Ruralism
This is my family in 1982.
My grandparents are the oldest folks (I am the smallest folk).
Their lives were built around suburbia and the post-war American
dream. They secured home
ownership, two cars, two children, a beagle, and a stock-market account. I have the fondest childhood memories of
playing in the backyard of their split-level 1950’s, banana crème-colored
single-family home that my grandmother still lives in today. Though suburban enough, in reality I grew up
in a very rural county of southwest Virginia.
Rural living is what complicates the suburban/urban
discussion. Today, we cannot use
antiquated or generalized terminology when discussing rural America as
sustained by only the industrial – agriculture, manufacturing, and other production
industries. As rural industry is modernized and increasingly automated, I would say the rural is more trade-oriented
where doctors, veterinarians, mortgage and insurance salesmen, restaurateurs,
educators, artists, craftsmen, and even architects (gasp) choose to make their
livings in rural settings.
Throughout this history course, Auburn’s Rural Studio is the
only mention of social architecture for those with need in rural settings that
comes to mind. However, I think there is
a vast need for architects beyond the urban/suburban. According to the 2010 US Census, about 19.3%
of the US population lives in rural areas.
The rural is sacred to my childhood and outlook on design, where nature –
the wild, lawless and free – still exists.
For those of us who have experienced it, I argue that the rural calls us back and demands
our respect and intrigue as architects.
*Note: I also highly recommend the documentary "If You Build It" written around Emily Pilloton's work with Project H in Bertie County, NC. On Netflix.
I love this post Ivan, and I thank you for sharing your childhood with us. I do agree that the rural condition makes for an interesting exception -or at least a very particular form- of the suburban. Much of the critique of modernity that sprang after the WW2 was inspired on a certain sense of nostalgia of the rural world, even if the subjects of that nostalgia were already urbanized (in the sense of being fully integrated in the modern culture). Also, many historians argue that what makes American Modernity in architecture different from European is precisely the integration of landscape (of course Wright comes to mind here) and the distrust for the city as the only place for relevant architecture to occur.
ReplyDeleteAnyhow, as Henri Lefebvre states, that nostalgia was not only related to a particular relationship with a physical environment (a certain landscape), but also to a way of socialization and economic production. Lefebvre, in a short beautiful text called 'Town and Country' included in his 'Writings about Cities' (which you can find on the course bibliography), explains that the danger of suburbanization during the fifties was double: on one side it meant the end of centrality (the dense, urban city), but on the other it also endangered the culture of the rural. He says that we should concentrate in emphasizing the difference between the urban and the rural.
But, decades after that, you are right in your perception that, even in the US, contemporary architecture theory has become a primary urban discipline. However, some of the more interesting critical practices that deal with social issues right now (such as Teddy Cruz or Alejandro Aravena, who we discussed about a month ago) are inspired on the inventiveness and resourcefulness of rural cultures.