Summaries

The Israeli ‘Place’ in East Jerusalem:

This essay examines architectural practices and the Israeli built environment in general. Initially Israeli architects built in the international style, but this didn’t leave any room for culture. To create a sense of culture and belonging, Israeli architects looked to Palestinian buildings. These buildings had rich history and looked like they belonged in their environment. Israeli architects copied this style to create a sense of belonging in themselves. The sense of homeliness didn’t exist in the international style, but it did in Palestinian architecture. Moshe Safdie played a large role in the Israelization of Jerusalem. He pushed to appropriate the style of Palestinian buildings, though he didn’t use the word “appropriate” in his work. After the war in 67 there were a few different tactics used to stake Israel’s claim on the land. They asserted their stolen style as local to the region, they biblicized their architecture and emphasized the history of the location, and they established mediterraneanism. Mediterraneanism allowed Israeli architects to appreciate what was actually Palestinian architecture, while still being disgusted by Palestinian culture as a whole. Essentially Israel appropriated the architecture of the colonized in order to assert themselves as belonging in Jerusalem, and Jerusalem belonging to them.

Toward a Critical Regionalism:

In this article Frampton discusses the idea of universalities, and a common global culture that is eroding distinct old cultures. He discusses this further in six different parts. In the first part he argues that modern buildings and designs are extremely optimized by technology. The utility of a building is becoming its only meaning, which he says is meaningless. In the second part he discusses the rise and fall of the avant-garde and how it can’t be seen as liberative anymore due to being brought to its extreme, the threshold of nuclear war. The third part asserts that architecture should take a critical regionalism approach to design. This approach takes the effect of universal civilization and eases it with specific elements of style derived from a specific place. The fourth part establishes that critical regionalism also needs to take in the provision of the place-form, which is a clearly defined boundary for building. Part five states that critical regionalism must take into account environmental and historical factors, and build in a way that integrates them. With the final part of this article Frampton asserts that critical regionalism needs to take into account all of the senses, not only sight. Try to think about distancing yourself from the direct experience of the environment of a building.

Global Modernism and the Postcolonial:

In this article the author’s goal is to look back at modern architecture, and seeks to decolonize and globalize modern architecture with a postcolonial framework. In the past, modernism and modern architecture have been seen as a natural evolution of a particular western history. This statement in and of itself is unifying, and universalizing modern architecture. The author points out that the attempt to do this is a wasted effort, as what “modern architecture” is is actually very fragmented. The author also points out that it isn’t just former colonies that are postcolonial, it is the entire world, including the west. Also, the “west” is just as abstract of a place and definition as the “orient”. The west defines itself as the west, and somehow establishes itself as the center for science, and reason. In the “post-postcolonial” section the author also notes that the western idea of influence in the world is problematic. This idea of influence is about the relationship between a center of origin and its peripheries. Western thinking assumes that innovation starts in the west and radiates outward to the colonized. Essentially the analysis of history will always be changing. One way to stay on top of analyzing history is through a deconstructive and reconstructive process.

Critical Response:

One of the thoughts I had while reading the first article “The Israeli ‘place’ in east Jerusalem”, was at what point does building in a certain style become cultural appropriation? Obviously the case of Israel and Palestine is an extreme example, and straight up appropriation. But a different example could be, what if a non-Japanese architect designs a building in traditional Japanese style? Is that insensitive, is that unethical? My gut tells me that the stamp of appropriation would have to be considered on a case to case basis. Personally, I think that the amount of passion and thoughtfulness that goes into a project has to be taken into account. But even then if everyone involved in the making of a project was thoughtful and sensitive, and had the best of intentions, that project could be received by society as appropriation. So who is right? Where is the line for appropriation?

Application and Interpretation:

Here is the supreme court of Israel. This building began design in the late sixties, and the foundation was laid in 1973. Due to the Yom Kippur War the project was abandoned until 1986, and the building completed construction in 1992. The overall layout of the building is more modern than other projects in Israel, but the materials used, arches, and courtyard are ver indicative of Palestinian architecture. The Israel supreme court website says this building is “a combination of modern architecture and architectural references from typical buildings of Jerusalem throughout the generations”. The site also says that the building is “linked to tradition, inspired by biblical metaphors”. This is just another example, on a large scale, of Israel appropriating the local style of architecture to establish themselves as belonging.

Takeaways:

• An architectural style can give a place a great sense of culture.
• Critical regionalism incorporates designing with new technologies and methods while also taking into account the history of a place.
• Looking at architectural history has to take into account multiple perspectives, as each perspective will have biases and blind spots.