Walmart as the New Vernacular?
"The case can be made that Critical Regionalism as a cultural strategy is as much a bearer of world culture as it is a vehicle of universal civilization."
--Kenneth Frampton
Critical Regionalism is an interesting topic because it is rooted in ideas of place/origin and modernity. It is an architectural attempt that falls somewhere between an international style and a local vernacular. With our culture being a part of a larger global society, it seems natural to embrace modernity and technology in our built environment. But it is also unsurprising that local culture is hell-bent on maintaining its roots through local vernacular. The real question is where we draw the line between innovation and the insincere application of contextual forms.
The problem with the vernacular is that people often don't understand what it truly is. Vernacular, by definition, does not fall into the realm of the architect. The vernacular is a tradition of building that is developed over time through the use of local materials and the trial and error of the people who build there. Therefore, any attempt by the architect to replicate the vernacular is merely a mimicry of the original thing.
Then there are people who think vernacular is merely the architecture that they consider "unique" to their area. We discussed university architecture in class. You can take almost any university architecture and place it on any other campus and swap out its material to match the rest of the school and people will be proud of their local tradition. This isn't regionalism and it sure isn't nationalism. America is notorious for trying to establish a national identity through architecture and most of those forms we are the proudest of are reinterpretations of architecture from elsewhere.
I guess the point I am trying to make, at least from an American standpoint, is that Critical Regionalism makes sense on the global scale but is harder to define on the local scale. There are obviously American forms of architecture, but they aren't the forms that people are proud of. It's not like people want to build architecture that looks like Walmart when the building isn't being used as a Walmart. America is a landscape of asphalt and decorated sheds, yet that is not what the people see as being American architecture. In order for Critical Regionalism to be successful in America, we have to first be able to define what our true local architecture looks like. And how does this architecture fit into the global context?
Taylor, really good points! It's really hard for me to define what "American" architectural style truly is... and I think ultimately it's a lot of different things in different places. But as a whole nation, we tend to be known for the "big boxes" and the imitation of cultural architecture elsewhere in the world.
ReplyDeleteTaylor,
ReplyDeleteVery right. I think local identity in the form of architecture is hard to establish... as it relates to vernacular. BUT, I do see some styles pushing through. The PNW has a great deal of heavy timber projects, and the southwest has a good deal of adobe structure. Although these have manifested from different times and cultures, they still too did not establish the initial vernacular... being the hut. It is a fluid adaptation from the sole purpose of built form: shelter.
I love the statement: "There are obviously American forms of architecture, but they aren't the forms that people are proud of." This is so true in the vernacular of the U.S. We have let big box stores and consumerism defined our cityscapes and urban sprawls. I agree that we need to identify our vernacular on a deeper level. Some U.S. cities have done it sparingly such as the singles houses of Charleston.
ReplyDeleteWanna hear my favorite joke?
ReplyDeleteWhat's the difference between America and yogurt?
If you leave yogurt alone for 200 years it'll grow a culture.
I think an interesting point between local architecture for america and other areas is how these communities started. America started in a wide variety of places at the same time as colonization spread. And these people who settled largely had no idea who their neighbors were other than they were someone else trying to survive. People migrated from all over too, so different dialects were exchanged, food, ways of life, etc. In other parts of the world, tribes and cities have been growing for a long time and went through different stages. It's much easier to establish a local as we think of it when a town has been there for hundreds of years before "modern" architecture. It's much harder to distinguish when almost all of the architecture is "modern"
ReplyDeleteTaylor,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your views on American architecture. I think maybe American architecture is picking and pulling styles from different time periods and cultures because as a country we started as a melting pot of cultures and people. As we develop our own identity as a country, it would be interesting to dissect what we need in vernaculars in different regions of the US.