The American Dream
The discussion of critical rationalism in class today made me think of suburban developments and the typical neoclassicism style in which they are constructed. Often thought of as the “American dream” classically detailed suburban homes with pitched roofs and large yards seem to be a popular and desirable choice for American families. Why is this? Is this popularity due to cultural reasons? Aesthetic reasons? Or does it have to do with the idea of familiarity is a safe option? While these questions of popularity may not be answerable, critical regionalism works in many ways to address the fake or inefficient nature of neoclassicism. Using the same logic of modernism, without the rigidity of form, critical regionalism looks to use logic and reason to address design decisions. Whether this may be the roof form to allow for light or building orientation for site connectivity, the form is informed by site conditions as opposed to aesthetics. By following this line of logic, critical regionalist projects work for the buildings inhabitants as opposed to direct contrast as found in some neoclassicist work.
I find myself contemplating this question often, especially when driving around suburban and rural areas. It doesn't matter where I am, South Carolina or Massachusetts, the vast majority of homes are board and batten cladding, have double-hung windows with shutters, and an accent painted door. Hell, I grew up in one. The only answer I can come up with is a result of the two main facets of construction: money and labor. These materials are cheap and are always available in the US. East Coast American general contractors are framers; they know light-frame wood construction best. Why fix what ain't broke? The onus is on architects to leverage critical regionalism as a design tool to create a more diverse and interesting portfolio of single-family home architecture.
ReplyDeleteThis is exactly what comes to mind for me when thinking about this topic, the houses that a lot of us probably grew up in. Your typical suburb house that had a cookie cutter floorplan and exterior material, but everybody had a different colored front door. It is a product of more affordable housing in newer neighborhoods. And when those neighborhoods get to be 15-25 years old (all at the same time cause they all went up in about 6 months) then onto the next pop up set of cookie cutters. Its efficient and for the "American Dream" its the closest thing while remaining affordable. Also, if we threw in a custom designed house into one of these neighborhoods, it becomes a noticeable anomaly. Therefore, the cookie cutters prevail.
DeleteI think also that there really is nothing wrong with the suburban style itself that we've come to accept. For the most part its negative perception is because of the widespread amount of bad and generic suburban design there is where its almost begun to take over the entire style itself.
DeletePalladio fathered "children" outside of the architectural profession, too. In many areas (ours in particular), popular tastes are still steeped in our country’s historical ties to Western Europe and the dominance of White, Christian culture. Problematically, society typically equates the term "nice neighborhood" with homes that mimic 18th and 19th century Europe. Our classically-designed public buildings—seats of power and symbols of our towns, states, and country—reinforce this as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree that money is reinforcing this practice. However, I would bet that it has less to do with the cost of materials and more to do with market demand. Developers and contractors bank on traditional architecture that will sell, probably channeling the “Why fix what ain't broke?” mentality that you mentioned.
I think what Cindy said is spot on in response to your question. I think that when looking to ancient greek or roman architecture, people associate columns and this style with power and wealth. It is what we learn first in architecture school, hence why the government buildings/ monuments are found in that same style in Washington DC. It communicates order and grandeur.
ReplyDeleteThis is probably why this idea of the recent government's idea to make all federal buildings look like that came out.
I also think Josh and Cindy gave good answers as there is more than just one reason. After decades of B.S. the construction of these types of houses has been optimized in the United States and it also becomes a safe aesthetic for developers to sell to the general public. Some of Houston "nice" neighborhoods' deed restrictions push you to build these types of houses and prevent you from building anything that looks out of alignment with it. I use to go through these at work and it was ridiculous how they refuse to let go of their ideas of what a nice American neighborhood should look like, but at least they did cross out the clause that said that only white Caucasians could live in those neighborhoods.
ReplyDelete