Toward a Critical Regionalism

“Western civilization habitually identifies itself [with others] that are a deviation, less advanced, primitive or – exotically interesting at a safe distance.”

-Dutch architect Aldo Van Eyck

The subtle deconstruction of traditional cultures is the antithesis of colonization, thought not altogether irreparable. Some say it is the creative nucleus of great cultures: to destroy the past like a wildfire in an overgrown forest.

Abandonment of cultural past is essentially the first step in achieving modernism. But is it worth reviving dormant cultures? It seems to me as unnatural and anti-Darwin as it does to progress – it went extinct for a reason.
New civilizations grow from roots of our past – but hinder growth when we cling to dead limbs for the sake of familiarity. Older generations have the hardest time letting go of their comfort zones to accept new systems – especially when it comes to urbanizing their communities or upgrading their technology. Don’t even try to teach them about a new app.
“Never ending chains of mean and ends” have us all in a haze of habit. This endless parade of upgrades never seems to amount to any actual progress, as “meaning generates meaninglessness.” Critical Regionalism deconstructs the spectrum of world culture to achieve universal civilization, leaving the avant-garde as its greatest symbol of superiority.

The Israeli Place in East Jerusalem

Belonging. The centuries long strife for a place to belong. The Sabras ironically were inspired by Palestinian vernacular architecture, and still took every means to suppress them. I can’t begin to understand the intricate histories of these feuding peoples, and what it means for today’s never-ending war.

Re: Upper Lifta (Romema) “They do violence to the mountain. They are foreign – imported from some rainy, cool European suburb.”

Moshe Safdie’s Montreal Exhibit ’67 is totally reminiscent of the Nakagin Capsule Tower that I am simultaneously studying for Japan. As much as the Sabras despised foreign influence in their community, I can see the inspiration filter in. Where an “international arch left no room for their culture and national home”, They took an absolute nationalist approach to locking down their Isrealization of culture, but did it really enhance their country, to lock out western influences? Or did it alienate their people from expanding their horizons? It was Safdie’s Zionist dream to somehow fuse the ancient with the modern. I would like to explore the same as a future architect, in a generation stuck in between movements.

In connection with The Place in Jerusalem and Post Colonial Modernism: The global ruins of basic consumer culture have become our universal thread, however the cost of wasteful over-production. And all the ways colonizers appropriate cultures for their own need and greed “in order to define authentic cultures of their own.”

Born and raised in the West of the West, to a white suburban family with no claim to culture besides pop and capitalism – I know I am not the best perspective for this heavy and current topic… But I’m here to listen.

These futurisms continue to progress in a relentless desire for utopia. Both articles connected to tabula rasa and the favoritism of moving earth to our will. I found it interesting to compare bulldozing topography with the forcefulness of colonialism, versus the adaption and cultivation of an existing site. So what if the land is sloped and imperfect? So what if the native culture exists against your ideas of utopia? Don’t force yourself into the picture! If you must stay and change a place that isn’t inherently yours – Adapt to the surrounding ecology as if you belonged.

I find myself steeped in skepticism that Le Corbusier was the best choice for an icon of decolonization. How is it that a white European man is the one to design a new capital for India, and teach the natives about colonization? I smell irony.