Regional Criticalism
Google defines Critical Regionalism as “progressive approach to design that seeks to mediate between the global and the local languages of architecture” “The stylings of critical regionalism seek to provide an architecture rooted in the modern tradition, but tied to geographical and cultural context.”
According to Frampton, critical regionalism should really aim at adopting modern architecture. Emphasis should be placed on topography, climate, and light. I feel that it is important for a design to correlate with its site. This will look different for each and every building, but I feel that it is crucial. We do this in each project with something as simple of sun study diagrams. How do we as designers replicate this idea of critical regionalism that responds to the environment, the culture, and gains emotional responses from those who walk across the threshold?
Are the buildings that we design today leaving a mark? Will people look back in years to come with awe of our design?
I understand your argument of how we usually do work on site specific conditions, no argument. That's same as what I felt when I heard this concept.
ReplyDeleteComing to the cultural context. I believe few cultures disappear after a while and few stand for centuries. But at some point of time, they might have also not existed(before specific contexts or even civilizations).
For example, after Independence, Indian architecture reverted back to local and traditional architecture. But there are buildings that were built during British rule which still stand today in India and create a confusion in Critical regionalism. Similar condition with Mughal Architecture.
The rulers came, ruled and left, but the Architecture was left behind and created new regionalism.