Comments on: Optimism by design

By: Critical regionalism – or critical localism? The Sydney Opera House and its context | Garden Design And Landscape Architecture Blog – Gardenvisit.com

Fri, 16 Apr 2010 07:12:56 +0000

[…] and critical in the sense of not being a slavish imitation of older forms. Christine suggested that the Sydney Opera House exemplifies this approach but I wonder if Jorn Utzon’s great […]

By: Christine

Christine — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 05:56:32 +0000

The image reference for the architecture for the Burj and its location was an inspiration. [ http://flashydubai.com/tag/burj-al-arab/ ] From the presidential suite, however, the air quality (or is this effect due to sand storms) does not look fantastic?

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:47:29 +0000

I agree about the Burj – very good but not nearly as good as the Sydney Opera House. The Burj looks a bit like an advertising display outside an airport – probably for mobile phones.

By: Christine

Christine — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 05:17:59 +0000

No not the same thing exactly. But yes the Burj is poetic in its own right. The Burj Hotel in Dubai is a great building. It is a very evocative and self confident building.

I have also seen photographs of the interiors and believe they do not do justice to the building – they are obviously expensive but not tasteful. [ http://cae2k.com/bhagwan-photos-0/inside-burj-al-arab.html ]

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:10:22 +0000

Your summary is very good ‘the poetics of the harbour, to the wind, and to the light’. Would you say the same about the Burj Hotel in Dubai? To me it is less poetic – but still a good building.

By: Christine

Christine — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 06:30:16 +0000

Sorry that I was not clear. I would say Utzon’s regionalism is a response to nature first, in the case of the Sydney Opera House to the poetics of the harbour, to the wind, and to the light.

Perhaps the following statement sums it up best: “Utzon is one of the very few architects with sufficient sense of abstraction and judgment to be able to translate the power of natural phenomena almost direct into buildings (others’ attempts to do so usually end up in kitsch fiasco).”

Within the design there was also a response to the urban setting (which I suppose strictly speaking is cultural).

In Utzon’s design for the Opera House it is almost too difficult to separate the two (nature and culture) as responses to context. However his cultural borrowings which were abstracted were not regional ie. South American temple platforms and references to Japanese architectural forms etc.

Although I was much surprised to read this blog comment on the Opera House:
“Even as a student I went on the occasional tour when it seemed as if one had strayed onto some gigantic Mayan temple.”

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 05:51:56 +0000

‘Imperative’ is too-strong a word but I think there is a heavy obligation on all the built environment professions to THINK about both nature and culture when developing a design. And I see nature as the more important of the two. Development projects can and should respond to geography: landform, climate, hydrology, geology, ecology etc. The above photographs of Chardigarh are admirable for their response to sunlight and it would have been wise to follow this lead in many parts of the hot-arid zone. But much more important than this is the demonstration that appropriate responses to characteristics of the natural environment are possible/desirable/necessary.
I also think the Plan Voisin demonstates a significant response to landscape – it is just a tragedy that Corb had such an odd attitude to gardens and that his example, rather than his principle, was followed in so many twentieth century building projects. He can, for example, stand beside Chairman Mao as one ot the men who most influence on modern China!
Re Utzon, I agree that his regionalism is a response to culture rather than to nature.

By: Christine

Christine — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 05:27:59 +0000

Kenneth Frampton’s 1987 definition is a good one. Critical Regionalism as a style rather than strictly an approach to architecture (Corbusier’s latter work, Utzon’s work) gained currency in the 1990’s. Some aspects of this movement perhaps follow more closely on Alexander Tzonis and Liane Lefaivre’s 1981 definition which evolves from critical theory rather than architectonics.[ http://www.worldarchitecture.org/theory-issues/index.asp?position=detail&no=11&ref=ri&rel=4 ]

I suppose the nature v culture debate is important here. Is the architecture a response to place in the sense of setting or location? Or is it a response to the culture of place? Critical Regionalism as a theory and a style is grounded in a political polemic.

Kenneth Framption in his essay on cultural sustainability says “Norberg-Schulz connects place very strongly to the definition of identity,personal as well as national.” I don’t believe Norberg-Schulz was making a political statement when he said this, rather he was commenting insightfully on place and architecture. [ http://home.earthlink.net/~aisgp/texts/regionalism/regionalism.html ]

Re: Chandigarh. What you say is fair comment, however because Corbusier’s work is not fully resolved in all its aspects does not detract from what he has achieved. See the comments attributed to Mario Botta on “building the site”.

Equally I don’t think it is inconsistent to recognise that Utzon, a Danish architect, could create a building in Australia which was so essentially a response to its location (even though it referenced in abstract a range of elemental forms from other cultures).

Does Utzon’s work belong to ‘Critical Regionalism’ as a style? I would say not. Does it however demonstrate a critical regional approach to architecture? I would say yes.

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:38:18 +0000

Here is a comment on Kenneth Frampton's understanding of critical regionalism. I have been thinking about it and am not finding it easy to see Chandigarh as an example. One hears about people having to walk long distances in hot sun to get from building to building. They do this on country roads in India but to make them do it in towns as well seems a misjudgement to me.

By: Christine

Christine — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:00:17 +0000

I have not visited Chandigarh either – it would definitely be on my iternary on any visit to India. The notion of ‘regional design’ derives not from referencing the architecture and culture of the region, but rather from the approach taken by the designer to consider regional factors (including climate) within his design. Did he do this well?

On a blog by someone who had visited Chandigarh described his visit in contrast to the surrounding environment as “like walking into a cultural coma.” He also notes of the building that the pool is dry and is now “just filled with dead animals and rubbish.”

So without visiting myself, I am not sure what to make of this.