Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • 2024-05
  • br Conclusion br The vision though noted

    2018-11-12


    Conclusion
    The vision, though noted, is yet to be sculpted in the right direction. In current architectural discourse, a tendency in which contemporary examples are placed in a hermetic situation where traditional and modern architectural examples are displaced from one another, thereby subverting any possibility for transmission of ideas and lessons between the two despite emerging findings from local architectural case studies where technological innovations and environmental perception and knowledge are remarkably modern. Such tendency limits and slows the promise for the development of an ecologically inspired green/sustainable design-tuned architecture, though this rxr receptor appears to be a catchphrase now. The findings presented in this study do not propose utopian solutions from Asian vernacular examples that might be included in modern buildings. Rather, a few key merged notions between traditional and modern ways of building and construction are illustrated throughout the article. In doing so, we propose that ideas and issues be opened up for the exploration and identification of new directions in green/sustainable and innovative techniques, which might be channeled and filtered through local knowledge, practice, and wisdom as much as by new industrial innovations and emerging technology. Vernacular dwelling studies show a remarkable shift from the previous “image” and “notion” ideas of static old forms. By contrast, a section of current works is opting to highlight critical, creative, and procedural aspects of vernacular examples. This shift certainly lifts vernacular to a prominent position in architectural research, education and practice. In essence, this understanding is not so remote from the famous Miesian aphorism,“ Form is not the aim of the work, but only the result” (Fromonot, 2003, 23).This result, as in the vernacular architecture of the Mru as well as in modern successful design practices, is hinged on some common dynamics. Any boundary between tradition and modernity is fluid and complex. The bypassed vernacular built solutions, such as material and structural sensibility, minimalism, modularity, adaptability, as well as tactile and temporality or fluidity, are essentially modern. Drawing upon the similarities in principles rather than in images, one can see the possibilities of transmission of ideas and techniques from traditional (in vernacular) to modern (as in contemporary examples) or from modern to vernacular in a two way directional process. Needless to say, local vernacular examples offer a rich repertoire of architectural knowledge not only in the field of design, innovations, and sustainable techniques but also in other theoretical fields. Local solutions are obviously honed by culture and social logic (Rapoport, 2005; Oliver, 2003), thereby adding a deeper meaning to the given examples. Indeed, many of the defining criteria for modernist design (such as Le Corbusier׳s “five points of architecture”) that are often considered as radical innovations, are inspired by traditional or vernacular forms (Glancey, 2003) in which social, cultural, spatial, physical, technological, and aesthetic factors combined into one complex definition.
    Acknowledgements We would like to thank Professor Miles Lewis of Architecture Building and Planning (ABP), University of Melbourne, for his unwavering encouragement, useful critiques, and support for x-ray diffraction work. Our gratitude to traveling companions MonKhia and PothiMong, for accompanying us to the remote CHT settlements. Lastly and foremost, deepest thanks to the Mru people in the Bandarban area, especially the karbaris of the ten hamlets, for letting us stay and for trusting and confiding in us. We would also like to thank Jean Pipite of Agence de Developpment de la Culture Kanak for granting the permission to use the photos showcasing Renzo Piano׳s work (Jean-Marie Tjibaou Cultural Center).