Aug 2
2010
Herzog & de Meuron in Beijing. Jean Nouvel in Minneapolis. Zaha Hadid in Guangzhou.
Is the globalization of design creating a fertile dialogue or erasing local identities?
Avinash gave the final word
I’d argue that it actually strengthens local identities. And this is essentially a function of time.
A great example, one that I am familiar with, is Louis Kahn’s Indian Institute of Management Building in Ahmedabad, India. The building has little, really, to do with local building traditions in Ahmedabad (which were in themselves heavily influenced by 150 years of colonial rule).
At the time, one might have argued that its influence was so great that it erased local identity. But what it actually did was open up the possibilities for a new local Ahmedabadi architecture, with a unique vocabulary of its own: exposed brick and concrete, large, airy spaces that are carefully shielded from direct sunlight, yielding surprisingly cool interiors. Today, even domestic architecture in Ahmedabad has this distinct flavour.
Local identity is resilient and fluid, and cultures re-invent themselves all the time.
Friday, August 6 at 4:29pm
Nice, well-designed, uplifting (and yes, pretty) buildings can be absorbed into alien cultures but in some cases design will be rejected after use, or sometimes on sight. I remember overhearing a story in St. Louis where designers built a playground in a crime-ridden area of the city, and it was quickly destroyed and left to burn (that end seems improbable, though. What playgrounds are flammabe?).
Architecture is so big that we are forced to deal with it. Comparatively, we can choose whether to buy the newest gadget, eat at KFC, buy a Smart Car (maybe), but only a few decide the built environment and the richest get to decide where they live but not anyone else, really.
The case of the playground is strange to me, but maybe people felt their identity was being destroyed. Or maybe that’s why many feel a secret satisfaction at seeing disaster movies like the Day After Tomorrow or 2012.
Friday, August 6 at 2:45pm
I remember a character in a Woody Allen movie saying, “Comedy equals tragedy plus time.” Perhaps a similar calculus works with architecture: local identity equals foreign design plus time. For example, think of the Bund in Shanghai. It’s a bunch of Neoclassical piles created by European architects in the early part of the 20th century. Today, it’s pure Shanghai. Do we just need to wait a few decades for local people and places to absorb foreign objects and make them their own?
Thursday, August 5 at 7:36pm
Some food for thought: Katharina Altemeier’s review of this spring’s “Global Design” show at the Museum of Design in Zurich
http://www.stylepark.com/en/news/global-design/303500
Thursday, August 5 at 12:22pm
In the spread of design through the advances of global communication, dialogues are sprouting up giving fruit to new styles, collaborations, and advances in design. Even with the perspective to see the world’s inspiration in a moment, local identities will not be destroyed. The local voice will always have a place. I consider even the “local” differences of Los Angeles, USA and New York, USA. Communication has spread between these two hot beds of creativity and yet there is still a distinct New York voice and Los Angeles style. One of the key factors sustaining local identities is pride in one’s home, one’s territory, one’s stomping grounds. While our wings may span the globe, our roots grow deepest in the place we call home.
Wednesday, August 4 at 12:40pm
I agree, a big question is: does global design create useful or unhelpful buildings or objects? It seems that we should be looking for reactions to design, over time, through people’s eyes. How do Beijing residents see their Herzog & de Meuron building? How do those in Minneapolis feel their Jean Nouvel building, including (especially) people who work or see plays in the that blue, spaceship-resembling theatre—for it was designed for them.
Kenneth Frampton, in his writing “Towards a Critical Regionalism,” suggested that universal architecture can create universal placelessness. I think that, nowadays, architects are contributing to create places and meaning (new or not), and if they aren’t we should call them out (and if their buildings hurt more than help, we should take note). Unfortunately, good design is rare when compared with the amount of Wal-Marts, as much as I love them.
It’s about how the people relate to their built environment, but we know little about this, in both new buildings and older ones (and on a side note, good design dialogue seems to take users into account during the design process).
Wednesday, August 4 at 9:16am
Chinese focus groups when asked about american restaurants etc. coming to china want them to be super american (read Disney). American national brands have spent the last couple of years trying to “deGap” their stores and make them regional/locally appropriate ….mid eastern entrepeners are developing store concepts for mideast,india and china using US ROI business models but
non western imagery/form etc…(even avoiding the use of english store names for fear of anti american backlash) …I wonder if a KFC doesnt have alot more global/local impact then a “press talked” about building
Wednesday, August 4 at 9:10am
I agree with Paddy’s comment, and I think the globalization of technology specifically is allowing design to operate on many levels that range from global to very local.
When it comes to design in general, I don’t think in terms of foreign or familiar but rather engaging/useful or boring/unhelpful. Because technology has exposed much of the world–cultures, images, materials–to each other to some degree, I think it has also changed the way we perceive design, so there is fertile dialogue + erasing happening all the time, every day. But when it comes to architecture and urban planning in particular, I think the process can often seem brutal or destructive, even if the resulting building or environment is contextualized. Here the erasing is all too real. While technology allows us quick and easy access to a wealth of new information and images, it takes time to learn to live with something new.
Wednesday, August 4 at 7:55am
I think of globalization as the rapid transfer of ideas. A loss of friction between regions. It is creating abrupt collisions at a rate difficult to absorb. We must all be prepared for this rate to accelerate. What will it mean to never have the time to absorb cultural change?
My grandmother remembered seeing a car for the first time and my son lives in a world with nearly a billion.
Globalization of design may be a fertile erasing of identity.
Tuesday, August 3 at 1:35am
I think it depends on the architect. Focusing on the client’s needs is very important, and this client focus leads to similarities in design overall – a focus on “green” building practices, for example. Ethical, responsible, client focused architecture lends some similarities to design, I think.
However, adherence to overall concepts to the detriment of the building site, client needs, and local culture is harmful to design – but as in any art form some architects and designers will adhere to their internalized standards and ideas while ignoring the requirements of the client and the special qualities of the local site and culture. The best designs happen a the intersection of principles and sensitivity. Take, for example, the Kimbell Art Museum. Kahn obviously had standards and ideas for the building, but was sensitive to the needs of the client (think of the long, customizable gallery areas) as well as the culture and climate (the way he treats the harsh Texas sun). I think, then that I would echo Mr. Harrington’s previous comment and expand by saying that “good” design and buildings come from a place where ideals, ideas, and sensitivity meet.
Monday, August 2 at 5:23pm
Both.
It’s creating fertile local dialogues by exposing local cultural economies to diverse global voices.
And it’s erasing local identities by creating a more homogeneous global (and by extension local) field of creative output.
For those who are exporting their design to far off contexts, it requires a more participatory involvement with the local culture if one is to hope for a meaningful engagement with that context. The challenge is to do so within the realities of deadlines, budgets, and clients who want to buy that designer’s ‘brand’. Some very interesting things happen when a designer from a different culture truly engages with the local cultural economy. David Adjaye’s new museum of African American History and Culture in Washington looks like it will be such a thing.
For those who are watching as design from far away places is imported into their places of local practice, it requires an open attitude and willingness to expand one’s understanding of the virtues of the imported thoughts and ideas. In the best instances, the imported work can become a catalyst for the cultural economy and spur a wave of local inventiveness. Our project in Guatemala had this precept at its core. In fact, failure to ‘lose the ego’ means failure for the project.
In either case, what’s needed is a willingness to deeply engage with the specificity of the local site because that’s where the real opportunity lies. And not just in terms of the technical dimensions, but also the cultural.
Monday, August 2 at 8:27am
Avinash Rajagopal
1
Avinash gave the Final Word
I’d argue that it actually strengthens local identities. And this is essentially a function of time.
A great example, one that I am familiar with, is Louis Kahn’s Indian Institute of Management Building in Ahmedabad, India. The building has little, really, to do with local building traditions in Ahmedabad (which were in themselves heavily influenced by 150 years of colonial rule).
At the time, one might have argued that its influence was so great that it erased local identity. But what it actually did was open up the possibilities for a new local Ahmedabadi architecture, with a unique vocabulary of its own: exposed brick and concrete, large, airy spaces that are carefully shielded from direct sunlight, yielding surprisingly cool interiors. Today, even domestic architecture in Ahmedabad has this distinct flavour. I don’t know whether there was any real dialogue (in that Ahmedabad gave back to Louis Kahn), but local architecture definitely received a shot in the arm.
Local identity is resilient and fluid, and cultures re-invent themselves all the time. In the long run, who knows what all this international architecture will become in the hands of the Chinese? But whatever it is, when the Chinese architects take over, I’m betting it will still be Chinese.
Friday, August 6 at 4:29pm