Peter
Caradonna, for whom I work, once gave a lecture that started with a
question: Who here is indigenous? One or two people of the 50 person crowd
raised their hands. If we aren't
indigenous that what are we? The same
dictionary.com entry noted above included antonyms of indigenous as
"foreign, alien". So if we are
not indigenous are we then foreign? Where
I live, in the United States, many people would take offense to that, so maybe
we need to reevaluate how we interpret indigenous.
If you were
to ask an American to give an example of indigenous people the most common
answer would be American Indians. Ask
them to name some characteristic traits of these indigenous people and you are
likely to get answers that include a deep appreciation for the earth, respect
for tradition, and awareness of their heritage.
Nobel traits regardless of your origin.
Traits that that some may say are lacking in our current society.
Prior to the
industrial revolution much architecture around the world would have fit my
description of indigenous simply due to the fact that it wasn't economical to
bring in exotic materials for buildings.
Additionally, the import of new and unfamiliar materials would often
require the import of the skilled labor necessary to have it installed. With the rise of technology and
transportation it became more economical to bring in non-regional
materials. Advances in technology also
saw the emergence of more standardized building materials symbolizing a loss of
the connection to local materials. Following
this standardization of materials came the standardization of aesthetic personified
by the International Style of architecture.
The
acceptance, and promotion by many leading architect of the time, of a singular
International Style can be seen as the turning point away from the elements of
indigenous architecture that made it valuable to its occupants and
culture. People love to travel because
it exposes them to something new. We
visit different places to eat their food, listen to their music, see their
architecture, experience their culture.
Increased globalization is increasing homogenization, I've traveled to
different states and seen the same style housing, the same strip malls, the
same food, I had to search out the things that made it unique.
There is
currently very little regional variation as far as building materials are
concerned, the local lumber yard in New York and Arizona stock the same items,
therefore the skill set of the labor force differs very little based on
location. This isn't necessarily a bad
thing, it is a part of the culture of our time, an ever shrinking world with
ever growing technology. Another element
of indigenous architecture that has largely been lost is its relationship to
local conditions, specifically climate and culture. While some try to mimic the styles of the
past it is often done without regard to why it was done in the past, which was
usually a direct response to specific local conditions whether it be materials,
climate, or use. Even if the reasoning
is understood, indigenous architecture isn't about copying the past, it's about
addressing the specific needs of the place in which it exists.
Modern, or
contemporary, indigenous architecture can take the form of the favelas of
Brazil or the High Line in New York. It
is about its time and place so it is ever changing. If we think of ourselves as indigenous, we're
all indigenous to somewhere, we can think of our architecture as indigenous and
create an architecture of our time and place to serve our needs. I'm not a sociologist but maybe if we reconsidered
our indigenousness we would approach things differently and feel more of an
ownership to the place we are indigenous to.
With ownership comes pride, which demands thoughtfulness, which will
result in art, architecture, culture that is more unique and appropriate to its
time and place.
