Looking Past the Signs
A simplified definition of Pragmatism is trying to learn from reality. Retroactive manifestos such as "Learning from Las Vegas" or "Learning from Pop", did just that. They present facts of reality, choosing to look past the signs (literally & figuratively), that architecture styles and trends in our cities today may not be what they should be.
Denise Scott Brown presents a short critique of this logic:
"Of course learning from what's there is subject to the caveats and limitations of all behavioristic analysis -- one is surveying behavior which is constrained, it is not what people might do in other conditions. The poor do not willingly live in tenements and maybe the middle classes don't willingly live in Levittowns;"
I pulled from this quote, my own interpretation and directly translated it to our current studio project in Haiti. As architecture students, I believe that it is our duty to observe and respect the current context and architecture that exists. In surveying behaviors though, we need to understand that although Cange may be filled with small structures composed of banana wood and corrugated metal roofs and also the larger gingerbread house styles, these may not be the preferred architecture styles if other options were available.
As we design in Haiti, it is important to search the context for clues on material usage and formal qualities that are currently successful, but to also think inventively and present the opportunity for new architectural styles to arise.
I fully agree with you. But by connecting it with our project you make me think about completely other aspects. I think the same when we are dealing with developed societies, when we are paying attention to local (even if not attractive in terms of “ideal” architectural taste) features of an environment, when we learn from it and use it for our design to make it for the good of the society but simultaneously rooted in it. It works in Clemson, Los Angeles, Toronto, Madrid, Moscow. But I keep asking myself why we think that we can make the decisions, working with developing countries like Haiti? Could we call it neocolonialism? Or probably our collaboration with locals, our devotion to understanding and preserving a local identity through our design is a way to overcome this notion? I think yes.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this, it brings to mind that "as an architect you design for the present, with an awareness of the past, for a future which is essentially unknown" (Norman Foster),
ReplyDeleteof course we want our architecture to last, but we have to do so with a sensitivity to the current context and historical context as well.
I agree that it is always important for an Architect to carefully consider the physical, cultural, and historical context in which he or she designs, but part of considering it is also questioning why it is the way it is, and if the existing conditions are good. I think there must be a balance between accepting and questioning: a balance between making a statement/being innovative and respecting an existing culture and context.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Madison, there is more than just than "accepting the current reality as is". That's what Venturi and Scott-Brown were doing. That particular reality that they interpreted in Las Vegas for that week under their lense was enough and I don't think that's our intent in Haiti but like you said, observe, be respectful, learn from their past and present reality but also move forward with it using architecture as an tool for it. Yet, I do agree with Ksenia too. Is this just neocolonialism? How can we help others without feeling guilty or being judged for it? It really troubles me sometimes but I tend to think that if its for the best, then it will get done.
ReplyDelete