Space as an essential and integral concept of architecture has always included different meanings and understandings, and this reduced its original meaning to general architectural features. In addition, because this concept was created in the modern period, architects’ general understanding of its indicators has unilaterally been led to the concepts such as void, freedom and movement. Therefore, there has not been any true and comprehensive understanding to evaluate the indicators directly related to this concept. On the other hand, in Iranian-Islamic Architecture, space as the main element making form of the buildings has been considered much more than the material aspects, but due to the lack of a specific framework for explaining its physical indicators or modern sense of space, it has not properly been analyzed. The main purpose of this paper was to identify the principal indicators related to the concept of space and examine the
relations, and this was achieved through purposeful analysis of basic definitions, Western viewpoints of architectural space, and perspectives of Iranian-Islamic architectural space. The paradigm of this study was qualitative and the methodology was based on documentary and library researches. In order to achieve a conceptual framework for analyzing the essential indicators of space in architectural works they were distinguished from general features and other concepts through analyzing and comparing of important perspectives and organizing existing structure in recognition of space. Finally, based on this model, the overall status of the indicators of space in Iranian-Islamic architecture and important periods of Western architecture were compared. An examination of architectural space indicators based on Western theories revealed three types of viewpoints: 1- According to this view, architecture was considered as the “Art of Space” which has been on the path of historical evolution, and always conformed to “dematerialization” (reducing the effect of the masses) and increasing the role of empty spaces. Clearly, on this view, the indicators were emphasized those which conformed to “total freedom of space”, “exposure”, “permanent expansion”, and “maximum relation”. 2- This thinking was almost the opposite of the first point of view. The theorists criticized the unlimited freedom of the space and looked for defining the new intricate and meaningful structures. It could be said that this view, influenced by phenomenological approaches, conformed to promote the concept of space to “place”, caused to the sense of habitation and settlement, and emphasized the “internalization” and “preservation” as the main characteristics of the space. 3- In this view, the relative balance among the dual indicators of architectural space and their challenges were emphasized. Accordingly, fundamental characteristics of the architectural space in different periods were identified with no specific direction to one side of dual indicators. In fact, the balance between the inside and the outside was necessary. It meant that in order for space to be essentially recognized as real space, at least a part of this separation was needed. On the other hand, the complete separation was not usually correct too. The enclosure and protection of the inner space and the continuity between the inside and the outside both were inherently necessary and appeared differently depending on the period of each architectural work and its context.
Iranian-Islamic views on the space were investigated both in art and architecture. In Iranian-Islamic art theories, two facts were revealed: 1- The emergence of imaginary and mysterious quality through the constant fluctuation between opposing characteristic and creation of dual concepts such as “Hayaa” (modesty). 2- The balance between material and immaterial aspects in art to achieve two main goals: the existence of art and a trace or an echo of God. By reviewing the opinions of some experts in Iranian-Islamic architecture, such as Nader Ardalan, Darab Diba, Seyyed Hadi Mirmiran, Mohammad Reza Haeri, etc., it became clear that the dual indicators of space appeared in two different ways: In the first case, there was simultaneous presence of opposing dualities, such as void-mass, inside-outside, movement-stagnation, continuity-obstruction of vision, etc., and at the same time, the tendency to internal and limiting indicators. In the second, there was simultaneous presence of opposing dualities and the lack of inclination to one side: balance, ambiguity or fluctuation in dual indicators. The results of numerous analyzes indicated that, despite of intricate and extensive theories of architectural space and approaches derived from, they revealed certain forms of relations between the dual indicators in a “spectral” framework. These indicators both at the basic level (fundamental indicators) and at the final model (extension of basic indicators) showed different tendencies, including the overcoming of liberating characteristics, overcoming of limiting characteristics, and the balance or fluctuation between the dualities. In a general comparison, it could be said that the indicators of the space in Iranian-Islamic architecture appeared balanced, vague, or mysterious, which had some similarities with spatial concepts prevailed in Postmodern architecture; and they were completely distinct from those of other periods of Western architecture.
