| Instructor: Dr. Jeff Webb |
Modernism and Vernacular
Read the following texts:
Chua Beng-Huat. "Resettling a Chinese Village: A Longitudinal Study." Political
Legitimacy and Housing: Stakeholding in Singapore. London: Routledge, 1997.
51-69. (Course Packet).
Chua Beng-Huat. "Modernism and the Vernacular: Public Spaces and Social Life."
Political Legitimacy and Housing: Stakeholding in Singapore. London:
Routledge, 1997. 70-89. (Course Packet).
Booth, Wayne. The Craft of Research. "Using Sources." 73-84.
Preparation:
These essays by Chua Beng Huat, who teaches in the Sociology Department here
at NUS, are from Political Legitimacy and Housing, a study of
public housing in Singapore. The chapters are models of expository prose. Chua
writes very clearly and is always careful to show how his interpretations of
the social impact of resettlement are warranted by the evidence he supplies:
interviews, observations, the work of other sociologists, etc. In this respect,
Chua's academic style differs from that of the other sociologist we've read,
George Simmel, who offered almost no data to support his claims but instead
relied on the reader's ability--presumably as a metropolitan--to recognize the
truth of those claims. This is certainly a form of evidence, though obviously
very tricky to deploy successfully. What advantages and disadvantages does Chua's
evidentiary style have? Notice, too, that although Chua's basic approach is
scientific, with sections at the beginning of the each chapter on methodology,
he proceeds by asking questions. What are the questions motivating his analysis
in each chapter? Are they genuine questions? Are his answers at all surprising
to you?
The comparison with Simmel is appropriate since Chua is also interested in
the impact on people of modernization, specifically urbanization, as people
were aggressively resettled from villages into HDB flats following Singapore's
independence. For Simmel, the contrast between the village and the metropolis--indeed,
between villager and metropolitan--couldn't be starker. How do Chua's findings
differ from, or perhaps in some respects corroborate, Simmel's analysis of metropolitan
life?
Finally, Chua's chapter
on modernist and vernacular architectural styles obviously bears comparison with Le Corbusier,
who is widely regarded as an--perhaps the--exemplary modernist architect. Corbusier, you
will remember, stressed the virtues of using a standard form, or repeating unit, as the
basis of of design for all structures in the city of tomorrow (175).
Chua is considering only public housing units, but we might ask further to
what extent modernist structures dominate the rest of Singapore. Is Singapore
essentially Corbusier's city of tomorrow, with its relentless
geometry and functional specialization? But David Turnbull and Rem Koolhaas, both practicing architects,
stress Singapore's lack of geometry (Turnbull 231, Koolhass 22). What
do you think? Furthermore, how would you relate Chua's analysis of the way Singaporeans
adapted to resettlement with Jane Jacobs' interest in the street level order
that people created for themselves amidst New York's apparent disorder? Another
way of putting this question is to ask how much architecture actually influences
behavior, and hence to what extent urban planners could be considered social
engineers? Is there, to borrow Chua's phrase, "architectural determinism" (71)?
To what degree?
Writing assignment: 1) Summarize Chua's argument in "Modernism
and Vernacular" first in one paragraph, then in one sentence.
Further Reading (please contact
me if you find materials that should be added to this list):
|
