It may be easy to think that the topic of Critical Regionalism merely deals with the vernacular matters of building development. However, it observes that in more critical and reflective ways, with particular respect to the emerging world of the 20th century. Kenneth Frampton develops a case for Critical Regionalism as a movement in the context of that world. Along with him, Alexander Tzonis and Liane Lefaivre ask the question of how exactly this movement can fit into the world, and argue for what makes it ‘critical’ than other movements. Moreover, the work of Katherine Morrow Ford provides one example of how Regionalism in general extends beyond history and culture.
In Kenneth Frampton’s Prospects for a Critical Regionalism, he discusses the ‘universalization’ of the world during the 20th century. There comes a question of how the regional can co-exist in this modern space, where the world is becoming more globalized. Frampton defines Critical Regionalism as something of a bridge. “Critical Regionalism is a dialectical expression. It self-consciously seeks to deconstruct universal modernism in terms of values and images which are locally cultivated, while at the same time adulterating these autochthonous elements with paradigms drawn from alien sources…” (Frampton, p.472). As a ‘dialectical expression’, this movement aims to find common ground between previous world and the reality of the present. On the one hand, universal modernism is something that Frampton criticizes for being ‘mediocre’. “Everywhere throughout the world, one finds the same bad movie, the same slot machines, the same plastic or aluminum atrocities...It seems as if mankind, by approaching en masse a basic consumer culture, were also stopped en masse at a subcultural level.” (Frampton, p.470). The replication and mass media and services creates a homogeneity which strips away culture for the sake of selling products to everyone. With this comes a potential loss of value and a ‘subtle destruction’ of both tradition and creativity. At the same time, Frampton does acknowledge a need for compromise. “...But in order to take part in modern civilization, it is necessary at the same time to take part in scientific, technical, and political rationality, something which very often requires the pure and simple abandon of a whole cultural past.” (Frampton, p.470). Advances in technology, building techniques, and the increasingly interdependent nature of the world meant that things can never fully be the same as they were previously.
Similar in stance to Frampton, Tzonis and Leafaivre examine in Why Critical Regionalism Today?, that buildings no longer exist in the same context as they once did. One argument made for Critical Regionalism above other, similar movements is precisely that it is more critical and aware of this. They begin by using one example of Romantic Regionalism, the Strasbourg Cathedral, as a point of contrast. “...no building today is capable of arousing feelings like the ones the Cathedral of Strasbourg did...a sense of individual and local architectural values symbolizing an aspiration for emancipation against universal alien design canons, a sense of belonging to a single racial community” (Tzonis, p.484). They later refer to Critical Regionalism as “...a response to new problems posed by contemporary global development of which it is strongly critical…”. (Tzonis, p.485). Context separates these movements, as Critical Regionalism has to become more widely responsive.
Another key distinction of where Critical Regionalism places its emphasis. “...a commitment to ‘placeness’ and a use of regional design elements as a means of confronting universalist order of architecture hat is seen as dominating or oppressive...it also contains a new idea...that of ‘place’ whose definition goes beyond ethnicity, not to say against the grain of nationalist insularity.” (Tzonis, p.485). The subject of place as an idea that reaches outside of culture is addressed in Katherine Morrow Ford’s “Modern is Regional”. Namely, she discusses issues such as environmental and geographical awareness, which are becoming more prominent in the 20th century. She refers to a ‘lack of uniformity’ as a virtue of Regional design, as it allows place to become more important. “...Lack of studied uniformity is one of its virtues. Environmental influences are enormously important. Concessions made to climate alone result in modifications in orientation, construction and external forms...Regional necessity in each instance is the mother of invention, and the reason for its continuance.” (Ford, p.265). Considerations made to place inform how living space is to be designed, and what needs to be prioritized. These observations allow for the Region and its unique environmental qualities an integral part of the design process. This ‘confronts’ the idea of universal design, paying respect to local conditions while welcoming present techniques and innovations.
Critical Regionalism is a reflective movement that seeks to acknowledge the failings of modernism while accepting the reality of the world as it is. Kenneth Frampton proposes a compromise. Alexander Tzonis and Liane Lefaivre ask the question of how exactly this movement can fit into the world, and argue that this movement is critical precisely because of that ommission. Katherine Morrow Ford’s examination of environmental design is one example of how such compromise can be achieved in practice.
Image Credit: https://pixabay.com/users/moremilu-11409661/?tab=most-relevant
Works Cited
Ford, Katherine Morrow. Modern is Regional, Columbia University Graduate School of Architecture. 1941, pg.264 - 265
Frampton, Kenneth. Prospects for a Critical Regionalism, Princeton Architectural Press. New York. 1996, pg.470 - 480
Tzonis, Alexander. Leafaivre, Liane. Why Critical Regionalism Today?, Princeton Architectural Press. New York. 1996, pg.470 - 480
