window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'UA-149431051-2');
C1 Advanced (CAE)
Get Premium
Test 1 / 25

The Architecture of Happiness

Four reviewers comment on philosopher Alain De Botton’s book

A
Alain de Botton is a brave and highly intelligent writer who writes about complex subjects, clarifying the arcane for the layman. Now, with typical self-assurance, he has turned to the subject of architecture. The essential theme of his book is how architecture influences mood and behaviour. It is not about the specifically architectural characteristics of space and design, but much more about the emotions that architecture inspires in the users of buildings. Yet architects do not normally talk nowadays very much about emotion and beauty. They talk about design and function. De Botton’s message, then, is fairly simple but worthwhile precisely because it is simple, readable and timely. His commendable aim is to encourage architects, and society more generally, to pay more attention to the psychological consequences of design in architecture: architecture should be treated as something that affects all our lives, our happiness and well-being.

B
Alain de Botton raises important, previously unasked, questions concerning the quest for beauty in architecture, or its rejection or denial. Yet one is left with the feeling that he needed the help and support of earlier authors on the subject to walk him across the daunting threshold of architecture itself. And he is given to making extraordinary claims: ‘Architecture is perplexing … in how inconsistent is its capacity to generate the happiness on which its claim to our attention is founded.’ If architecture’s capacity to generate happiness is inconsistent, this might be because happiness has rarely been something architects think about. De Botton never once discusses the importance of such dull, yet determining, matters as finance or planning laws, much less inventions such as the lift or reinforced concrete. He appears to believe that architects are still masters of their art, when increasingly they are cogs in a global machine for building in which beauty, and how de Botton feels about it, are increasingly beside the point.

C
In The Architecture of Happiness, Alain de Botton has a great time making bold and amusing judgements about architecture, with lavish and imaginative references, but anyone in search of privileged insights into the substance of building design should be warned that he is not looking at drain schedules or pipe runs. He worries away, as many architects do, at how inert material things can convey meaning and alter consciousness. Although he is a rigorous thinker, most of de Botton’s revelations, such as the contradictions in Le Corbusier’s theory and practice, are not particularly new. However, this is an engaging and intelligent book on architecture and something everyone, professionals within the field in particular, should read.

D
Do we want our buildings merely to shelter us, or do we also want them to speak to us? Can the right sort of architecture even improve our character? Music mirrors the dynamics of our emotional lives. Mightn’t architecture work the same way? De Botton thinks so, and in The Architecture of Happiness he makes the most of this theme on his jolly trip through the world of architecture. De Botton certainly writes with conviction and, while focusing on happiness can be a lovely way to make sense of architectural beauty, it probably won’t be of much help in resolving conflicts of taste.

Which reviewer

has a different opinion from the others on the confidence with which de Botton discusses architecture?
Text B
shares reviewer A’s opinion whether architects should take note of de Botton’s ideas?
Text C
expresses a similar view to reviewer B regarding the extent to which architects share de Botton’s concerns?
Text A
has a different view to reviewer C on the originality of some of de Botton’s ideas?
Text B
Test 2 / 25

Reviews of Pieces of Light

Four reviewers give their opinions on a book about memory by Charles Fernyhough

A
In my view, the most important message of Pieces of Light is that the ‘reconstructive nature of memory can make it unreliable’. It is wrong to see memories as fixed biochemical or electrical traces in the brain, like books in a giant library that you could access if only you knew how. People are becoming increasingly aware that memory is, in fact, unstable. The stories in Pieces of Light may persuade a few more – and anyone who reads them will enjoy Fernyhough’s effortless prose. He returns repeatedly to his central message using a sophisticated and engaging blend of findings from science, ideas from literature and examples from personal narratives. Yet in disabusing us of our misconceptions, and despite this being the stated aim of the book, Fernyhough leaves us with little sense of a scientific explanation to put in their place.

B
‘Remembering is a serious business,’ Charles Fernyhough warns. It is this respect for his subject that makes Pieces of Light such an immense pleasure, as Fernyhough sees the emerging science of memory through the lens of his own recollections. In the hands of a lesser writer, such reliance on personal experience could rapidly descend into self-indulgence and cliche, but Fernyhough – a psychologist and published novelist – remains restrained and lyrical throughout. As Fernyhough examines the way the brain continually rewrites our past, it is almost impossible not to question the accuracy of our recollections. Even the events that we recall with the most vivid sensory detail are not to be trusted, he maintains. Although I remain to be persuaded, Fernyhough does serve up the latest findings in neuroscience and quotes academic studies without ever baffling the reader along the way.

C
Fernyhough, who is a popular science writer as well as an academic psychologist, wrote this book because he is worried that too many people still think of memory in terms of a vast personal DVD library. He sets out to show the reader how he believes it to actually operate, and I for one was convinced. The author plays a key role in his own book, returning to places that were very familiar to him in childhood to see how much he can remember. However, he gets hopelessly lost. Though Fernyhough is a gifted writer who can turn any experience into lively prose, these autobiographical passages are the least successful of Pieces of Light because they are too disconnected from any scientific insights about memory. There are also frequent references to literature. Yet whereas others might find these a distraction from the main narrative, I personally found the balance between science and literature refreshing and well judged.

D
A major theme of Charles Fernyhough’s book is that remembering is less a matter of encoding, storing and retrieving an accurate record of events, and more a matter of adjusting memories to current circumstances, which may then alter them for future recollection. He mixes the latest findings in neuroscience with in-depth case histories. Nor is Fernyhough uncomfortable using personal testimony to put warm flesh on hard science: sizeable sections of the book are taken up with him exploring his own past. These do not add greatly to the book, and it is hard for the reader not to wonder whether it is really worth the effort of ploughing on with him. This weariness is reflected in his writing style. Surprisingly, however, Fernyhough is a lucid, concise and knowledgeable guide to all the data that generally stay buried deep in specialist journals, and that is where the book really springs to life.

Which reviewer

expresses a similar opinion to B on how clearly the science is presented?
Text D
has a different opinion to all the others on the quality of the writing?
Text D
shares C’s view of how well the writer brings together diverse academic disciplines?
Text A
has a similar view to D on the effectiveness of the writer’s emphasis on his personal memories?
Text C