Critical Regionalism as a Guide to Creating Better Public Space





“The bounded place-form, in its public mode, is also essential to what Hannah Arendt has termed “the space of human appearance,” since the evolution of legitimate power has always been predicated upon the existence of the “polis” and upon comparable units of institutional and physical form.” - Kenneth Frampton


Much of our discussion last week was centered on the topic of public space versus private space, but in the writings of Kenneth Frampton, we are called to question the very existence, or absence, of defined places – public or private. Several times throughout his essay, Frampton points out how the absence of the “place-form” and consideration of place have resulted in the creation of “placelessness” in architecture and urban planning. Frampton describes urban planning’s “current tendency to reduce all planning to little more than the allocation of land use and the logistics of distribution.” However, I find a deeper explanation of the importance of place, and one’s connection to place, in the writings of architect W.G. Clark (who is arguably a good example of a critical regionalist architect from Southeast). In an essay by Clark titled “Replacement,” he explains that the characteristics of a site, or place, correspond to three aspects of humanity: body, mind, and spirit.[i]  Thus, to create architecture of resistance one must understand the significance and importance of a place through these three channels before establishing a defined place in which the built environment – public or private - can exist.

W.G. Clark’s reminder to architects to consider the physical, cultural, and spiritual places of a site echoes Frampton’s assertion that Critical Regionalist architecture must be more informed and shaped by the site, than modern, avant-garde architecture, which in contrast, shapes the site to accommodate its needs.  Frampton explains that for architecture to relate more closely to nature, one must consider the five realms of Critical Regionalism: topography, context, climate, light, and tectonic.

However, I find that the writings of W.G. Clark can, once again, aid in a deeper understanding of creating a more direct relationship between architecture and site.  Clark distinguishes engagement with the site as “settlement” which is distinct from simply “abiding in a place.”  He writes, “Settlement implies a benign and sympathetic occupation, the selection of a specific and favored place, and the engagement of that place to meaningful use; settlement is the establishment of home. Our growth is opposite of establishment.”[ii]

Perhaps the crisis of public space in today’s world results less from debates about the level of “designing” that is appropriate for public space, but is more an issue of architects and designers not truly understanding the places that they are designing. Using the words of architects and thinkers like Clark and Frampton as guiding principles in our efforts to understand a site better, can we create better public space?




[i] Clark, W.G. "Replacement." Clark and Menefee. New York: Princeton Architectural, 2000. Page 13.
[ii] Clark, W.G. "Replacement." Clark and Menefee. New York: Princeton Architectural, 2000. Page 11.

Comments

Popular Posts