D.R.F. Taylor (Eds.), Visualization in Modern Cartography (pp. 149–166). New York: Pergamon. Kühne, O. (2021). Contours of a ‘Post-Critical’ Cartography – A Contribution to the Dissemination of Sociological Cartographic Research. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 71 (3), 133–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-021-00080-5. Kühne, O. Edler, D. & Jenal, C. (2021). A Multi-Perspective View on Immersive Virtual Environments (IVEs). ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 10 (8), 518. https://doi. org/10.3390/ijgi10080518. Kühne, O. & Edler, D. (2022). Georg Simmel Goes Virtual: From ‘Philosophy of Landscape’ to the Possibilities of Virtual Reality in Landscape Research. Societies 12 (5), 122. https://doi. org/10.3390/soc12050122. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Laakso, M. & Sarjakoski, L.T. (2010). Sonic Maps for Hiking – Use of Sound in Enhancing the Map Use Experience. The Cartographic Journal 47 (4), 300–307. https://doi.org/10.1179/0008 70410X12911298276237. Leitner, M. & Arsanjani J.J. (2017). Citizen Empowered Mapping. Cham: Springer International.

240

D. Edler and F. Dickmann

Lütjens, M., Kersten, T.P., Dorschel, B. & Tschirschwitz (2019). Virtual Reality in Cartography: Immersive 3D Visualization of the Arctic Clyde Inlet (Canada) Using Digital Elevation Models and Bathymetric Data. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 3 (1), 9. https://doi. org/10.3390/mti3010009. Mandinach, E.B., Parton, B.M., Gummer, E.S. & Anderson, R. (2015). Ethical and Appropriate Data Use Requires Data Literacy. Phi Delta Kappan 96 (5), 25–28. https://doi. org/10.1177/003172171556946. McLean, K. (2021). Temporalities of the Smellscape: Creative Mapping as Visual Representation. In D, Edler, C. Jenal & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 217–245). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-30956-5_12. Micaroni, L., Carulli, M., Ferrise, F., Gallace, A. & Bordegoni, M. (2019). An Olfactory Display to Study the Integration of Vision and Olfaction in a Virtual Reality Environment. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering 19 (3), 031015. https://doi. org/10.1115/1.4043068. Mukherjee, S., Hauthal, E. & Burghardt, D. (2022). Analyzing the EU Migration Crisis as Reflected on Twitter. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 72 (3), 213– 228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-022-00114-6. Rienow, A. (2022). Volunteered Geographic Information for Sustainable Urban Development. In J.M. Gurr, R. Parr & D. Hardt (Eds.), Metropolitan Research: Methods and Approaches (pp. 205–222). Bielefeld: Transcript urban studies. Suarez, A.M. & Clarke, K.C. (2022). A Geographical and Content-based Approach to Prioritize Relevant and Reliable Tweets for Emergency Management. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 49 (5), 443–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2022.2081257. Weißmann, M., Edler, D. & Rienow, A. (2022). Potentials of Low-Budget Microdrones: Processing 3D Point Clouds and Images for Representing Post-Industrial Landmarks in Immersive Virtual Environments. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 9, 886240. https://doi.org/10.3389/ frobt.2022.886240. Wolff, A., Gooch, D., Cavero Montaner, J.J., Rashid, U. & Kortuem, G. (2016). Creating an Understanding of Data Literacy for a Data-driven Society. The Journal of Community Informatics 12 (3), 9–26. https://doi.org/10.15353/joci.v12i3.3275. Wood, D. (1992). The Power of Maps. New York: The Guilford Press. Zahtila, M. & Knura, M. (2022). Visualizing Point Density on Geometry Objects: Application in an Urban Area Using Social Media VGI. KN – Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information 72 (3), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-022-00113-7.

Dennis Edler  is Senior Lecturer in the Institute of Geography at Ruhr-University Bochum (RUB). His research and teaching activities refer to Multimedia Cartography, Cognitive Visualization and Geospatial Data Infrastructures. [email protected] Frank Dickmann  is Professor of Cartography and Geographic Information Science in the Institute of Geography at the Ruhr-University Bochum (RUB). [email protected]

Street-Food and Multisensorial Construction of Cityscapes Nipesh Palat Narayanan

Abstract

The way we conceptualize cities, influence the way we operate in them and vice versa. This makes practices an important heuristic tool for analysing and comprehending cityscapes. This chapter will investigate the social construction of Delhi (India) using sight, smell, and taste as analytical categories, derived from practices around production, sale, and consumption of momos (dumplings). I will outline how the production locations, points of sale, and momos in online conversations, construct various Delhi(s). Thus, exploring the gustatory dimension of landscapes. Keywords

Street-food · Southern Theory · Gustatory dimension of Landscape · Cityscapes · Momos ·  Delhi

1 Introduction All edible items are not food. Food is socio-culturally constructed (Palat Narayanan 2022b). What would be considered a delicacy in one context could be seen with disgust or altogether be illegal in another. The same could be said about cities, e.g., the governmental definition of cities are different in different contexts (c.f., Sridhar 2020). In this N. Palat Narayanan (*)  Centre Urbanisation Culture Société, Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS), Montreal, QC, Canada e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_13

241

242

N. Palat Narayanan

chapter, I will juxtapose city and food (two socio-culturally constructed entities) using the case of momos in Delhi, to understand the multisensorial construction of landscapes. That is, to investigate landscapes by focusing on cityscapes and foodscapes. Momos are dumplings sold on the streets of Delhi as an evening snack, which are mostly steamed but sometimes fried or baked. Although momos are sold throughout the year, their consumption increases in winter. Winters in Delhi are fairly moderate with occasional dips to 4 °C. Compared to the extreme heat during summers (around 45 °C), winters allow for activities and street food like momos thrives during this period.1 Walking along the streets, one can easily spot a momo stall, with steam coming out and people standing around it eating. The composition of consumers change based on the locality, but in general, there is a relative diversity of class, sex, and age. Momos are now available in most neighbourhood markets and outside metro stations of Delhi. Momos, thus could easily qualify as the ‘Delhi street food’, which is further perpetuated by street food festivals that feature momos or exclusively momo festivals that are organized in the city. These practices tend to make momos a characteristic of Delhi by essentializing and creating an identity of the city by food (c.f., Del Casino 2015; Goodman 2016; Sedelmeier et al. 2022 for more on foodscapes, food geographies). Delhi’s centrality amongst cities in the region further reinforces this identity (c.f., Palat Narayanan 2020a for more on centrality of Delhi in the knowledge production networks). Momos are ubiquitous street food, but nonetheless also contested. Momos are understood as a foreign food which has become quintessentially of Delhi. Its foreignness is entangled in the identity politics (Singh 2017) and its popularity is exploited by enterprises. However, the story of momos as an identity of Delhi changes when we read it from a manufacturing point of view rather than that of consumption. Momos are largely produced in small-scale household manufacturing centres run by an individual or a small group. Most of them operate from residential properties, adapted to cooking in small scale. However, these small-scale household manufacturing centres cannot be located anywhere in Delhi. There are societal controls and coercions which drive momo manufacturers out of many neighbourhoods. These controls and coercions are more diffused compared to the modernist planning rationale of cityscapes which pushes industries outside of the cities. Most momos sold on the streets are produced in Chirag Dilli, a south Delhi neighbourhood. Momos are ubiquitous but momo makers are spatially constricted to a part of the city. In an abstract sense, momo industry is both universal (when we read its consumption) and spatially constricted/local (when we read its production). How do we understand this contradiction of being universal and local at the same time? It relates to the need to have momos but not its makers, both of whom, mark the landscape (or the cityscape) of Delhi. This phenomenon is related to how the knowledge about both Delhi and momos are socio-culturally constructed. In this light, the chapter takes a critical constructivist position on knowledge, derived from Freire’s (2000) work. Thus, if landscapes

1 There

are also summer specific street food in Delhi.

Street-Food and Multisensorial Construction of Cityscapes

243

are the way we understand (and alter) our environment, the critical constructivist position, juxtaposes these various (subjective) constructs to outline the dominant discourses and provide routes to resist accepted oppressive nexus of power and knowledge (concerning landscape theory, see in this volume: Küne et al. 2023a, b). City, of course, as any landscape, is perceived through multiple senses and subjectively imagined into a being (Palat Narayanan et al. 2022). If the senses are varied, then the notion of city (and imageries) is also bound to be multiple. However, the juxtaposition of these imageries (or parts thereof) is a political act, to contest the power-knowledge nexus. This contestation in myriad forms have been attempted by various authors working with southern theory (Mohan et al. 2021; Palat Narayanan 2021; Patel 2014). Delhi or momos is a case which could help us uncover a general phenomenon, i.e., of multisensorial construction of multiple cityscapes and its impact on how people operate in and on them. Momos, therefore, allow for conceptualizing the gustatory dimension of landscapes. The argument presented in this chapter draws from two datasets. First, from fieldworks in Delhi carried out in 2015, 2016, and 2020, using participant observation, interviews, and focus group discussions. The second dataset consists of Twitter feeds collected using the keywords ‘Delhi + Momos’ over a period of 10 years (2010–2020). All names used in this chapter are pseudonyms and the tweets quoted are without the names of the tweeter. Furthermore, momos are available in restaurants (and in places beyond Delhi or India), however, this chapter investigates only the practices related to its street vending in Delhi. In the following section, I will discuss how momos is constructed to be identified with Delhi. Thereafter, the section on its manufacturing and spatial constriction will follow. In the final section, I will discuss how through these practices, the same city is understood differently, leading to the notion of multiple Delhi(s).

2 The Ubiquitous Momos Like any city, Delhi is also diverse in terms of class, caste, ethnicity, and linguistic affiliations. Delhi may be a bit special in this aspect amongst other cities, in that it is a historical capital tracing back its heritage to around 1000 BC, however, majority of the current population have migrated post-independence (1947).2 The partition (based on religion) of the then British India into independent India and Pakistan in 1947, led the vast majority of Muslim residents of Delhi to move out and equally large number of non-Muslims (mainly Hindus and Sikhs) to move in. This also led to a shift in cultural composition. Over the years, as the city grew, people from different parts of the country and outside

2 Population

of Delhi in 1947 was circa 950,000, which rose to circa 1,744,000 in 1951, to circa 16,752,000 in 2011.

244

N. Palat Narayanan

moved to Delhi. With diverse set of people also came different cuisines, which became part of Delhi. Momos is one such import. Who brought momos to Delhi is a difficult question, because various dumplings (known with different names from dim-sum to mantu) are part of culinary cultures across the ancient silk route. However, in Delhi, the two prevalent beliefs are that either the Tibetans (who came as refugees during the 1960s) or Nepalis (who worked in Delhi) brought momos to Delhi and made them popular. Although there are some Tibetans who sell momos on the streets (including some of the famous ones) majority of the vendors are either from Nepal or other parts of India (mostly from around Darjeeling). This diversity withstanding, on ground, bodies of momo vendors are racially typecasted (based on mongoloid features) and discriminated against (c.f., McDuie-Ra 2012; Wouters and Subba 2013). While the momo makers are racially typecasted, the momo itself takes on local variations and is known as of Delhi. From paneer momos (Indian cottage cheese) to removal of beef,3 has transformed momos in manners that it could be sold almost everywhere in Delhi and become unique to the place. This ubiquitous availability is important to the imageries which are constructed of Delhi via momos. Momos now has a big consumer base, as one of the vendors told me: I have a tea stall, but I make much more money selling momos than selling tea. Everyone eats momos and whatever I make for a day, is sold. People mainly come to my stall for momos and tea now is just a side-business.

This large consumer base has also made the existence of momo vending location banal. This banality is important, for being banal helps momos be available across Delhi, although not without spatial contestations. I will discuss the spatial controls and contestations in the next section, here let us look at the availability of momos and its renderings. Social media is a pertinent dataset to analyse the renderings of momos and that of Delhi, capturing a wide and diverse sample. How people use momos to express facets of Delhi gives a glimpse of multiple imaginations and construction of the cityscapes (c.f., Bellentani 2016 for a discussion on landscapes as text; and, Loda et al. 2020 on social construction of landscapes). By imaginations, I mean the answer to the question: What is Delhi? A universal answer to this question is impossible (as for any city), but the totality of Delhi is subjectively imagined. Availability of momos is one such imagination. Thus, availability of momos is generally imagined as an identity and a marker of Delhi’s image, e.g., a July 2012 tweet read:

3 Eating

cow meat for some Hindus is a Taboo. Slaughter of cows is illegal in some states of India, including Delhi. This legal and religious restrictions self-sensors the use of other bovine meat (e.g., buffalo meat, which neither has religious or legal sanctions, is rarely sold openly). Thus, beef (noncow meat) is available only in momos served in exclusive locations.

Street-Food and Multisensorial Construction of Cityscapes

245

Apart from all the monuments n [and] Politics, Delhi has “Momos” which is quite significant here n [and] defines it. What’s unique about your city??

The above tweet acknowledges the built heritage of Delhi, alongside it being the capital of India. However, these facets (built heritage and politics) are not considered unique, while momos are rendered as what defines Delhi. Another tweet from November 2019, encapsulates this understanding of momos using a popular prose structure: Main Momos likhu tum Delhi samajhna (I will write momos, but you read it as Delhi’).

We can see such renderings regularly being constructed in social media, which are often derived from people’s appreciation of momos in Delhi. In this appreciation, apart from few popular spots, momos generally are identified by the place, e.g., Delhi momos, or Yashwant Place momos, or Kamla Nagar momos, which are neighbourhoods of Delhi. At one scale the identity of Delhi is constructed via momos (as in the above tweets) and within Delhi, the identity of various neighbourhoods are further co-constructed with that of the momos. That is, momos mark the identity of Delhi and the identity of momos are marked by various neighbourhoods of Delhi. These locations and their momos come to subjectively identify Delhi for different residents/users. A comic tweet from October 2019 captures this well: I have mastered the art of small talk with clients from Delhi. Just start every conversation with ‘I’ve had the best momos at...’ and they will all jump to tell you how their area has the world’s best Michelin star approved momos.

The defining of momos from Delhi, or the identity of momos from various Delhi neighbourhoods is not just limited to the object of momos itself. The performance of eating and the manner of eating are equally important in the imagination of Delhi and its various neighbourhoods. It should be noted here that Delhi neighbourhoods are large (areawise) and thus entails a high diversity in terms of economic status, housing types, and ethnicity. Thus, essentializing any neighbourhood is a subjective act to be able to make sense of this large city and construct subjective imageries (which may be shared by a larger group). An example of this is the imagery of South Delhi (which is a district of Delhi and not a neighbourhood). This large district is often equated with economic prosperity and snobbish behaviours. This image of South Delhi manifests in multiple ways, e.g., in 2019 the Delhi Government made metro train rides free for women. A person in June 2019 posted his opinion against this move as: Great, now annoying south Delhi girls who have a pocket money of *insert 1/3rd of daddy’s salary* get to travel for free to have tandoori momos while Appu from Sahidabad who sells them the momos at a margin of 5 rs [rupees] a plate has to pay for his ride back home. #FreeMetroForWomen

The main argument in the above tweet is that economically there are more deserving people for a free metro ride than women (although the main rationale of the move by the

246

N. Palat Narayanan

government was women’s safety and not just access to public transport). Nonetheless, with this tweet, I would like to point more towards the portrayal of the rich and the poor. The rich is from South Delhi, which, of course, is a misnomer, but it is the subjective imagery I am pointing to rather than data based constructions. Such subjective imageries have wider acceptances and make up imageries that constitute Delhi. Furthermore, the South Delhi imageries are also constructed by puns on the performance of eating momos, many of which are sexist in nature. A tweet from December 2019, posted a picture of a famous Bollywood actress, dressed up with special-occasion clothes and excessive jewellery from a historical movie. The traditional attire usually would now be something that would be worn to occasions like weddings. The tweet read: Mom: Kahan ja rahi hai beta? [Where are you going?] South Delhi girl: momos khane [to eat momos].

The sexist tweet ridicules the stereotype of a girl from South Delhi (mark the locational specificity). It mocks the fact that girls (from South Delhi) will dress-up (as if it is a wedding) to go eat momos. The implication being, that eating momos is an everyday event and the rich South Delhi girl makes it a special event. The everyday-ness of eating momos are expressed across various tweets: Mar 2013—Delhi mein agar Momos nahi khaye to Kya khaya:- p [if you do not eat momos in Delhi then what did you eat?] Feb 2020—3 days in Delhi and I’m sure even Corona Virus will crave for momos.

These imageries of Delhi using momos is further articulated as a performance to belong to the city. That is, if Delhi is imagined as a place of momos, then liking these momos is what makes one belong to Delhi. Various tweets outline this position, e.g., in July 2019 a person posted: Thought extensively about death today while I demolished three plates of momos and if that doesn’t cement my citizenship of Delhi, idk [I don’t know] what will.

In this section, I have outlined two key points. First, how momos construct certain imageries of Delhi (a Delhi cityscape/landscape), whereby one performs belonging to the city via momos. Second, momos itself is identified using various locations in Delhi, thus essentializing imageries (cityscape/landscape) of various parts of Delhi. This section primarily investigated the consumption side of the momos (as a socio-culturally produced item) and in the next section I will move to the production side of it.

Street-Food and Multisensorial Construction of Cityscapes

247

3 The Constricted Momo Makers As discussed in the introduction, the ubiquitous nature of momos fall apart when we investigate its manufacturing process. Let us take the experience of Chetan, who moved to Delhi in the late 2000s from West Bengal. His maternal uncle used to run a shop in the city for a long time and he was the one who suggested that Chetan come and work in Delhi. Initially Chetan worked for his uncle, but soon realized the potential of selling momos. He told me that he always wanted to do his own business. Chetan started a trial by buying raw momos from an acquaintance and selling it in front of his uncle’s shop by steaming them onsite. It worked well, as Chetan made more money than working at his uncle’s shop. He also started bearing larger share of household expenses as he was living with his uncle. It obviously made business sense to make one’s own momos. Chetan has seen his relatives making momos back at home and knew the basics. Just after few trials Chetan was ready to make his own momos. He started by making it himself and within a month hired two young men for help. He was cooking everything at his uncle’s apartment as it was close to the shop where he used to vend. With young men walking in and out of the building, the neighbours complained. The issue was racial, the neighbours did not want young men especially with Mongoloid features to be hanging-out in the premises (c.f., Wouters and Subba 2013 for more on discrimination against Mongoloid phenotypes). Although Chetan’s uncle financially benefitted from his business, he could not risk upsetting the neighbours and deal with any legal complaints (if, for example, the police was called). Obliged by the inconvenience to his uncle and out of respect for his status in the neighbourhood, Chetan decided to find a place to make momos. He soon realized that everywhere he will go, he might face the same problem. Upon enquiring with the acquaintance who initially sold him raw momos, Chetan came to know about Chirag Dilli, where one can easily rent a place to make momos. Chirag Dilli is a South Delhi neighbourhood with a concentration of momo makers, largely owing to special planning and housing situation (c.f., Palat Narayanan and Véron 2018). Chetan easily moved into Chirag Dilli, he told me: There was everything in Chirag Dilli. I rented a place from the savings I had by selling momos before. I could get all the raw materials delivered, I could hire help, and even the transport was easy [from Chirag Dilli to his uncle’s shop]. It was all very smooth.

Although Chetan moved to Chirag Dilli to produce momos he still sells them in front of his uncle’s shop. It is almost impossible for a newcomer like Chetan to establish a vending spot of his own by navigating the municipality, police, and local socio-spatial controls (c.f., Schindler 2014a). Chetan’s case is unique in detail but is quite general in the pattern. During my fieldworks I have come across many young men who shared a similar pattern. It is important to refer back to the previous section to understand the contradiction between ubiquitous

248

N. Palat Narayanan

presence of momos and constriction of its makers. The claim to cooking is a claim to knowledge, or what Graf (2022) refers to as ‘taste knowledge’. Such knowledge become a powerful tool towards the agency of the cook. In the case of momos this agency has been transferred from the cooks to Delhi or parts thereof (to the landscape instead of people). In the previous section, we discussed how people revered the Delhi momos (as if Delhi is the one who cooked it). Further, the favourite momos listed by people are not one that is cooked by specific people,4 but one that is sold in specific places. This discursive practice transforms the majority of momo makers into bodies without any agency over the momos. Such bodies can thereafter be discriminated, spatially constricted, or abused, all the while keeping the sanctity of momos as an identifier of Delhi intact. This dichotomy allows for the reverence of momos to be attached to the consumption part of the cycle, while simultaneously marginalizing the production part of the cycle. It is this dichotomy that coerced Chetan to move out his production location by his uncle’s neighbours. The case here presents how foodscapes and cityscapes influence each other, illustrating further need to study gustatory dimensions of landscapes. Delhi is notorious for disenfranchising vendors (Baviskar 2021; Schindler 2014b) largely attributed to its planning aspirations. Spatial planning in Delhi, since colonial times, has largely focused on a cityscape that is sanitized (thus devoid of vendors) (Palat Narayanan 2020b). I do not want to get into the details of spatial planning in Delhi here but point only to its exclusionary nature and its relationship to imageries of the city. Spatial plans, conceived as per bourgeois ideologies (Baviskar 2019), of course, disenfranchises the masses, including the momo vendors. However, my interest here is in discussing what makes it possible, i.e., if momos are adored across Delhi and marks its identity, how can planning agencies (and other statal bodies) so easily persecute the momo vendors. This persecution is possible because in the imageries constructed of Delhi using momos the makers are not included (as discussed above); it is the place that makes momos special and not the maker/vendor. It should also be noted that these persecutions are not limited to statal bodies, but societal controls (e.g., Chetan’s neighbours) operationalize them too. Such controls lead to two main spatial implications for momo producers, i) momos cannot be produced anywhere, and ii) momo stalls can only be setup if there is a social access to it (e.g., Chetan could only access the front of his uncle’s shop for vending and not any other location). Like Chetan, many over a period of time have moved to Chirag Dilli to produce momos. Chirag Dilli has a concentration of momo producers and thus socio-spatial restrictions are fewer than other places. Further, momo vending spots, although lucrative, are dependent on the social-network of the vendors. My fieldworks suggest that only people with prior relation to the vending spot could establish the momo vending business, e.g., Chetan could because of his uncle’s shop. Without getting into the details of

4 There are very few momo vending spots which are known because of the vendor rather than momos of that place.

Street-Food and Multisensorial Construction of Cityscapes

249

the spatial politics, it could be argued that imageries of the city has very real implication on the physicality, on what things can be where and which bodies can be discriminated against. Momo makers are typecasted in Delhi. Many of them from Nepal and North-Eastern parts of India have mongoloid phenotypes. This creates an other, who is always outside of the imagination of Delhi. Momos, of course, is understood as an import to Delhi, at times from the very places where the typecasted momo makers come from. However, momos are imagined to have changed and become of Delhi (its foreignness nonetheless remaining intact). When a person identifies momos from a specific location as their favourite (e.g., Yashwant Place momos), a strong link is established between the momos and the place. In this linking, the momo maker can forever be alien, an outsider, insignificant. This discursive construct allows an outsider (momo maker) to produce and sell quintessentially ‘Delhi momos’. The othering of momo makers based on their mongoloid phenotypes is applied more widely to also racially discriminate people who are not into momo business (McDuie-Ra 2013; Wouters and Subba 2013). Imageries of the city also construct legitimate city dwellers. This legitimization creates an other, who are not part of the constructed imagery. In this section, we have seen how the othering process as a result of imagined cityscapes/landscapes has spatial and bodily implications. In the next section I will discuss that these imageries are not eitheror but are plural and overlapping.

4 The Multiple Delhi(S) City, like any socio-cultural construct is plural in nature. Thus, there are multiple Delhi(s) and those who conceptualize these different Delhi(s) operate in them and act on the city differently. These multiple Delhi(s) are not spatially or temporally constricted, but they overlap with each other (both spatially and temporally). A glimpse of these multiple Delhi(s) could be constructed using the life stories of users and producers of the city and their conceptions of Delhi. Thus, illustrating overlapping landscapes, one that is brought to light by various constructions of foodscapes and cityscapes. Chetan, whom we met in the previous section, came to Delhi as his uncle pictured to him a Delhi that is full of opportunities. He knew he was being offered a job, but he wanted more, to do business: I came to Delhi with my uncle because there is nothing much to do in our village. But that does not mean I was ready to do anything. I wanted to do my own work. When I came to Delhi, there was a job for me at my uncle’s shop. This was a job that was given to me, but I wanted to create something of my own. Delhi is full of opportunities, but we have to build ourselves to use them [Delhi me karne ke liye bahut kuch hai bas karne wala chahiye]. We have to work to connect these opportunities.

250

N. Palat Narayanan

For Chetan, Delhi is built using his entrepreneurial skills, a Delhi that is constructed (by the self). This imagery gives Chetan an agency in his own narrative and constructs a Delhi that he creates (to be able to do his business), rather than the one that is out there (a job that his uncle offered). This rendering of Delhi makes Chetan tackle the odds of doing the momo business, from moving his production location to managing the larger network of bribery and gift giving. Thus actively changing the existing Delhi to the Delhi he wants, rather than passively accepting the Delhi that subsists. Chetan’s notion of Delhi is in contrast with that of Chhetri. Chhetri works for a momo maker and accompanies his employer in all the steps from production to sale. Chhetri unlike his employer has no access to the point of sale (vending location) in Delhi. He came to Delhi unskilled, and over a period of time developed his profile. For him Delhi is full of opportunities, but there is a level which he cannot cross, a glass ceiling, which exists as he is an immigrant. Although he is skilled, he can never operate a momo business of his own, because he lacks the access to a point of sale. He explains his future plans as: When I came to Delhi, I knew nothing. I just came. The city is full of opportunities. Slowly I learned to make momos. The more skilled you are the more you get paid. I know everything about momos. Ideally now I should start my own business but I do not need any tension [stress]. If you cross the line to make your own momos, life is tough and you always have problems.

For Chhetri, Delhi provides some opportunities which needs to be grabbed. However, there is a subtle division between utilizing the opportunity and going beyond them. Moving beyond them comes at the cost of what Chhetri calls ‘tension’. He is referring to myriad social controls one has to navigate to access the point of sale. Delhi for Chhetri is a place where you come, make money and eventually leave. Chhetri plans to return to his native town in Nepal one day. He told me that he is saving up to open a small shop in his native town when he returns. It has been 8 years that Chhetri came to Delhi and as of now he does not know when he will definitively return back.5 There is a clear difference between how Chhetri and Chetan imagines and engages with Delhi. For Chetan, Delhi is a site where he is building his business and in this process building Delhi itself. Chetan does not see himself as a complete outsider, Delhi is his second home. Contrarily, Chhetri identifies Delhi as a place of work. Chhetri claims to be a migrant who will one day go back to his hometown. This imagination of Delhi changes the way they both act. Chetan has dreams of owning a house, buying a car, and settling in Delhi. Although, Chetan wants to eventually retire in his village, his life is imagined in Delhi. With this imagination also comes the comforts of life that he builds around himself. Contrarily, Chhetri’s relationship with Delhi is more transactional and

5 Interview

holidays.

conducted before covid-19 pandemic. Chettri goes back to his hometown during yearly

Street-Food and Multisensorial Construction of Cityscapes

251

he operates to increase his savings. He lives in a shared apartment and all his dreams are rooted in building a life back home (although he spends most of his time in Delhi). I do not intend to essentialize the life of those who are making momos. Their imageries of Delhi and the resulting practices could also be similar to many others who imagine Delhi as home or a place of work. However, the specificities of their imageries of Delhi gains importance when read alongside the renderings of Delhi, which their labour, sharing their taste knowledges, and improvisation of momos, create, i.e., the agency (or lack thereof) to change the landscape. Delhi, as imagined by those on the production side of momos and that of those on the consumer side are different kinds of Delhi. During the analysis of tweets over a decade (2010–2020), Chirag Dilli (or any place where momos are made) comes up only a couple of times. What matter to the imagination from the consumer side is where it is sold. Delhi is not only understood through momos but claims to know areas within Delhi are discursively produced through it. A comic depiction of this was tweeted in May 2016: Forget certificates, the best way to determine if someone has studied in Delhi University is to ask them where the best momos on campus are.

It refers to the educational qualification of the Prime Minister of India, who alleges to have done his postgraduation from Delhi University. Citing various procedural and legal complications, the degree certificate was never made public and the above tweet mocks this incident. What is interesting here is that a university education could be tested easily not on the knowledge acquired, but by that of the place, which in turn is constructed through momos. Above tweet captures the imagination of Delhi from the consumption side. The implied taste in identifying best momos, the knowledge of the places where momos could be found, and the street that it animates, constitutes a Delhi. At the same time, the labour that goes behind is masked and people involved in production has a different imagination of Delhi. This section attempted to bring together few of the multiple imageries of Delhi (cityscapes/landscapes) and its implications.

5 Conclusion In this chapter, I have shown how Delhi is imagined through momos by focusing on gustatory dimension of landscapes. The chapter started with how momos have come to be an identity of Delhi and in-turn how momos get its identity through various neighbourhoods of Delhi. These imageries are constructed from the consumption side of momos. The proceeding section discussed these facets from the production side. It highlighted how momos could be rendered as an identity of Delhi, while at the same time its makers could be marginalized or persecuted. The final section augmented these imageries to argue how there are different imaginations of Delhi and how people who imagine them act with/on

252

N. Palat Narayanan

the city differently. The three sections come together to present the importance of cityscapes and its multisensorial production. People’s engagement with a food item or the making of that food item may seem very trivial at first glance. Trivial because these engagements usually manifests as jokes, sarcasm, or merely an employment opportunity (at times informal). However, they are deeply political and forms the basis on which cities exist. They outline three primary aspects of our urban world, i) the social structures on which cities are built and operated on an everyday basis, ii) materializations that legitimize certain forms of accumulations and disposessions, and iii) discourses that trivialize forms of violence and discrimination, without rattling the society at large. This chapter aimed to both show the multisensorial construction of cityscapes (landscapes) as well as how these constructions impact the practices of city dwellers (in a cyclic fashion). What or who can be where is dependent on imageries of the landscape. Conceptions of cityscapes are varied. However, few dominant conceptions amongst this myriad become universalized and cities come to be known as that. Popular terms like the ‘city of love’ or ‘city of art’ or even ‘the best city’ comes from a process that hegemonizes singular narratives. This hegemony of singular narratives creates a knowledge system where oppression, discrimination, and violence becomes acceptable and at times desirable (c.f, Palat Narayanan 2021, 2022a for more on knowledge hegemony). For example, rendering of Delhi as a ‘world class city’ (Palat Narayanan 2020b) enables the violence that is laden on momo makers. This is not a unique case of non-western cities, but similar violence can be seen elsewhere (Hilbrandt et al. 2017; Sheppard et al. 2020; Vradis 2020). We need to study the formation of knowledge systems, the construction of cityscapes to overcome the acceptability of oppression, discrimination, and violence. Acknowledgements  I would like to thank Garima Choudhary and Thafseer Ummer for their assistance during the fieldwork.

References Baviskar, A. (2019). Urban Nature and Its Publics: Shades of Green in the Remaking of Delhi. In H. Ernstson & S. Sörlin (Eds.), Grounding Urban Natures: Histories and Futures of Urban Ecologies. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11600.001.0001. Baviskar, A. (2021). Street food and the art of survival: Migrants and places in Delhi, India. Food, Culture & Society, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15528014.2020.1859903. Bellentani, F. (2016). Landscape as text. Tartu Semiotics Library, 16, 76–88. Del Casino, V. J. (2015). Social geography I: Food. Progress in Human Geography, 39(6), 800– 808. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132514562997. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed). Continuum (originally published in 1968). Goodman, M. K. (2016). Food geographies I: Relational foodscapes and the busy-ness of being more-than-food. Progress in Human Geography, 40(2), 257–266. https://doi. org/10.1177/0309132515570192.

Street-Food and Multisensorial Construction of Cityscapes

253

Graf, K. (2022). Taste knowledge: Couscous and the cook’s six senses. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, n/a(n/a). https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.13708. Hilbrandt, H., Alves, S. N., & Tuvikene, T. (2017). Writing Across Contexts: Urban Informality and the State in Tallinn, Bafatá and Berlin. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 41(6), 946–961. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12583. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023a). Multisensory Landscapes: theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Kühne, O., Koegst, L., & Edler, D. (2023b). Theory and meaning of the multisensory of landscape. In L. Koegst, O. Kühne, & D. Edler (Eds.), Multisensory Landscapes. Theories, research fields, methods – an Introduction (in this anthology). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Loda, M., Kühne, O., & Puttilli, M. (2020). The Social Construction of Tuscany in the Germanand English-Speaking World—Presented by the Analysis of Internet Images. In D. Edler, C. Jenal, & O. Kühne (Eds.), Modern Approaches to the Visualization of Landscapes (pp. 157– 171). Springer Fachmedien. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-30956-5_9. McDuie-Ra, D. (2012). Northeast migrants in Delhi: Race, refuge and retail. Amsterdam University Press. McDuie-Ra, D. (2013). Beyond the ‘Exclusionary City’: North-east Migrants in Neo-liberal Delhi. Urban Studies, 50(8), 1625–1640. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098012465126. Mohan, A. K., Pellissery, S., & Gomez Aristizabal, J. (2021). Theorising Urban Development From the Global South. Palgrave Macmillan. Palat Narayanan, N. (2020a). The Delhi Bias: Knowledge hegemony of India’s slum governance. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 41(1), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjtg.12306. Palat Narayanan, N. (2020b). World-class as a provincial construct: Historicizing planning in Colombo and Delhi. Planning Theory, 19(3), 268–284. https://doi. org/10.1177/1473095219892999. Palat Narayanan, N. (2021). Southern Theory without a North: City Conceptualization as the Theoretical Metropolis. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 111(4), 989–1001. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2020.1791040. Palat Narayanan, N. (2022a). Dislocating Urban Theory: Learning with Food‐Vending Practices in Colombo and Delhi. Antipode, 54(2), 526–544. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12769. Palat Narayanan, N. (2022b). Bath packets and multiple Colombo(s): Food and gendered urban experience. Anthropology of Food. https://doi.org/10.4000/aof.13090. Palat Narayanan, N., Cornea, N., Dhesi, S., & Shreshtha, P. (2022). Ways of Knowing. Open Access. https://zenodo.org/record/7022902. Palat Narayanan, N., & Véron, R. (2018). Informal production of the city: Momos, migrants, and an urban village in Delhi. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 36(6), 1026–1044. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775818771695. Patel, S. (2014). Is there a “south” perspective to urban studies? In S. Parnell & S. Oldfield (Eds.), The Routledge handbook on cities of the Global South (1 Edition). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. Schindler, S. (2014a). The Making of “World-Class” Delhi: Relations Between Street Hawkers and the New Middle Class. Antipode, 46(2), 557–573. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12054. Schindler, S. (2014b). Producing and contesting the formal/informal divide: Regulating street hawking in Delhi, India. Urban Studies, 51(12), 2596–2612. https://doi. org/10.1177/0042098013510566. Sedelmeier, T., Kühne, O., & Jenal, C. (2022). Foodscapes. Springer.

254

N. Palat Narayanan

Sheppard, E., Sparks, T., & Leitner, H. (2020). World Class Aspirations, Urban Informality, and Poverty Politics: A North–South Comparison. Antipode, 52(2), 393–407. https://doi. org/10.1111/anti.12601. Singh, P. (2017, June 18). Delhi relishes dumplings to dump momo ‘ban.’ The Times of India. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/delhi-relishes-dumplings-to-dump-momo-ban/ articleshow/59198289.cms. Sridhar, K. S. (2020). Is India’s urbanization really too low? Area Development and Policy, 5(1), 32–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/23792949.2019.1590153. Vradis, A. (2020). Spatial politics and the spatial contract in Exarcheia, Athens, Greece (1974– 2018). Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 45(3), 542–558. https://doi. org/10.1111/tran.12359. Wouters, J. J. P., & Subba, T. B. (2013). The “Indian Face,” India’s Northeast, and “The Idea of India.” Asian Anthropology, 12(2), 126–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/1683478X.2013.849484.

Dr. Nipesh Palat Narayanan is an Assistant Professor at the Centre Urbanisation Culture Société, Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS), Montreal, Canada.Nipesh.palat. [email protected]

Influence of Perceptual Experiences, Especially Sounds, on Forest Attractiveness K. Tessa Hegetschweiler, Elisabeth Maidl, Jean-Marc Wunderli, Christopher B. Stride, Christoph Fischer, Lea Wunderli, Hannes Weinbrenner, Jasmin Breithut and Marcel Hunziker

Abstract

In most studies, forest attractiveness is determined by visual aspects. However, forest perception is not only influenced by visitors’ visual impressions—all sensory dimensions play a role. In order to capture other sensory perceptions, we conducted seven go-along interviews, during which forest visitors were accompanied by an interviewer on their normal route through the forest and prompted to comment on what they saw, smelled, heard and felt. In addition, a pilot survey provided some initial insights on the influence of sounds on visitors’ perceived visual attractiveness of forest plots. The pilot study was part of a larger quantitative forest visitor survey across the whole of

K. T. Hegetschweiler (*) · E. Maidl · C. Fischer · L. Wunderli  Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL, Birmensdorf, Switzerland e-mail: [email protected] E. Maidl e-mail: [email protected] C. Fischer e-mail: [email protected] L. Wunderli e-mail: [email protected] J.-M. Wunderli  Laboratory for Acoustics / Noise Control, Empa, Materials Science and Technology, Dübendorf, Switzerland e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2023 L. Koegst et al. (eds.), Multisensory Landscapes, RaumFragen: Stadt – Region – Landschaft, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40414-7_14

255

256

K. T. Hegetschweiler et al.

Switzerland aiming to link forest visitor data to forest characteristics according to the Swiss National Forest Inventory NFI. At a subset of 29 forest plots, sounds were recorded in addition to the questionnaire survey and the data on forest characteristics. This enabled us to link forest visitor data provided in the questionnaires with forest characteristics and sound parameters, in an attempt to explain between-plot variability in the perceived visual attractiveness of forest plots. Keywords

Visual attractiveness · Forest perception · Forest sounds · Go-along interviews ·  Questionnaire survey · Multilevel modelling · Sound measurements

1 Introduction Urban- and peri-urban forests are important natural areas for recreation and tourism (Bell et al. 2009). For planning and management, it is critical to have information concerning the attractiveness of these areas for recreation. One possible measure for recreational value is visual attractiveness. Visual preferences of landscapes and forests have been measured in numerous studies (Carvalho-Ribeiro and Lovett 2011; Daniel and Boster, 1976; Kaplan and Kaplan 1989). In these studies, landscape is treated as a physical space that can be described by characteristics that can be measured using natural scientific methods, in contrast to landscape being defined by places with cultural and group specific meanings (Hunziker et al. 2007; contextualizing this, see in this volume: Kühne et al. 2023a, b). In the following, we consider forests as physical spaces that people recreate in. It has been shown that the perceived visual attractiveness of the forest depends on forest characteristics and on social factors such as values and attitudes concerning forests (Chen et al. 2016; Eriksson et al. 2012; Frick et al. 2018; Gundersen and Frivold 2008;

C. B. Stride  Sheffield University Management School SUMS, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK e-mail: [email protected] H. Weinbrenner  Forest Research Institute Baden-Württemberg FVA, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany e-mail: [email protected] J. Breithut  Stabsstelle Gesellschaftlicher Wandel, Forest Research Institute Baden-Württemberg FVA, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany e-mail: [email protected] M. Hunziker  WISOZ-SLA, WSL, Birmensdorf, Switzerland e-mail: [email protected]

Influence of Perceptual Experiences, Especially Sounds …

257

Ribe 2009). In addition to physical characteristics of the forest, the presence of sounds can have an influence on the visual assessment of forests and landscapes. For example, landscapes were judged to be less natural in the presence of helicopter noise than in the absence of it (Mace 1999). Furthermore, people liked landscape images better when birdsong was present, especially when several species were singing (Hedblom et al. 2014). In our previous studies, we aimed to link forest characteristics as assessed in the Swiss NFI with social factors assessed in on-site and off-site surveys to explain perceived visual attractiveness of forest plots (Hegetschweiler et al. 2020, 2017). Results show that varying perceptions of visual attractiveness can in part be explained by forest characteristics and social factors, but that other factors also play a role. Therefore, we aimed to go a step further and include other sensory perceptions, especially sound measurements, in our assessments. We investigated the multisensory aspect of forest attractiveness in general and especially the influence of sounds on perceived visual attractiveness in more detail. In the following sections, we give a short overview over the current state of knowledge concerning multisensory forest perception and report our findings of two exploratory approaches, one qualitative and one quantitative, which we conducted in order to provide a basis for further investigations, to test the feasibility of our approach, and to assess the potential to continue with a larger, well-designed study.

2 Current State of Knowledge Assessment of Physical and Social Forest Data Data on forest characteristics are available from National Forest Inventories (NFIs) in many countries, including Switzerland (Tomppo et al. 2010; Vidal et al. 2016). NFIs monitor a wide range of forest characteristics, such as stand structure, ground vegetation cover and dead wood, and document changes over time (Brändli and Hägeli 2019; Tomppo et al. 2010). Social indicators on the other hand, are often assessed in off-site, often national surveys (Sievänen et al. 2008) or on-site forest visitor surveys (Arnberger et al. 2010; Hegetschweiler et al. 2007; Meyer et al. 2019). They provide valuable information about the relationship of the general public to the forest, usage patterns, recreational behaviour, forest preferences and motivations for forest recreation (Sievänen et al. 2008).

Multisensory and Auditory Forest Perception Literature shows that visitors’ perception of forests, and even perceived visual attractiveness, is influenced by all perceptual experiences. In fact, the different sensory perceptions lead to different experiences of the forest, even if the physical structures do not

258

K. T. Hegetschweiler et al.

change significantly (Jenal 2019). In an English study, 84% of participants rated visual impressions to be very important for health and well-being, 45% also stated this for sounds, 41% for scents and 20% for the sense of touch (O’Brien et al. 2012). Apart from measurable forest characteristics like a moderate shrub layer cover or mixed tree species, intangible visual impressions include seeing the change of seasons (O’Brien et al. 2012) and special conditions of light and shadow (Breithut 2018). Concerning sounds, forest visitors mention birdsong, wind in the trees, the rustling of leaves, insects humming, the splashing of water, the cracking of branches (Breithut 2018; Jenal 2019; O’Brien et al. 2012; Weber and John 2019). These sounds contribute to the peace and quiet in the forest. Sounds of other forest visitors, e.g. laughter and children playing, help to improve the mood of some forest visitors (O’Brien et al. 2012), but can also be perceived negatively, as did the sound of Nordic walking sticks in a study by Breithut (2018). Smells are also mentioned by the walkers, although less than sounds. These include scents of certain plants, the smell of resin from conifers or simply a characteristic (musty) smell of the forest (O’Brien et al. 2012). People feel the difference in temperature when they enter the forest, the fresh air, the springy forest floor, the change between walking on a gravel path and on the grass, or they specifically touch certain plants and the bark of trees (Breithut 2018; Jenal 2019; O’Brien et al. 2012; Weber and John 2019). The evaluation of sounds in natural areas is strongly dependent on visitors’ expectations, motives and activities. In wilderness areas, traffic and aircraft noise is judged more negatively than in areas developed for tourism, where a certain level of traffic and sightseeing flights is expected (Gramann 1999). In an urban forest park in Madrid, Calleja et al. (2017) found that the majority of visitors did not feel annoyed by noise—although the measured LAeq (A-weighted average level) was higher than 55 dBA—and explained this finding by the people’s activities. This was supported by Gozalo et al. (2018) who showed that visitors of urban parks doing sports, such as running or biking, were less annoyed by traffic noise compared to visitors doing slow activities, such as walking or relaxing on a bench. People seeking peace and quiet more often find voices and other human sounds inacceptable than people visiting nature for socialising and/or for doing physical activities (Marin et al. 2011; Pilcher et al. 2009; Schwarz 2013). Thereby, visual and auditory congruence seem to be important to create a positive assessment. Several authors found that sounds of nature are only perceived as pleasant if the visual environment matches the sounds (Van Renterghem 2019; Wang and Zhao 2019). In contrast, noise is perceived as much more annoying if the sound contradicts the expectations triggered by the visual impression (Carles et al. 1999). Various approaches to model perceived soundscapes have been followed in the past. Several studies used psychoacoustic characteristics, such as roughness, sharpness, fluctuation strength and tonality (Axelsson et al. 2010; Farina 2014; Farina and Pieretti 2012; Torija et al. 2013), as alternatives or refinements of classical acoustic descriptors based

Influence of Perceptual Experiences, Especially Sounds …

259

on decibel values, as for example compiled in Asensio et al. (2020). Aletta and Kang (2018) followed the concept of soundscape dimensions as specified in ISO (2019) and derived a model with the three dimensions eventful vs. uneventful vs. pleasant sounds, based on expert interviews, workshops and laboratory experiments. Pheasant et al. (2009, 2010) developed a regression model to explain perceived tranquillity of landscapes. They used A-weighted maximum and averaged sound pressure level as acoustic predictors and the areal extent of natural and cultural landscape elements on video scenes as visual predictors. In field studies, the concept was further developed (Watts et al. 2013; Watts and Pheasant 2013, 2015). They found “that rated tranquillity relates closely to rated calmness and pleasantness and this agrees with earlier studies of soundscape categorisation” (Watts and Pheasant 2015). In contrast, the perceived tranquillity is only weakly associated with averaged sound pressure level. For example, Wartmann and Mackaness (2020) stated high ratings of tranquillity in certain landscapes despite the presence of other people or elevated levels of traffic noise.

3 Material and Methods Qualitative Approach: Go-Along Interviews Seven forest visitors in 4 different forests were asked to take part in a go-along interview in July 2020 (Kusenbach 2003; Mellqvist et al. 2013). In these interviews, the respondents were accompanied by an interviewer on their normal, everyday walk through the forest and prompted to think aloud and comment on what they saw, smelled, heard and felt. The conversation was audio-taped by the interviewer and notes were taken directly after the walk. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using MaxQDA (VERBI Software 2022). Overview of interviewees: • • • • •

B00: Teenage girl in the forest of Wildsberg, Uster (mixed forest), 17 years old, pupil B01: Single woman, Käferberg, Zürich (deciduous forest), 50 years old, teacher B02: Single man, Käferberg, Zürich, 27 years old, engineer in nanotechnology B03: Woman with two dogs, Käferberg, Zürich, 36 years old, dog trainer B04: Two women in the forest of Willisau (mixed coniferous forest), 80 years old, former foot masseur • B05: Couple in the forest of Willisau, 43 years old • B06: Single man in the forest of Baldegg, Baden (deciduous forest), 74 years old, former electrical engineer

260

K. T. Hegetschweiler et al.

Quantitative Approach: Forest Visitor Survey with Sound Measurements A large forest visitor survey conducted between May and September 2018 (Hegetschweiler et al. 2022b) and dealing with the perceived visual attractiveness of forests, enabled us to test the approach of combining sound measurements with visitors’ perceptions. Sound measurements were conducted alongside forest visitor interviews, with a standardised questionnaire at 29 sites roughly evenly distributed across Switzerland (Fig. 1). Twenty sites were at or near sample plots of the Swiss NFI, each with a high or very high recreational demand according to the local recreation potential model (Brändli and Ulmer 2001). Nine additional sites were chosen based on recommendations of forest authorities. Details on the determination of the sites can be found in Hegetschweiler et al. (2022b). The interview location near each NFI sample plot was determined by searching for the nearest highly frequented footpath. The area to be surveyed was defined by looking in the direction of the unmarked NFI plot from the centre of the footpath as far as one could see (Hegetschweiler et al. 2022b).

Fig. 1   Distribution of the 29 sites at which sound measurements were combined with a forest visitor survey. (Map: Christoph Fischer)

Influence of Perceptual Experiences, Especially Sounds …

261

Forest visitors were interviewed face-to-face using tablets with the offline function of the online survey tool Sawtooth Software Lighthouse Studio, Version 9.3.0 (Sawtooth 1998). We aimed to capture data from 20 or more visitors per plot in both winter and summer, following the recommendations for within-group sample size required for multilevel modelling by Baltes-Götz (2013). In the end, 637 visitors were interviewed at these 29 sites. The questionnaire (Hegetschweiler et al. 2021) consisted of general questions concerning activities the respondents were undertaking in the forest at the time of the interview, frequency of visits, travel time to the forest and socio-demographics. Core part was the question asking respondents to look in direction of the NFI plot and rate the perceived visual attractiveness of the forest on a scale from 1 to 10. Respondents were also asked about their own inherent forest preferences irrespective of the forest they were rating, motives for visiting the forest and what they disliked about the forest. Objective physical forest data were collected from the defined interview location to match the visitors’ perspective. The objective physical data largely consisted of a subset of parameters normally examined on NFI sample plots (Düggelin et al. 2020). They included forest type, e.g., beech forest, the structure, size, height and age of the stand, the stage of stand development, the cover of ground vegetation, shrub layer and berry bushes, the degree of mixture of coniferous and broadleaved trees, and the presence of root plates, snags (standing dead trees), natural and artificial regeneration, geomorphological objects, dry stonewalls, stone piles, stumps, lying dead trees and lying dead wood. In addition, we recorded stem density and the presence of moss, ivy, ferns, flowers and fallen leaves or needles, as these could be important for visual attractiveness (Jensen and Skovsgaard, 2009; Nielsen et al. 2018, 2012; Vega-Garcia et al. 2011; Wang et al. 2017). Sound measurements Sound recordings were done using omnidirectional Brüel & Kjaer studio microphones type 4006 in combination with hard disk recorders type SoundDevice 702. The microphones were place 1.5 m above ground, as shown in Fig. 2. Recordings with the duration of 5 min each were conducted 2–5 times during the day that the interviews took place— once before interviewing started, 1–3 times during the day at intervals of approximately 1 h, once after all interviews had been completed. At 9 sites, sound recordings were not taken on the day of the interview, but at a later stage after interviews had been completed. At these sites, only one recording of 5 min was done. In addition to the recordings, notes were taken on the type of sounds heard (birdsong, sounds of other animals, cowbells, church bells, other forest visitors, logging, sounds of water, wind, traffic, aeroplanes and helicopters).

262

K. T. Hegetschweiler et al.

Fig. 2   Microphone placed at 1.5 m above ground. The hard-disk recorder is placed on the ground. (Photo: Tessa Hegetschweiler)

For each sound recording, a set of acoustic metrics were determined in Matlab to characterize the local soundscape: • the A-weighted average level LAeq describes the acoustic intensity and is used as a measure of dose • the intermittency ratio IR quantifies the share of acoustic intensity stemming from distinct sound events and consequently characterizes the eventfulness of a specific soundscape (Wunderli et al. 2016). • The difference of the A-weighted statistical levels L10 and L90 for rare peaks and background noise (i.e., the level that is exceeded in 10% of the time compared to the level that is exceeded in 90% of the time) describes the level variability and helps to distinguish between lively and vibrant compared to monotonous situations.

Influence of Perceptual Experiences, Especially Sounds …

263

• A- and C-weighting are standardized frequency weightings that account for the fact that the sensitivity of our ears differs with respect to frequency and level. While the C-weighting leaves frequencies between 63 Hz and 4 kHz widely unchanged, the A-weighting introduces a substantial penalization of low frequencies, with for example −20 dB at 100 Hz. Consequently, the difference of the two frequency weightings can be used to assess the spectral centroid of the exposure situation; the higher the difference, the more low-frequent the sound is. Data analysis An exploratory factor analysis (Conway and Huffcutt 2003) was conducted to examine the underlying dimensions (factors) measured by the survey questions on general forest preferences and motives for visiting the forest. We then computed mean scale scores for these forest preference and motive factors, taking the average scores across the respective sets of items loading on each factor (Hegetschweiler et al. 2022b). In order to investigate which forest characteristics and social factors were most strongly related to perceptions of visual attractiveness—and if sounds might have an influence on these assessments—we built and then tested the fit of a multilevel regression model in which visual attractiveness of the forest was predicted by forest characteristics, sounds and social factors. The multilevel data structure was comprised of respondents (the lower, or person-level) nested within the site (forest) level, with corresponding forest characteristics and sounds. The dataset was randomly split into two equal halves, with the model built on one (construction) half. When building the model, we first added the person-level predictor variables measuring demographic background, variables related to the subject’s visit (e.g., weather, activity, travel details) and the mean scale scores derived from the aforementioned factor analysis, measuring forest visit motives and forest preferences. We retained predictor variables that explained at least 1% of the variability on the person level. We applied the same process at the site level, adding as predictors the NFI measures of forest characteristics and sound variables. The resulting model was then tested on the other (validation) half of the data (Hegetschweiler et al. 2022b).

4 Results Go-Along Interviews The interviews revealed different dimensions of recreation, sensory impressions, emotions and activities related to visiting forests, which we analyse as main categories.

264

K. T. Hegetschweiler et al.

Recreation Fresh, clean air and calmness are key recreational motivations to visit forests. Calmness is described as the absence of people and human noise like machines, and as the presence of natural sounds. Narrow and uneven roads not allowing big vehicles are therefore appreciated, while tarred roads are perceived as rather disturbing (B06). Calmness is further related to space. A spacious forest provides a chance to walk long and deep into a forest (B02). At the same time, a spacious forest provides the opportunity to be alone and have some privacy: “At certain times, the forest was like a second home for me.” (B00). Closely related is the perception of beauty in the forest, which is associated with plants and animals (B02), freshness and exercise. Further, sunlight and the play of light and shadow makes the forest beautiful (B00, B01). It contributes to the harmonic component of beauty that comprises the recreational experience (B01). Beauty is influenced by personal taste, e.g., a preference for conifers, mixed forests or the diversity of different types of forests (B06). Visitors emphasise beautiful impressions more than rare negative impressions like dead plants (B06). In addition to calmness and beauty, exercise is an important recreational activity. This can take the form of specific sports, but for most it is about going for a walk, e.g., as a counterbalance to work: “So for me it’s primarily about the exercise, and, if you have to sit inside all day, at some point your legs get stiff, and… yes, then I just have to go out, even if it’s drizzling outside.” (B06). Another aspect of recreation is a feeling of safety (B01, B04, B05). It is supported by well signposted paths and having information on time and distances at hand. Visitors do not like to worry about how to find shelter in case it is needed, and prefer to have an overview. In the dark, the forest can be frightening. Denser parts of the forest with less sunlight gave some people an uneasy feeling. In line with the preference of having an overview, interviewees perceive well maintained, “tidy” forests as more recreational. Visitors also appreciate using infrastructure like benches or viewpoints (B02, B04). They like to have breaks, sit down, or eat something (B02). The recreational effect of forests can be disturbed by noise, intense signs of forest work, or, particularly among walkers, by mountain bikes (B06). Sensory impressions Forest visitors mostly use vision, followed by auditory and olfactory perception of the surroundings. Concerning vision, the colour of green is predominant. In addition, visitors perceive how the forest is maintained (cutting and planting of trees). Some of them focus on different types of plants, e.g., conifers or deciduous trees, but also moss, ferns, grass, flowers and bushes. Specific trees are described, e.g., how the light glitters on the leaves (B01). Other visitors do not differentiate between single objects, but perceive the forest more as a whole entity. Among olfactory perceptions, the interviewees describe smells like fresh air, fungi, and conifer needles. Conifers are perceived more intensely than other trees (B06).

Influence of Perceptual Experiences, Especially Sounds …

265

The most important auditory impressions are the absence of noise, resp. calmness, and birdsongs that are mentioned by all interviewees. The sound of cow bells is also present in the forest, because they can be heard in greater distance. Additional sounds are sounds of walking on gravel stones, which, however distracts from natural sounds. Standing still changes the way of perception. However, the auditory sensation is sometimes reduced because of wearing headphones. Sounds, unlike other sensory impressions are described as mixing together: “So, I do perceive insects, this buzzing… however, what you hear now, that’s not a buzzing of an insect but a buzzing of an airplane” (B06). The temperature of the forest is perceived as pleasantly cool in summer (B01, B05, B06). An additional aspect is the protection from stronger wind outside the forest (B02). Forest visitors also become receptive for natural impressions that are not directly related to the forest, e.g. feeling the sun on the skin or changing lights in more or less dense forests (B01, B06). The presence of other humans is perceived differently. A particularly positive perception are forest nursery schools and children (B02). Visitors usually developed the habit of enjoying forests in their childhood and consider it of special value to educate children in relation to nature (B01). All these impressions trigger conscious thoughts and recall memories, mainly childhood memories and, for example, reflexions on changing times, including how the forest is used differently in the past and present time (B05: collecting fire wood, B00 and B06: playing with friends). While some interviewees consciously think about what they know about the forest like names of plants and trees, others (B00) enjoy letting thoughts go and not focusing on anything specific. The kind of company visitors share the walk with, seemed to influence the content of memories and associations. An adult couple focused more on change of times, while a single person reported to be more aware of sensory impressions when being alone (B01). Walking in the forest can change the way of perception, for instance, it can have an effect on the feeling of time, which may be forgotten (B00). Being alone in the forest helps people to create a distance from stressful thoughts: “When I have a lot going on in my head, I often go out into the woods, cycling or running. Then I forget about it again (laughs).” (B02). Emotions and meanings Forests are associated with life and human dependency on nature (B05). If they are not strongly maintained by foresters, they are interpreted as wild and natural (B05). Dense forest is also perceived as natural, and as such as a home for animals (B00, B01, B02). In contrast, foresters’ work is appreciated for keeping the forest a space for recreation. In this sense, machines and protective fences are tolerated. This leads to contradictions between the described preference of untouched nature on the one hand, and appreciation of man-made infrastructure that contributes to comfort (maintained paths, benches, viewpoints, signs, small inns). As long as there is no noise, resp. no work-activity, man-made structures are not perceived as a nuisance. Forestry work itself is judged in a differentiated and sometimes contradictive way. For instance, the image of a well-maintained, tidy

266

K. T. Hegetschweiler et al.

forest is challenged by the view that forestry work itself creates a rather chaotic state that is clearly non-natural, but still considered pleasant: “Forestry work. Yes, it looks a bit wild, it’s not all clean and stuff (…) I like it.” (B02). In contrast, the same sight can raise strong negative emotions: “There they drive around with the heaviest tractors and… then it has these… compacted tractor tracks, or, they do stay for years, and just, just… a total mess they leave behind.” (B06). At the sight of fallen trees, visitors begin to consciously reflect on whether the cause is human impact or storm. Human interference also raises somewhat critical thoughts, e.g., that politicians do not put enough effort into protecting nature. Political strategies for nature conservation are appreciated, like laws to protect the forest and natural areas: “I think it’s a protected area between the two forests. And they can’t build there. That’s for the animals and insects that want to go from one forest to another. That’s very nice.” (B02). Protecting nature means to visitors to preserve space that is not developed for housing or industry. Nature is usually interpreted as a contrast to humans shaping the environment (B02). Interviewees often compare the experience of being in a forest with other, contrasting experiences, like living in a city (B01, B02), close to noisy streets or in different cantons or countries (B05). Forest is also seen in contrast to walking around fields and meadows, or mountains (B06). Regarding emotions, a deep feeling of gratitude was reported by one of the interviewees (B04). This feeling is expressed by imagining a personified relationship to the forest: “I greet the forest when I enter it.” (B04). Some visitors express special emotions for favourite trees, e.g., beech or larch that are enjoyed more than others, e.g. yew trees (B06). Visitors, however, do not give reasons how such preferences were developed. In summary, the following types of meanings were found: forest as a metaphor for life, forest as intimate mutual relationship with nature, and forest as manifestation of human influence. Activities Some visitors tend to be in the forest on a regular basis and during all seasons, but there is a tendency to be there more frequent in summer, in the absence of slippery ice (B01, B02, B06). The forest is enjoyed for different qualities with the change of seasons (B06). Participants were found to walk alone or together with close persons, like spouses, friends, enjoy to walk with a pet, or to do sports, mostly jogging or cycling, or collect food (berries, mushrooms, beechnuts or pine cones for decoration). Encounters with other people are described of different quality than elsewhere: in the forest, it is more likely to greet each other, or acknowledge the shared preference for forests (B02). Perception varies, depending on visitors’ activities (B01) and on whether they have company or are alone (B02). Sometimes they focus on doing sports, at other times they pay more attention to the surroundings (B01). Some visitors emphasise the greater value of combining sports with nature experience instead of going to a fitness studio (B01, B06). When being with pets in the forest, it has an effect on the owners if the pet has fun (B00). Being together with others means sharing the experience of the forest. Partici-

Influence of Perceptual Experiences, Especially Sounds …

267

pants have different habits of walking through a forest. Partly, they discover new ways and footpaths (B05, B06), others prefer to always use the same paths (B04). For many people, experiencing the forest is something they have been accustomed to since youth (B00, B01, B02, B04, B06). For young people, “vita parcours” (exercise trail) can be a motivation to visit forests and discover the recreational effect of it (B01). Others used to spend time in the forest in school or with their parents (B02, B06): “From there I have of course the love for the forest” (B06). Growing up in connection with forests makes it more likely to find activities in the forest in adulthood like orienteering (B06). Another family-related forest activity is to barbecue, which is however less frequent (B01, B06). Forests further inspire creativity, e.g., to spontaneously collect natural items that are considered beautiful and bring them home (B06).

Forest Visitor Survey with Sound Measurements Of the forest visitors questioned at these sites, 45% were males, 55% were females. Their average age was 51 years (SD = 17 years). Thirty-nine percent of the visitors were encountered walking (with or without a dog), 36% were hiking, 13% were biking or cycling, 10% were jogging or Nordic walking and 2% were doing other activities. The most important motive for visiting the forest was experiencing peace and nature, followed by the motive to do something for physical health and fitness. The least important motive was visiting the forest for social reasons. Concerning the structure of the forest sites, 34% of the sites (10 sites) were singlelayered, 41% (12 sites) were multi-layered, 21% (6 sites) were all-aged/all-sized and one site was clustered. Stand height ranged from 8 to 39 m (mean: 26 m, SD = 7  m). Stand age ranged from 15 to 150 years (mean: 94 years, SD = 45 years). More than half the sites were purely coniferous (17 sites or 59%), 1 site was mixed coniferous, 2 sites were mixed deciduous and 9 sites (31%) were purely deciduous. A more detailed description of the sites and the sociodemographic profile of the forest visitors can be found in Hegetschweiler et al. (2022b). As expected, birdsong was recorded at most (83%) of the sites, while sounds of other animals could be heard at 34% of the sites. As all sites were highly frequented, sounds of forest visitors were recorded at 62% of the sites. Traffic could be heard at most (86%) sites too and aeroplanes at almost half (41%) of the sites. Wind was recorded at 45% and water at 28% of the sites. Sounds of logging were heard at 4 sites (14%), cowbells at 4 sites and church bells at one site. Figure 3 summarizes the analysis of acoustic metrics for the different locations. Circles indicate single measurements and horizontal lines averages per location and quantity. It is interesting that the acoustic conditions vary substantially between locations, ranging from very calm situations with A-weighted levels down to 30 dB to places with highly elevated levels of almost 70 dB. These high exposure situations are either caused

268

K. T. Hegetschweiler et al.

Fig. 3   Acoustic metrics per location. The circles indicate single measurements, the horizontal lines averages, which were used for the statistical modelling. (Own representation of Jean-Marc Wunderli)

by water sounds, as in the case of Champfer or Nendaz, or by elevated transportation noise, as in the case of Allschwil, Sauvabelin or Pfynwald. Eventfulness and level fluctuations also cover a wide range of conditions, even though very eventful situations, i.e., with IR values above 66%, are rather rare. In addition, the frequency content varied substantially, covering differences between C- and A-weighted levels between 0 and 10 dB. For 20 of the 29 locations, up to five measurements were taken, allowing to assess the temporal variability of the acoustic conditions per location. These multiple measurements gave consistent results for some locations, for example Beatenberg, Champfer, Nendaz, S-Chanf or Scuol. For other locations, notably Bettmeralp and Krienseregg, all sound metrics varied over a wide range. In the majority of sites—examples being SaasFee, Samedan and Vercorin—there were strong variations of IR and L10–L90. This is due to the fact that dominant events, such as an aircraft overflight, occur comparatively rarely and therefore, with a measurement duration of only five minutes, it has a certain randomness whether such an event is included in the recording or not. By averaging over several measurements, this variability can be reduced substantially. However, we have

Influence of Perceptual Experiences, Especially Sounds …

269

Table 1  Coefficients from the model testing stage for predicting perceived visual attractiveness. (Own representation of Christopher B. Stride) Predictor

Estimate

SE

p

Intercept

5.482

1.099