Showing posts with label Vernacular. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vernacular. Show all posts

Interrogating Difference: Postcolonial Perspectives in Architecture and Urbanism / Jyoti Hosagrahar / 2012

Hosagrahar in her survey article on the Postcolonial thought interrogates changing perspectives on architecture and urbanism in the colonized world. Her arguing of intellectual decolonization is reminiscent of Chatterjee's challenging question -- should even the thoughts of the colonial world remain colonized forever? She introduces the emergence of postcolonial thought as a rebellion to "dominance of universalizing paradigms and simplistic categorizations in conventional scholarship in architecture and urbanism focused on Western Europe and North America. Simply, it is thinking about the "relationship  between a dominant power and its subjects under colonialism."

The essay begins with a discussion of key ideas and concepts in postcolonial theory and the influence of decades of postcolonial critiques on architecture and urbanism.
Frantz Fanon's "The Wretched of Earth" (1961) that critiqued French colonization of Algeria, denounced psychopathology of colonialism and forewarned about the violence in the aftermath of independence struggles. It inspired anti-colonial liberation movements for decades
Edward Said's "Orientalism" (1978) was a literary analysis of the creation of the 'Orient', and discussed learned Orientalists who disdained indigenous scholars and bestowed authority to historical texts by European scholars. Said showed that identity was culturally constructed and paved way for architectural historians to study buildings and the urban fabric as cultural documents that could reveal hidden biases.
Foucalt's seminal works on Power, Knowledge, and Culture presented the networks of power that could dominate without the assertion of physical force, and led to new ways of postcolonial thinking where architecture was seen as tool of power.
The Subaltern Group started in 1980's and spearheaded by Ranajit Guha, Gyan Pandey, Partha Chaterjee, Gayatri Spivak opened a new window to colonial history by proposing that history should be seen from below. They argued that the non-elites (peasants in India) were the agents who had brought radical socio-economic changes in the colonies, and the experiences of these marginalized people opens a new window to national history. Hosagrahar suggests that the works of Subaltern group has influenced Architetcure and Urbanism in two ways: One, by legitimizing the history from margins, and second, by recognizing the power of even non-elites in controlling and shaping the built environment.
She also discusses the commentaries of Henry Louis Gates and Kwame Appaiah's on black culture and African-ness, Hosgargar argues, that brought an awareness of the subjectivities in aesthetic appreciation based on race.
Finally, key works of Homi Bhabha, Arjun Appadurai, and Dipesh Chakrabarty have been instrumental in introducing the hybridity between the east- west, modern- traditional, and have provided complex readings of modernity and globalization. Dipesh. C. in Provincializing Europe (2007) presents an idea of Europe, not as the center of humankind and its scholarship, but as a "mythical site of the original modern."

Postcolonial theory, Hosagrahar writes, "has informed thinking about buildings and urban space as symbolic cultural landscapes that are historically constituted, culturally constructed, political artifacts whose forms are dynamic and meanings constantly negotiated."

The second part traces the historiography of postcolonial architecture and urbanism which contests the european architectural canon as the 'original' history of architecture. As Gwen Wright's book on French Urbanism and Thomas Metcalf's work on Imperial India demonstrate, even seemingly antagonistic projects of architecture in the colony were only built to promote tourism and garner public support (French Algeria), or as a symbolic representation of power that articulated the cultural difference (India). Further, Anthony King's Bungalow and Hosagrahar's work on 19th century Delhi showcase the making of a new 'hybrid culture' that is neither the colonizer's nor from the colony. 
Citing the early works on architectural history which precluded non-western architecture from the canon, she calls for a change in the teaching of history in European and American universities  to include indigenous architecture as a part of the larger canon. 

The third section discusses the creation of national identity through architecture. Hosagrahar identifies three ways in which architecture is used for nation building: One, by rejecting everything that was western and getting inspiration from the traditional-vernacular architecture of the region (Turkey), second, to embrace modernity by having European architects design new capitals (Chandigarh, Dhaka), and third, where changing nationalist agendas results in a diverse range of architecture and hence constructing a diverse national identity. After a brief discussion on who decides what to preserve as cultural identity through architecture, and the effects of globalization on postcolonial thought, the final section presents four elements that are crucial in postcolonial designing in the margins - in-depth knowledge of the site, regional emphasis, being socially responsible and sustainable.

In conclusion, Hosagrahar argues that postcolonial thought has a transformative effect on architecture and urbanism by challenging the paradigms if modernism which are accepted to be universal, second, they urge architectural historians to think of the various alternative narratives to the traditional historical canon of architecture and alert us about the marginalized vernacular histories from the colonies.


Disappearing Dichotomies: Firstworld - Thirdworld; Traditional - Modern/ Janet Abu-Lughod/ 1992

This paper permeates the dichotomous boundaries of Firstworld - Thirdworld, Tradition-Modern by delving into the making and meaning of these terms. Abu-Lughod argues that tradition is not a product but a process, and this process is the same in different parts of the world. She calls for a distinction in understanding 'traditional' and something newly created that is yet to be named. 

Abu-Lughod identifies three ways in which the dichotomies of Firstworld - Thirdworld narratives are breaking down in the social and economic spheres: First, with more 'developing' countries being classified as 'developed' (most famously Japan); Second, as the congruence between geographic location and the social formation fades, dichotomous terms like colonizers - colonized, east- west, north- south are rapidly becoming obsolete (Is Australia South and East?); Third, with the changing International Labor laws it is hard to classify a country let alone a region or a continent into one particular group. Lughod argues that these changes in the economic sphere are reflected in the built environment thus problematizing our understanding of what is 'traditional' and 'modern' architecture.

It was proposed in the early 20th century that the processes of urbanization, industrialization, and modernization could be the determining factors to divide the world two distinct groups. But these lines are increasingly getting blurred. New meanings are created for 'traditional' as the third world id adapting the practices of the first world. Traditional rugs made by an African tribe that depicts war tanks and bombs, Bedouin music tapes that bring together traditional Egyptian horse dance music with European pop tunes, and vernacular self-built houses around the world that are built using ubiquitous cement blocks are but a few examples. Abu-Lughod asks two questions to understand the agencies involved in preserving traditions: whose tradition do we preserve, and why are certain traditions favored over others. She contends that the criteria used to determine whose tradition has to be upheld can only be indeterminate because it eventually obtains a political narrative (ex: which layer of history should archeologists blast, and at which layer do they stop). Also, certain traditions or vernacular practices are favored by modern states simply because they can control and impose ways of life that fits with their ideology (ex: traditional Islamic quarters that segregates the sexes)

By calling upon John Turner's concept of 'traditioning' (verb as opposed to a noun) which says that attention has to be paid to the process through which 'tradition' is created and not the product (traditional) itself, Abu-Lughod proposes three identifying criteria to understand 'traditional’. One, in a traditional product there is a link between the maker and consumer, in that somebody unrelated to and with little empathy to the consumer does not produce the product for profit. Two, traditional things have symbolic meaning and emotional content which is shared by both makers and consumers. And three, traditioning is a collective process where houses/objects are collectively built, collectively interpreted and collectively consumed. 

With changing definitions of 'tradition' and the disappearing boundaries between first and third worlds, Abu-Lughod argues that there are commonalities in the ways 'traditioning' happens at both places. She takes examples from both first world (Harlem, NewYork) and third word (Cairo) where there was a need to creatively re-use old buildings that had symbolic and emotional value to the society. Both in Harlem and Cairo, she writes, the solution to renewing historic buildings that were abandoned in the city center was similar. Thus showing the disappearing dichotomies between the worlds.