Architectural history used to be part of art history, but has been gradually distanced from the latter as architecture develops as an independent modern discipline. Despite debates on architectural historiography in recent decades, architecture as a unique type of historically situated aesthetic objects and design products has not been adequately addressed. To further an independence from art history, and to re-center architecture itself in historical analysis, this article highlights three essential natures of architecture which differentiate it from other types of aesthetic objects (such as painting and sculpture) and design products (such as cars and furniture), while asserting its situated materiality: architecture orders bodily activities and conditions human existence; it necessitates the integration of techne, technology, materials, and labor in construction; and it is a collective expressive medium which is shaped by and contributes to the interaction between different social forces. Based on the above propositions, this article provides an upgraded version of the Vitruvian Triad, with the existential replacing utilitatis (utility), the constructive replacing firmitatis (stability), and the interactive replacing venustatis (beauty).
{"title":"A Conceptual Framework for Architectural Historiography","authors":"D. Lu","doi":"10.55939/a4005p6e3c","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a4005p6e3c","url":null,"abstract":"Architectural history used to be part of art history, but has been gradually distanced from the latter as architecture develops as an independent modern discipline. Despite debates on architectural historiography in recent decades, architecture as a unique type of historically situated aesthetic objects and design products has not been adequately addressed. To further an independence from art history, and to re-center architecture itself in historical analysis, this article highlights three essential natures of architecture which differentiate it from other types of aesthetic objects (such as painting and sculpture) and design products (such as cars and furniture), while asserting its situated materiality: architecture orders bodily activities and conditions human existence; it necessitates the integration of techne, technology, materials, and labor in construction; and it is a collective expressive medium which is shaped by and contributes to the interaction between different social forces. Based on the above propositions, this article provides an upgraded version of the Vitruvian Triad, with the existential replacing utilitatis (utility), the constructive replacing firmitatis (stability), and the interactive replacing venustatis (beauty). \u0000","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129119631","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
From the 1970s social and political changes in Australia and the burgeoning feminist movement were challenging established power relationships and hierarchies. This paper explores how in the 1980s groups of women architects actively took positions that were outside the established professional mainstream. A 1982 seminar at the University of Queensland galvanised women in Brisbane to form the Association of Women Architects, Town Planners and Landscape Architects. Formally founded the association was multi-disciplinary and not affiliated with the established bodies. Its aims included promoting women and working to reform the practice of these professions. While predominately made up of architects, the group never became part of the Royal Australian Institutes of Architects, it did inject itself into its activities, spectacularly sponsoring the Indian architect Revathi Kamath to speak at the 1984 RAIA. For five years the group was active organising talks, speakers, a newsletter and participating in Architecture Week. In 1984 an exhibition ‘Profile: Women in Architecture’ featured the work of 40 past and present women architects and students, including a profile of Queensland’s then oldest practitioner Beatrice Hutton. Sydney architect Eve Laron, the convenor of Constructive Women in Sydney opened the exhibition. There was an active interchange between Women in Architecture in Melbourne, Constructive Women, and the Queensland group, with architects such as Ann Keddie, Suzanne Dance and Barbara van den Broek speaking in Brisbane. While the focus of the group centred around women’s issues such as traditional prejudice, conflicting commitments and retraining, its architectural interests were not those of conventional practice. It explored and promoted the design of cities and buildings that were sensitive to users including women and children, design using natural materials and sustainability. While the group only existed for a short period, it advanced positions and perspectives that were outside the mainstream of architectural discourse and practice. Nearly 40 years on a new generation of women is leading the debate into the structural inequities in the architectural profession which are very similar to those tackled by women architects in the 1980s.
从20世纪70年代开始，澳大利亚的社会和政治变革以及蓬勃发展的女权运动正在挑战既定的权力关系和等级制度。本文探讨了在20世纪80年代，女性建筑师群体如何积极地在既定的专业主流之外占据一席之地。1982年昆士兰大学的一次研讨会激励了布里斯班的女性成立了女性建筑师、城市规划师和景观设计师协会。正式成立的协会是多学科的，不隶属于已成立的机构。其目标包括促进妇女和努力改革这些专业的做法。虽然主要由建筑师组成，但该组织从未成为澳大利亚皇家建筑师协会的一部分，但它确实将自己融入了该协会的活动中，引人注目地赞助了印度建筑师Revathi Kamath在1984年的RAIA上发言。五年来，该团体积极组织讲座，演讲，时事通讯和参与建筑周。1984年，一个名为“简介:建筑中的女性”的展览展示了40位过去和现在的女性建筑师和学生的作品，其中包括昆士兰当时最年长的从业者Beatrice Hutton的简介。悉尼建筑师Eve Laron，悉尼建设性女性的召集人，为展览揭幕。墨尔本的建筑女性、建设性女性和昆士兰团体之间进行了积极的交流，Ann Keddie、Suzanne Dance和Barbara van den Broek等建筑师在布里斯班发言。虽然该团体的焦点集中在女性问题上，如传统偏见、相互冲突的承诺和再培训，但其建筑兴趣与传统实践不同。它探索和促进对包括妇女和儿童在内的用户敏感的城市和建筑设计，使用天然材料和可持续性的设计。虽然这个团体只存在了很短的一段时间，但它提出了在建筑话语和实践的主流之外的立场和观点。近40年来，新一代女性正在引领关于建筑行业结构不平等的辩论，这与20世纪80年代女性建筑师所解决的问题非常相似。
{"title":"Yes, You Can Be an Architect and a Woman!’ Women in Architecture: Queensland 1982-1989","authors":"F. Gardiner","doi":"10.55939/a4001phps8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a4001phps8","url":null,"abstract":"From the 1970s social and political changes in Australia and the burgeoning feminist movement were challenging established power relationships and hierarchies. This paper explores how in the 1980s groups of women architects actively took positions that were outside the established professional mainstream. A 1982 seminar at the University of Queensland galvanised women in Brisbane to form the Association of Women Architects, Town Planners and Landscape Architects. Formally founded the association was multi-disciplinary and not affiliated with the established bodies. Its aims included promoting women and working to reform the practice of these professions. While predominately made up of architects, the group never became part of the Royal Australian Institutes of Architects, it did inject itself into its activities, spectacularly sponsoring the Indian architect Revathi Kamath to speak at the 1984 RAIA. For five years the group was active organising talks, speakers, a newsletter and participating in Architecture Week. In 1984 an exhibition ‘Profile: Women in Architecture’ featured the work of 40 past and present women architects and students, including a profile of Queensland’s then oldest practitioner Beatrice Hutton. Sydney architect Eve Laron, the convenor of Constructive Women in Sydney opened the exhibition. There was an active interchange between Women in Architecture in Melbourne, Constructive Women, and the Queensland group, with architects such as Ann Keddie, Suzanne Dance and Barbara van den Broek speaking in Brisbane. While the focus of the group centred around women’s issues such as traditional prejudice, conflicting commitments and retraining, its architectural interests were not those of conventional practice. It explored and promoted the design of cities and buildings that were sensitive to users including women and children, design using natural materials and sustainability. While the group only existed for a short period, it advanced positions and perspectives that were outside the mainstream of architectural discourse and practice. Nearly 40 years on a new generation of women is leading the debate into the structural inequities in the architectural profession which are very similar to those tackled by women architects in the 1980s.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130381282","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Greg Burgess Archive (GBA) is perhaps the most complete, and arguably the most valuable architectural practice archive in Australia. However, its physical size presents a problem to both visibility, and longevity, and plans are in place to digitise the collection. While in storage at Avington, Victoria, an archival team – including Burgess himself – have begun repairing the 447 models, scanning the hundreds of tubes of drawings, and extracting data from countless obsolete media. Yet how reasonable is it to assume the efficacy of a program of digitisation? What are the implications for an objective architectural historiography if the process fails? Precipitated by difficulties in accurately digitising Burgess’ intricate physical models, this piece explores both questions. Firstly, the digitisation process for the GBA acts as a case study. Then, the technical limitations encountered are placed within a wider context of archival concerns in today’s diverse, digital age. These archival concerns are recognised in the eliding of ephemeral archival material – bodies, experiences, spoken histories – all of which may elude Western archival frameworks. What is illustrated here is that the same underrepresentation may extend into digitised collections, and that what is omitted is precisely the contents of the GBA – intricate, tectonic objects which do not conform to the idiosyncrasies of the technology at hand. The subsequent discussion then proceeds to advance, and explicate, the notion of the third object. Curation, then, is surrendered to the archival process itself, and the agency to reify our material history is at risk of being left to the machines, and their preference for certain types of ethnocultural artifact. Considering this, alternative strategies are presented for both the GBA and institutions at large, yet archivists and historians must be conscious of these limitations, or risk the failings of traditional, institutional archival systems spreading throughout a growing digital landscape.
{"title":"A Selective Digital History: Limitations within Digitisation Practices and their Implications","authors":"A. Grant, P. Raisbeck","doi":"10.55939/a4013phyct","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a4013phyct","url":null,"abstract":"The Greg Burgess Archive (GBA) is perhaps the most complete, and arguably the most valuable architectural practice archive in Australia. However, its physical size presents a problem to both visibility, and longevity, and plans are in place to digitise the collection. While in storage at Avington, Victoria, an archival team – including Burgess himself – have begun repairing the 447 models, scanning the hundreds of tubes of drawings, and extracting data from countless obsolete media. Yet how reasonable is it to assume the efficacy of a program of digitisation? What are the implications for an objective architectural historiography if the process fails? Precipitated by difficulties in accurately digitising Burgess’ intricate physical models, this piece explores both questions. \u0000\u0000 Firstly, the digitisation process for the GBA acts as a case study. Then, the technical limitations encountered are placed within a wider context of archival concerns in today’s diverse, digital age. These archival concerns are recognised in the eliding of ephemeral archival material – bodies, experiences, spoken histories – all of which may elude Western archival frameworks. What is illustrated here is that the same underrepresentation may extend into digitised collections, and that what is omitted is precisely the contents of the GBA – intricate, tectonic objects which do not conform to the idiosyncrasies of the technology at hand.\u0000\u0000 The subsequent discussion then proceeds to advance, and explicate, the notion of the third object. Curation, then, is surrendered to the archival process itself, and the agency to reify our material history is at risk of being left to the machines, and their preference for certain types of ethnocultural artifact. Considering this, alternative strategies are presented for both the GBA and institutions at large, yet archivists and historians must be conscious of these limitations, or risk the failings of traditional, institutional archival systems spreading throughout a growing digital landscape. \u0000","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121113626","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The paper examines the reorientations of the appreciation of ugliness within different national contexts in a comparative or relational frame, juxtaposing the British, Italian, and Australian milieus, and to relate them to the ways in which the transformation of the urban fabric and the effect of suburbanization were perceived in the aforementioned national contexts. Special attention is paid to the production and dissemination of the ways the city’s uglification was conceptualized between the 1950s and 1970s. Pivotal for the issues that this paper addresses are Ian Nairn’s Outrage: On the Disfigurement of Town and Countryside (1956) Robin Boyd’s Australian Ugliness (1960), and the way the phenomenon of urban expansion is treated in these books in comparison with other books from the four national contexts under study, such as Ludovico Quaroni’s La torre di Babele (1967) and Reyner Banham’s The New Brutalism: Ethic Or Aesthetic? (1966).
{"title":"The Reconceptualization of the City’s Ugliness Between the 1950s and 1970s in the British, Italian, and Australian Milieus","authors":"Marianna Charitonidou","doi":"10.55939/a3981pqn6x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a3981pqn6x","url":null,"abstract":"The paper examines the reorientations of the appreciation of ugliness within different national contexts in a comparative or relational frame, juxtaposing the British, Italian, and Australian milieus, and to relate them to the ways in which the transformation of the urban fabric and the effect of suburbanization were perceived in the aforementioned national contexts. Special attention is paid to the production and dissemination of the ways the city’s uglification was conceptualized between the 1950s and 1970s. Pivotal for the issues that this paper addresses are Ian Nairn’s Outrage: On the Disfigurement of Town and Countryside (1956) Robin Boyd’s Australian Ugliness (1960), and the way the phenomenon of urban expansion is treated in these books in comparison with other books from the four national contexts under study, such as Ludovico Quaroni’s La torre di Babele (1967) and Reyner Banham’s The New Brutalism: Ethic Or Aesthetic? (1966).\u0000","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134049920","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper investigates one aspect in the work of architect, educator and theorist Peter Eisenman (b 1932) through the filter of select writings from the mid 1980s. It does this by examining two texts published in 1984, a period characterised as one of rupture if not emphatically in crisis. The writings considered are “The Futility of Objects: Decomposition and the Processes of Difference” and “The End of the Classical: the End of the Beginning, the End of the End”. Secondary authors referenced include Robin Evans, Kenneth Frampton and Raphael Moneo. The paper conjectures that certain approaches such as Eisenman’s to materials and phenomena from architecture’s past can open new conditions of possibility for architecture today. A number of questions are asked: By what means and in what forms are Eisenman’s thinking about architecture in a moment of crisis revealed in these essays? Which architectural qualities and form generation devices does Eisenman discern in the past? How might the processes for interrogating architecture’s past as displayed in the two essays inform an approach to architecture today? The paper adds to scholarship on Eisenman, examining a little studied facet of his work in a period marked by swerves in his thinking. In a conference that seeks to identify a spectrum of disciplinary positions, the paper contributes to discussions around conference thematic sub-stream Design Practice and Education in its consideration of one stance vis-à-vis architecture’s past.
{"title":"Untimely Meditations: Decomposition and Timelessness in Select Writings of Peter Eisenman","authors":"Michael Jasper","doi":"10.55939/a4004pmiov","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a4004pmiov","url":null,"abstract":"This paper investigates one aspect in the work of architect, educator and theorist Peter Eisenman (b 1932) through the filter of select writings from the mid 1980s. It does this by examining two texts published in 1984, a period characterised as one of rupture if not emphatically in crisis. The writings considered are “The Futility of Objects: Decomposition and the Processes of Difference” and “The End of the Classical: the End of the Beginning, the End of the End”. Secondary authors referenced include Robin Evans, Kenneth Frampton and Raphael Moneo. The paper conjectures that certain approaches such as Eisenman’s to materials and phenomena from architecture’s past can open new conditions of possibility for architecture today. A number of questions are asked: By what means and in what forms are Eisenman’s thinking about architecture in a moment of crisis revealed in these essays? Which architectural qualities and form generation devices does Eisenman discern in the past? How might the processes for interrogating architecture’s past as displayed in the two essays inform an approach to architecture today? The paper adds to scholarship on Eisenman, examining a little studied facet of his work in a period marked by swerves in his thinking. In a conference that seeks to identify a spectrum of disciplinary positions, the paper contributes to discussions around conference thematic sub-stream Design Practice and Education in its consideration of one stance vis-à-vis architecture’s past.\u0000","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115455263","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Students are a necessary part of the architecture profession. Their training and preparation have long been key to maintaining the business and culture of architecture, and in doing so perpetuating traditional territories that control the institutionalisation of a profession. Students have also created their own associations, often mirroring, and at the instigation of, their parent organizations. More often than not though, in addition to acting as social binders and playing out the role of disciplinary ‘club’, these associations have developed a critical voice, urging change and injecting critique: in short, setting the basis for the framing of a local discourse. Using its publications as primary source material, this paper explores the critical activities of the Victorian Architectural Students Society (VASS), which developed under the auspices of the Royal Victorian Institute of Architects (RVIA). VASS published its annual from 1908, which evolved by 1932 to become Lines and, then additionally in 1939, students Robin Boyd and Roy Simpson expanded VASS’s publishing remit, producing the oft-controversial fold-away pamphlet Smudges that infamously gave ‘blots’ and ‘bouquets’ to new buildings. In 1947, VASS published Victorian Modern, Australia’s first polemical history of modern architecture and in 1952, it was the first publisher of the influential journal, Architecture and Arts. This paper examines the shifting ambitions of VASS, its chief protagonists, the role of graphics and the deft blending of the social, satirical and the critical that eventually framed and shaped Victoria’s architecture culture after World War II.
{"title":"Designing a Critical Voice: Discourse and the Victorian Architectural Students Society (VASS), 1907-1961","authors":"P. Goad","doi":"10.55939/a3992pwp5p","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a3992pwp5p","url":null,"abstract":"Students are a necessary part of the architecture profession. Their training and preparation have long been key to maintaining the business and culture of architecture, and in doing so perpetuating traditional territories that control the institutionalisation of a profession. Students have also created their own associations, often mirroring, and at the instigation of, their parent organizations. More often than not though, in addition to acting as social binders and playing out the role of disciplinary ‘club’, these associations have developed a critical voice, urging change and injecting critique: in short, setting the basis for the framing of a local discourse. \u0000\u0000 Using its publications as primary source material, this paper explores the critical activities of the Victorian Architectural Students Society (VASS), which developed under the auspices of the Royal Victorian Institute of Architects (RVIA). VASS published its annual from 1908, which evolved by 1932 to become Lines and, then additionally in 1939, students Robin Boyd and Roy Simpson expanded VASS’s publishing remit, producing the oft-controversial fold-away pamphlet Smudges that infamously gave ‘blots’ and ‘bouquets’ to new buildings. In 1947, VASS published Victorian Modern, Australia’s first polemical history of modern architecture and in 1952, it was the first publisher of the influential journal, Architecture and Arts. This paper examines the shifting ambitions of VASS, its chief protagonists, the role of graphics and the deft blending of the social, satirical and the critical that eventually framed and shaped Victoria’s architecture culture after World War II. \u0000","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114442522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the decades following the war, the spread of international luxury chain hotels was instrumental in shaping the global image of modernity. It was not simply the export of modernist architecture as a style, but rather a process which brought about an overall transformation of the industry and culture surrounding modern domesticity. For Adelaide, well before the arrival of large brand hotel chains like Hilton and Hyatt, this process was initiated by the construction of its first international style hotel in 1960 – Australia Hotel. The proposed paper traces the history of this structure and its impact not only on local design and construction industries but also on domestic culture and lifestyle after the shadow period of recovery after the war. This paper looks at three specific enduring legacies of this structure that went well beyond the modernist aesthetics employed by its original designers, the local firm of Lucas, Parker and Partners. The hotel was one of the first to employ the new technology of lift-slab construction and was recognised by the Head of Architecture at the University of Adelaide, Professor Jensen, as the outstanding building of 1960. It is argued that it was the engagement with such technological and process innovations that has allowed the building to endure through several renovation attempts. In her study of Hilton International hotels, Annabelle Wharton argues how architecture was used for America’s expansion to global economic and political power. Following on from her arguments, this paper explores the implications of the acquisition of the Australia Hotel by the Indian hotel chain Oberoi Hotels in the late 1970s when it became Oberoi Adelaide. The patronage of Indian hotelier Mohan Singh Oberoi came alongside the parallel acquisition of Hotel Windsor in Melbourne, heralding a new era of engagement with Asia. Finally, the paper also highlights the broader impact of this hotel, as a leisure venue for the burgeoning middle class, on the evolving domestic culture of Adelaide.
在战后的几十年里，国际豪华连锁酒店的传播在塑造全球现代化形象方面发挥了重要作用。它不仅仅是作为一种风格的现代主义建筑的输出，而是一个过程，它带来了围绕现代家庭生活的工业和文化的全面转变。对于阿德莱德来说，早在希尔顿和凯悦等大型品牌连锁酒店到来之前，这个过程就开始于1960年第一家国际风格的酒店——澳大利亚酒店的建设。这篇论文追溯了这座建筑的历史，它不仅对当地的设计和建筑行业产生了影响，而且对战后复苏的阴影期后的国内文化和生活方式也产生了影响。本文着眼于该结构的三个具体的持久遗产，这些遗产远远超出了其原始设计师(Lucas, Parker and Partners当地公司)所采用的现代主义美学。该酒店是最早采用升降板建筑新技术的酒店之一，并被阿德莱德大学建筑系主任Jensen教授认可为1960年的杰出建筑。有人认为，正是这种技术和工艺创新的参与，使建筑能够经受住几次翻新尝试。在她对希尔顿国际酒店的研究中，安娜贝尔·沃顿论证了建筑是如何被用于美国向全球经济和政治力量的扩张的。根据她的论点，本文探讨了印度连锁酒店Oberoi酒店在20世纪70年代末收购澳大利亚酒店的影响，当时它成为Oberoi阿德莱德。印度酒店老板莫汉•辛格•奥贝罗伊(Mohan Singh Oberoi)的赞助与墨尔本温莎酒店(Hotel Windsor)的并购并收，预示着与亚洲接触的新时代即将到来。最后，本文还强调了这家酒店的广泛影响，作为新兴中产阶级的休闲场所，对阿德莱德不断发展的国内文化。
{"title":"Hotel Australia to Oberoi Adelaide: The Transnational History of an Adelaide Hotel","authors":"Meherzad B. Shroff, Amit Kumar Srivastava","doi":"10.55939/a3996p40wb","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a3996p40wb","url":null,"abstract":"In the decades following the war, the spread of international luxury chain hotels was instrumental in shaping the global image of modernity. It was not simply the export of modernist architecture as a style, but rather a process which brought about an overall transformation of the industry and culture surrounding modern domesticity. For Adelaide, well before the arrival of large brand hotel chains like Hilton and Hyatt, this process was initiated by the construction of its first international style hotel in 1960 – Australia Hotel. The proposed paper traces the history of this structure and its impact not only on local design and construction industries but also on domestic culture and lifestyle after the shadow period of recovery after the war.\u0000\u0000 This paper looks at three specific enduring legacies of this structure that went well beyond the modernist aesthetics employed by its original designers, the local firm of Lucas, Parker and Partners. The hotel was one of the first to employ the new technology of lift-slab construction and was recognised by the Head of Architecture at the University of Adelaide, Professor Jensen, as the outstanding building of 1960. It is argued that it was the engagement with such technological and process innovations that has allowed the building to endure through several renovation attempts. In her study of Hilton International hotels, Annabelle Wharton argues how architecture was used for America’s expansion to global economic and political power. Following on from her arguments, this paper explores the implications of the acquisition of the Australia Hotel by the Indian hotel chain Oberoi Hotels in the late 1970s when it became Oberoi Adelaide. The patronage of Indian hotelier Mohan Singh Oberoi came alongside the parallel acquisition of Hotel Windsor in Melbourne, heralding a new era of engagement with Asia. Finally, the paper also highlights the broader impact of this hotel, as a leisure venue for the burgeoning middle class, on the evolving domestic culture of Adelaide.\u0000","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124161792","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Established during the Second World War, the Commonwealth Experimental Building Station (CEBS) researched new building technologies with an emphasis on housing construction. The CEBS experimented with materials and design prototypes in collaboration with both industry and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), which later became the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). Based in North Ryde, Sydney, the CEBS was associated with the Department of Post-War Reconstruction during the Second World War and then moved to the Department of Works and Housing. The paper introduces the CEBS’s initial aims through its housing research and design experimentation with built prototypes in Sydney during the 1940s. This research into house design, positioned at the edge of innovation, is situated in the wider housing context of the period. Federally funded building research was predicated by the Commonwealth of Australia’s housing shortage during and extending beyond the Second World War. Due to a lack of traditional materials such as bricks and timber from the war effort, the agency trialled developing low-cost, prefabricated concrete and steel houses. These housing experiments are considered in connection to cultural framings of home and its physicality in circulation at the time. After the Second World War, the detached suburban house gained momentum in the political and cultural vernacular as the ideal house for ownership. By examining the CEBS’s activities in connection to this background, the paper asks how the nation-state developed mass-production systems to enable government-sponsored agencies to produce more housing for more people but also how understandings of house and home surround and influence innovation in design.
{"title":"Producing the House: The Commonwealth Experimental Building Station and Housing Research","authors":"Renee Miller-Yeaman","doi":"10.55939/a3995ptgqb","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a3995ptgqb","url":null,"abstract":"Established during the Second World War, the Commonwealth Experimental Building Station (CEBS) researched new building technologies with an emphasis on housing construction. The CEBS experimented with materials and design prototypes in collaboration with both industry and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), which later became the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). Based in North Ryde, Sydney, the CEBS was associated with the Department of Post-War Reconstruction during the Second World War and then moved to the Department of Works and Housing. The paper introduces the CEBS’s initial aims through its housing research and design experimentation with built prototypes in Sydney during the 1940s. This research into house design, positioned at the edge of innovation, is situated in the wider housing context of the period. Federally funded building research was predicated by the Commonwealth of Australia’s housing shortage during and extending beyond the Second World War. Due to a lack of traditional materials such as bricks and timber from the war effort, the agency trialled developing low-cost, prefabricated concrete and steel houses. These housing experiments are considered in connection to cultural framings of home and its physicality in circulation at the time. After the Second World War, the detached suburban house gained momentum in the political and cultural vernacular as the ideal house for ownership. By examining the CEBS’s activities in connection to this background, the paper asks how the nation-state developed mass-production systems to enable government-sponsored agencies to produce more housing for more people but also how understandings of house and home surround and influence innovation in design. \u0000","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125532211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
There is increasing pressure on urban landscapes surrounding Islamic pilgrimage sites to accommodate growing numbers of pilgrims. Recent developments have responded to this issue with comprehensive clearance of historic urban landscapes, constructing grand open spaces and dislocating local residents. The traditional expansion of Islamic pilgrimage sites was characterised by a layering of interconnected structures with continuous functions that merged gradually over time into the surrounding landscape. The rift between the traditional urban growth and the recent expansion approach across the Muslim world is inconsistent with international developments that seek to incorporate sustainable development into urban heritage conservation. To achieve sustainability, developments should meet intergenerational equity and protect the interests of stakeholders including the community. Literature has established two operational characteristics for sustainable development that helps gauging the extent to which it is integrated into practice: Stakeholder participation and strategic planning. Participatory processes create shared visons among stakeholders and facilitate long-term directions. However, in non-Western contexts where decision-making power and financial control reside in the central state, participation is either considered a threat to the state or its potential benefit is unrecognised. This paper argues where conservation objectives are determined by experts in isolation from the community’s interests, the plans fail to be achieved. This will be demonstrated by undertaking a comparative analysis of conservation proposals prepared by international heritage experts for Islamic pilgrimage sites of Mecca, Medina, Kāzimayn and Shiraz. Visited by millions of pilgrims annually, the four sites have similar clearance and expansion patterns. This paper analyses the extent of community participation integrated into these proposals as one of the significant operational dimensions of sustainable development and a crucial link that enhances strategic planning. Finally, by reflecting on site specifics and social methods, this paper recommends participatory methods to enhance community engagement.
{"title":"Community Participation in Conservation Proposals of Islamic Pilgrimage Sites","authors":"A. Saeedi","doi":"10.55939/a4025pfdgv","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a4025pfdgv","url":null,"abstract":"There is increasing pressure on urban landscapes surrounding Islamic pilgrimage sites to accommodate growing numbers of pilgrims. Recent developments have responded to this issue with comprehensive clearance of historic urban landscapes, constructing grand open spaces and dislocating local residents. The traditional expansion of Islamic pilgrimage sites was characterised by a layering of interconnected structures with continuous functions that merged gradually over time into the surrounding landscape. The rift between the traditional urban growth and the recent expansion approach across the Muslim world is inconsistent with international developments that seek to incorporate sustainable development into urban heritage conservation. To achieve sustainability, developments should meet intergenerational equity and protect the interests of stakeholders including the community. Literature has established two operational characteristics for sustainable development that helps gauging the extent to which it is integrated into practice: Stakeholder participation and strategic planning. Participatory processes create shared visons among stakeholders and facilitate long-term directions. However, in non-Western contexts where decision-making power and financial control reside in the central state, participation is either considered a threat to the state or its potential benefit is unrecognised. This paper argues where conservation objectives are determined by experts in isolation from the community’s interests, the plans fail to be achieved. This will be demonstrated by undertaking a comparative analysis of conservation proposals prepared by international heritage experts for Islamic pilgrimage sites of Mecca, Medina, Kāzimayn and Shiraz. Visited by millions of pilgrims annually, the four sites have similar clearance and expansion patterns. This paper analyses the extent of community participation integrated into these proposals as one of the significant operational dimensions of sustainable development and a crucial link that enhances strategic planning. Finally, by reflecting on site specifics and social methods, this paper recommends participatory methods to enhance community engagement. \u0000","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130858733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Successive house building booms from the late 19th century until the Second World War shaped London’s built environment decisively. In terms of the sheer size of area covered, the dispersed, suburban London of terraced, semi- and detached houses that we know today was to a large extent created then, and much of it was built speculatively - by private firms for an assumed demand. Despite this legacy, the questions of who those involved in the design were and how they did it is an under-researched topic surrounded by assumptions that are often difficult to substantiate. Speculative housing of the period has long been regarded as an example of vernacular architecture, made by craftsmen using standard templates, so-called pattern books, without architect’s or otherwise professional involvement. The idea – in its extreme, ‘ultra’ form - is that designers were hardly necessary, as builders could simply copy house designs found in popular books and build from these. This idea of house building without architects or designers is also reflected in some of the literature but has been questioned more recently in academic research. This paper will discuss the key occupations involved in the design and planning of speculative housing 1880s – 1939 through a survey of Building Applications for Richmond. These can only be understood in the context of its working world where boundaries between building and design roles were often less specialized than today. The evidence suggests that housing design was not as standardised as it appears, by simply reusing templates, but that much of it was in fact designed, usually for a number of dwellings at a time - by builders, architects and also by other professionals. These were the other ‘architects’ who made the London we know today.
{"title":"The Other Architects Who Made London: Building Applications in Richmond 1886 -1939.” between Architecture and Engineering","authors":"D. Kroll","doi":"10.55939/a3987pr6js","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a3987pr6js","url":null,"abstract":"Successive house building booms from the late 19th century until the Second World War shaped London’s built environment decisively. In terms of the sheer size of area covered, the dispersed, suburban London of terraced, semi- and detached houses that we know today was to a large extent created then, and much of it was built speculatively - by private firms for an assumed demand. Despite this legacy, the questions of who those involved in the design were and how they did it is an under-researched topic surrounded by assumptions that are often difficult to substantiate. Speculative housing of the period has long been regarded as an example of vernacular architecture, made by craftsmen using standard templates, so-called pattern books, without architect’s or otherwise professional involvement. The idea – in its extreme, ‘ultra’ form - is that designers were hardly necessary, as builders could simply copy house designs found in popular books and build from these. This idea of house building without architects or designers is also reflected in some of the literature but has been questioned more recently in academic research.\u0000\u0000 This paper will discuss the key occupations involved in the design and planning of speculative housing 1880s – 1939 through a survey of Building Applications for Richmond. These can only be understood in the context of its working world where boundaries between building and design roles were often less specialized than today. The evidence suggests that housing design was not as standardised as it appears, by simply reusing templates, but that much of it was in fact designed, usually for a number of dwellings at a time - by builders, architects and also by other professionals. These were the other ‘architects’ who made the London we know today. \u0000","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120901151","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：