Fang lee by AA School

Beyond Caricature Heartlands of Singapore Fang Lee, Diploma 1 Edward Bottoms

‘Many people apparently dream about the Queen of England, but probably more have fantasies about Singapore … Like a good Rorschach blob, the city provokes a response, revealing some truths, though these often tell you more about the viewer than the viewed.’ – Charles Jencks1

Asia Dystopia ‘The capital of Singapore is Kuala Lumpur’, ‘Singapore is part of China’ – these are some of the misguided statements I have heard regarding Singapore. Whilst they are a sign of ignorance, it is reflective of a lack of understanding of the city-state and how it fits within the larger geopolitics of Asia. People tend to give names and generalize things they do not know enough about. It is no wonder that Singapore has been called ‘Disneyland with the Death Penalty’ – as in William Gibson’s article of the same title that described the city as a clean dystopia after a brief visit in 19932, as well as in Koolhaas ‘Potemkin Metropolis’3 who talks about a doomed city ‘perpetually morphed to the next state’ and assembled buildings resisting the formation of a ‘recognizable ensemble’4 Singapore subverts expectations of what an Asian city should be. Through the Western gaze, the city has neither the chaos of Bangkok nor the squalidness of Hong Kong. With tinted lenses, people such as Gibson and Koolhaas go on to label the country as a doomed Asian dystopia that does not fit into the Western narrative of Asia – too clean, too boring and too devoid of life they lament. The recent exposition on Singapore by Charles Jencks was a little fairer but even he could not escape from the temptation to call out crisis at what he states is the Generic Individualism of the city 5. On closer inspection, one realizes the allusions to the city have always centered around the financial and colonial ethnic districts, convinced that must be what the whole of Singapore is – look at Chinatown! However, beyond that, there exists another Singapore – blocks of public housing, affectionately referred to as Heartlands and known as Housing Development Board (HDB), compose themselves within

‘No, Singapore in not China’

‘Disneyland with the Death Penalty’

Singapore’s landscape. Under the western gaze, the ordinary HDBs have been ironically sensationalized as soulless objects of modernity to make headlines. This is despite its status as one of Singapore’s most enduring architectural forms – given that over 82 percent of the population have been housed in public housing since the 1960s6. In dismissing them as soulless objects, the authors reduce the HDBs to caricatures of their physical forms, and overlook their importance as architecture that is lived and experienced. HDBs exist beyond these caricatures – they are housing blocks that are imagined and inhabited at varying scales, from the humble family to that of a nation. Their familiarity within Singapore’s landscape, as well their concrete manifestation of Singapore’s growth since the beginning of independence to present day, is deeply ingrained in public imagination7. This can be seen in the various arts and literary evocations of the HDB estates. Some romanticize the quietness amidst the buzz, as in Colin Cheong’s poem Void Decks: Across the blocks the neighbors watch each other’s light flick on to check routines by another’s timing when all agree that it is morning8 Others use it as a metaphor to lament Singapore’s rapid progress. It has been argued that those literary and cultural works by Singaporeans themselves intentionally censor the central city area, as it reflects a different side of global-oriented Singapore that does not evoke any sense of the local and historic9.

Taking inspiration from how the literary capture the spirit of HDBs, the essay

examines the ways in which these public housing is negotiated, occupied and perceived

on four different scales by the residents and the authorities. It looks at the scale of the family, the communal, the urban and the national to challenge the stereotypes of HDBs as pure generic and to reveal qualities that extend beyond their physical form. Qualities which make them unique pieces of Singaporean architecture.

Heartlands of Singapore

The censored City Centre

Family ‘Stop at Two’ was a family planning campaign launched in late 1960s that sought to curb the post-war baby boom as well as encourage people to stop giving birth after two children. In the posters, the ‘nuclear family unit’, a portrayal of the ideal family, is made up of a man and woman with two children. As part of the campaign, measures, such a lower priority for larger families on the wait list for Housing and Development Board flats were included to discourage families from having more than two children10. Whilst the ‘Stop at Two’ campaign is no longer relevant today because of falling birth rates, the HDBs continue to be an effective tool for the government to deal with the demographic issues of Singapore. Consequentially, the possession and habitation of a HDB are closely intertwined with the family structures of Singaporeans. Some have even gone as far as to comment that ‘marriage is the gatekeeper to fertility’11, in response to the conservative notions of family hood in population policies in Singapore

The purchase of a flat usually signifies the start of married life – as many couples

who are planning to get married apply for a flat together under the ‘Fiancé/Fiancée Scheme’. Under the scheme, a grant is disbursed by the government of Singapore for the purchase of a flat on condition that a copy of the marriage certificate is submitted within three months of the purchase of the flat12. The scheme also indirectly encourages early marriage as someone who is unmarried or divorced is only eligible to apply for flats under the ‘Joint Single Scheme’ when they are aged above 3513. Even then, the flat can only be purchased under the names of a single man and woman. Aside from the ‘Fiancé/Fiancée Scheme’, there are also grants such as the ‘Proximity Housing Grant’ which encourages a married child to live near to their

Two is Enough 1983 Population planning poster

parents14 – thereby forming close networks of support, such as allowing the parents to take care of their grandchildren or allowing the married child to take care of elderly parents. The conservative stance of the country on family stems from the society and ruling party’s deep belief in Confucianism. Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore’s first Prime Minister wrote that: Confucian societies believe that the individual exists in the context of the family, extended family, friends, and wider society, and that the government cannot and should not take over the role of the family.15 Whilst housing policies stemming from Confucian values have been criticized as typical a ‘nanny’ state, the legislation enables the provision of housing and formation of networks of support through many stages of Singaporeans’ lives.

Housing comes in the form of standardized flats varying in different categories

– designed to accommodate different family types and structures. Each housing type comes with its own set of eligibility and rules to provide a best fit to its inhabitants. There are ‘3 room’, ‘4 room’, ‘5 room’, and ‘3Gen’ variations, each having different floor areas and characteristics. For example, the largest of the variant, the ‘3Gen’, an abbreviation of three generations, is designed to house multi-generation families in an approximately 115 sqm space, and can only be sold to other multi-generation families16. In a 3Gen flat, two master bedrooms with attached bathrooms encourage a sense of autonomy between the different generations of the family. However, the segregation of housing types promotes a narrow view of family and risks compartmentalization and marginalization of certain groups such as the LGBT community and singles under thirty five who need a flat. This sterile division thus results in the general perception of public housing as cookie-cutter and confined.

Multi-generation living in a ‘3Gen’ flat

Despite that perception, the reality is that the interior of the housing units

varies greatly in the ways in which people inhabit them, having dramatic differences on the inside despite the flats looking the same from the outside. In 2016, two Singapore permanent residents Eitaro Ogawa and Tamae Iwasaki from Japan, documented the interiors of 50 HDB homes and published them in a book. To them, ‘the book is not about presenting nice home interiors, it is about how culture happens in our homes through the way we live’17. Within the flats, simple gestures such as the placement of religious altars or personal collections of objects reveal much about the personalities of the inhabitants and the way the choose to interpret their flat. Residents often knock down walls to create open kitchens or partition the living room to form study spaces, thereby interpreting the floor plan according to their needs and preferences. It can even be argued that the contrast given by the fixed orthogonal framework of a flat further reinforces the idiosyncrasies of its inhabitants.

The notion of family operates of many levels in the HDB flats, from the level

of policy-making to the ingenuity of the resident – who modifies the generic flat to meet his needs. These acts go beyond the physical flat – which is mainly functional. Instead, the flat functions as a neutral canvas which builds upon the generic so as to enable the formation of close familial ties and expression of self.

Insert Subtitle Here

Varied interiors of HDBs expressing idiosyncrasies

Communal Beyond the confines of the familial home, heterogeneity can also be observed permeating into the communal corridors of HDB blocks. Designed mostly for functional reasons of providing circulation, light and views, the corridors of HDB estates are furnished to the most minimal standards with fluorescent tubes and pipes. Within these corridors that run along single-loaded slab blocks, the boundaries between the personal and the collective are blurred though the residents’ acts of inhabiting the space. Firstly, through the porosity of thresholds – doors which are left open behind each unit’s grilled gates and windows which open towards the corridor space. Secondly, through the unique placement of objects in the public space, which are left on display for anyone passing through. And lastly through innovative uses of the space, which range from the most conventional - as an extended storage space or a dry yard to innovative ones like breaking fast on Hari Raya, a traditional Malay festival. However, due to the proximity of the space to the housing units – activities on this space easily become disturbances to the neighbors: It is also partly the consequence of neighbor relationship – that is relationship that avoids intimacy, while simultaneously calling for a high level of mutual responsibility especially in times of emergency. The result is a pattern of social relations that is extensive in the number of neighbors known, but only superficially’18. Conversely, when the barriers to intimacy are overcome in some estates, the communal space becomes an extension of the community living along the corridor. Neighbors help to maintain the space through mutual understanding It is common to see senior

Corridors : Personal and Collective

Void Deck : Tabula Rasa

neighbors seated on the corridors to chat, neighbors sharing herbs planted along the corridors, or children of different families playing along those corridors. However, the narrow space of the corridor is sometimes insufficient in fulfilling certain uses when a larger space is required. In those instances, the residents would use the void deck. The void deck is the most integral public and communal space within a HDB block. A shaded open space on the ground level, it is comprised of a series of columns or pilotis which allows for cross ventilation, like the single-load corridor. Positioned at the prime spot where lift lobbies and letter boxes are, the void deck acts as a transitory space that one must pass through at the start and end of each day. The vast expanse of empty space also encourages its use for informal and formal gatherings, such as this short-lived waiting group described below: On one occasion two women were observed seated at the table with their pre-school children running about them, while they waiting for their husbands or older children to come home. A third woman with two children walked by [â&#x20AC;Ś] [she] went on to the shops in the next block, leaving her children with the other two women. Soon she returned with a loaf of bread and chatted for the next ten minutes. A school bus arrived. A schoolgirl paused by the group on women â&#x20AC;&#x201C; one of them her mother.19 It is also used as a space for day-long informal gatherings â&#x20AC;&#x201C; old men would sit around playing chess, housewives would gossip, and kids would use it as a space to cycle around or play badminton. Lastly, the void deck and its programmatic flexibility is used formally as a ritual space for what would traditionally been held in a house, acting as an extension of the flat once again. We see this in its use for Malay weddings and Chinese funerals, with the generic nature of the void deck fulfilling its role as a secular tabula rasa space for its residents to be adapted into a sacred and religious one. However, recent attempts

to over-regulate the space, through prohibiting activities that cause disturbances, such as soccer and skateboarding, risk undermining the open quality of the void deck.

As observed, the generic nature of the void deck and corridor allows for the

residents to interpret the space and use them as extensions of their own home. In doing so, these communal spaces gain programmatic meaning and specificity, thereby transforming them beyond their built form.

Breaking fast at the corridor

A Taoist funeral at the void deck

Urban

There seems to be a lack of discussion of the HDB blocks on the urban scale

for various reasons. For some, the blocks are such a normal and typical sight that how it appears on the urban scale seems inconsequential. It can also perhaps be attributed to their discontinuity and disjunction against the more glamorous and iconic skylines of its siblings in the central district. Yet the transformation of each of the housing estates across the years, from mature ones such as Bishan to new towns like Punggol seem to be most reflective of the change in Singapore’s landscape over the years. In the previous discussion of the familial and communal, the residents are treated as individual users of the HDB. However, when we zoom out to the scale of the urban, the user takes the form of the residents’ committee, i.e. the representatives of housing estates, of which they interpret and inhabit the building on the urban scale. The way the typical block is interpreted takes place on different urban scales. Firstly, on a more micro level, the facade of the building functions as a grid that frames the lives of the residents in the block – displaying the void deck and corridor space to the passer-by who gets a glimpse of the residents’ lives. Secondly, on a larger scale, the facade acts as a canvas for selected paint schemes which are voted for by the residents and refreshed every five years. Whilst some paint schemes do not catch the eye, others go on to become representative of the estate – such as in the case of Rochor Centre. The blocks are painted in bright, eye catching colors and have gained local enthusiasm since the announcement of its impending demolition to make way for an expressway. A local photographer known only as Nguan, who photographed the estate said, ‘I am envious of its former residents, who got as close as you can to knowing what it’s like to live inside a rainbow’20.

TV test pattern for facade

Monochromatic variations in facade

Lastly, through the subtle variations of massing – each block is given an identity while remaining coherent within the larger whole. On closer inspection of larger housing estates, one can discern on the skyline the individual blocks but also subtle variations in the choice of roofing, color scheme and the variation in density from low- to high-rise. Together, the blocks create an urban ensemble that is simultaneously distinctive and unified within the larger coherence of the city. Through functioning as a frame for viewing residents’ lives, as well as a canvas for paint schemes that expresses the identity of each estate, each HDB distinguishes itself from other blocks in its urban site. Together with massing variations that is mostly functional and not in terms of formal play – which is difficult in the context of affordable housing and fetished by the western gaze, the blocks define themselves not as a generic landscape of sameness. Instead, they are dissimilar parts which form a coherent whole – a whole that is integral to Singapore’s urban landscape.

Rochor : Living in a rainbow

Bishan : Subtle variations in massing

National Beyond its physicality, HDB exists as a construct deeply entrenched in the national narrative and identity of Singaporeans. In the late 60s, 70% of the population identified HDBs as prideful symbols of national development21. The organization responsible for building them, the Housing Development Board, was first started in 1960, briefly before 1963 Merdeka, Federation of Malayaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s independence from the United Kingdom, and 1965, the separation of Singapore from the Federation. The short time frame between independence and the building of the first HDBs results in the close link between HDBs, nation-building and national identity. One can observe the pride in urban renewal and nation-building in the news reels of 1960s, which details the success of the first HDBs. In one of them, Berita Singapura, the narrator declared: Singapore must be one of the few countries in the world where the statutory board (HDB) satisfactorily completed everything it set out to do in its first five-year plan. Yet this is what the Housing Development Board has succeeded in doing, and the evidence of their success stands eloquently in all parts of Singapore for all to see22. The notion of national identity was of special significance as early Singapore was a melting pot of largely migrant population, composed of various ethnic groups, that did not mix nor identify with the nation. It can be argued that the modernist approach to HDBs when it first began, where focus is on the provision of basic amenities, allows for the creation of national identity not based on race and ethnicity, but on nationality. The generic was used strategically as means to unite the diverse population. This strategy is reflected in their the built forms â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the first HDBs was unadorned and composed of unrelieved plain colored rectangles.

1960s news reel: Berita Singapura

Singaporeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first one dollar note

This stands in contrast to the colonial approach detailed in the 1822 Jackson Town Plan, whereby populations lived in racially segregated districts and within their specific vernacular forms. The modern built forms of the HDBs resisted the formal arrangement of the Chinese shop house, the stilt typology of the Malay house, the vast expanse of the colonial bungalow, instead, pragmatically opting for an architecture that tended towards the universal and is founded upon the ideals of modernism. In doing so, it allows for the creation of a specific national narrative and identity that transcends racial and ethnic lines.

Jackson plan : colonial separation of ethnic districts

Unadorned early flats unifying the diverse population

Epilogue

In Darren Shiau’s novel Heartland, the old blocks of Ghim Moh were described

as such ‘Wing […] felt a warm glow whenever he saw the majesty of the four point blocks piercing the orange dusk sky and the lower blocks, old but graceful, rising proudly from the soil’ 23. However, Singapore’s public housing is neither the romantic estate described in Shiau’s novel, nor the manifestations of Gibson’s ‘Disneyland with Death Penalty’ or Koolhaas’ ‘Potemkin Metropolis’ – the reality of HDBs transcends such gross caricatures. Instead, like the Malay Wedding and Chinese Funeral that occupies the same void deck space, the HDBs are much closer to heterotopias. Within the generic and neutral framework of its built architecture, thriving spaces are inhabited and interpreted in distinct, and sometimes unexpected ways by its residents. This is enabled by the non-built – i.e. the social legislation, as well as the residents’ efforts at inhabitation. We see this on the familial scale, where the policies enable defined types of familial relations, as well as in the varied HDB interiors. On the communal scale, we see this in the wide-ranging ways that the void deck is adapted as an open space. On the urban scale, we observe the heterotopic qualities based on subtle variations in surface treatment and massing. The success of the generic form can be witnessed in the construction of a specific national narrative and identity. However, in recent years, there seems to be a deviation from its early ideals as an open structure both physically and metaphorically. One such example is the Pinnacle at Duxton: a development near the central business district constructed after an international architecture competition. Built with gated roof terraces accessible only to the residents or those who pay and a gallery for VIP state visitors, the formally articulate

and privatised architecture risks undermining the generic and open qualities of HDBs. With the proliferation of more individualized HDBs, I argue that there is a need to safeguard their generic and open qualities - which allow for the expression of sociological structures and individual idiosyncrasies, and transform these concrete structures into a humane modernism that forms an integral part of Singaporeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s landscape.

End Notes

Charles Jencks, ‘Notopia: the Singapore paradox and the style of Generic Individualism’, The Architectural Review, 04 June 2016, < https://www.architectural-review. com/notopia/notopia-the-singapore-paradox-and-the-style-of-generic-individualism/10006923.article> [accessed 20 November 2016].

William Gibson, ‘Disneyland with the Death Penalty’, Wired, 04 January 2009, <https://www. wired.com/1993/04/gibson-2/> [accessed 29 November 2016].

Rem Koolhaas, ‘Portrait of a Potemkin Metropolis’, in City Cultures Reader, ed. by Malcolm Miles, Tim Hall and Iain Borden (Abingdon: Routledge, 2000) pp. 22-25 (p.22).

Ibid., p.22.

Jencks.

Key Statistics (Singapore: Housing Development Board, n.d.) <http://www20.hdb.gov.sg/ fi10/fi10320p.nsf/ar2014/pdf/HDB_Key%20Statistics_13_14_d9_HiRes.pdf> [accessed 01 December 2016] (p.4).

Wei-Wei Yeo, ‘Of Trees and the Heartland’ in Beyond Description: Singapore Space Historicity, ed. by Ryan Bishop, John Philips and Wei-Wei Yeo (Abingdon: Routledge, 2004) pp.1730 (p.24).

Colin Cheong, ‘Void Decks’, in Void Decks and Other Empty Places, (Singapore: EPB Publishers, 1991), p. 1.

Yeo, p.26.

Tong Hai, Ngiam, ‘It’s dearer after Two’ The Straits Times, 25 October 1972, <http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/straitstimes19721025-1.2.2> [accessed 16 April 2017].

Gavin W. Jones, ‘Population Policy in a Prosperous City-State: Dilemmas for Singapore’, Population and Development Review, 38.2 (2012), 311-336 (p.317).

Eligibility Schemes (Singapore: Housing Development Board, n.d.) <http://www.hdb.gov. sg/cs/infoweb/residential/buying-a-flat/resale/eligibility-schemes> [accessed 01 December 2016].

Ibid.

Kuan Yew Lee, From Third World to First: The Singapore Story (New York: Harper, 2000) (n.p).

Types of Flats (Singapore: Housing Development Board, n.d.) <http://www.hdb.gov.sg/ cs/infoweb/residential/buying-a-flat/new/types-of-flats&rendermode=preview> [accessed 01 December 2016].

Lijie Huang, ‘A peek into 100 HDB homes’ The Straits Times, 26 July 2016, <http://www. straitstimes.com/lifestyle/arts/a-peek-into-100-hdb-homes> [accessed 01 December 2016].

Beng Huat Chua, Political Legitimacy and Housing: Stakeholding in Singapore (Abingdon: Routledge, 2000) (p.82).

Chua, p. 83.

Rachel Chia, ‘Long-time residents bid goodbye to Rochor Centre’, The Straits Times, 31 March 2016, <http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/long-time-residents-bid-goodbyeto-rochor-centre-each-neighbour-is-worth-a-million-bucks> [accessed 01 December 2016].

John A. MacDougall, ‘Birth of a Nation: National Identification in Singapore’, Asian Survey, 16.6 (1976), 510-524 (p. 516).

1965 HDB Flats - Berita Singapura (Singapore: Prime Minister’s Office, 2009) <https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=-VosvrTlw7c> [accessed 04 March 2017].

Darren Shiau, Heartland (Singapore: SNP Editions, 1999) p.5.

List of Images Nguan, Singapore (Singapore: Nguan, 2016) <http://nguan.tv/singapore.htm> [accessed 03 December 2016]. John Clang, The Land of My Heart, (Singapore: John Clang, 2014) <http://johnclang.com/theland-of-my-heart/> [accessed 25 November 2016]. Kenneth Jeyaratnam, ‘Disneyland with the Death Penalty - Revisited’, Wired, 19 April 2012, <https://www.wired.com/2012/04/opinion-jeyaretnam-disneyland-death-penalty/> [accessed 29 November 2016]. Darren Soh, Neighbourhood, (Singapore: Darren Soh, n.d.) <http://nowboarding.changiairport. com/live-local/5-unique-ways-to-see-Singapore-like-a-local.html> [accessed 19 April 2017]. Law, Pat, ‘Singapore Skyline Panoramic View’, Getty Images, 04 June 2015, <http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/license/593907393> [accessed 25 November 2016]. ‘Enjoy your children, help them grow : girl or boy, two is enough’, National Archives Singapore, n.d., < http://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/posters/record-details/31377a03115c-11e3-83d5-0050568939ad/> [accessed 16 April 2017]. Master Plan (Singapore: Urban Redevelopment Authority, 2014) <http://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/ master-plan/View-Master-Plan/master-plan-2014/master-plan/Regional-highlights/north-region/north-region>. [accessed 01 December 2016]. Tomohisa Miyauchi and Keyakismos Miyauchi, HDB : Homes of Singapore (Singapore: Keyakismos, 2016). Nguan, Corridor (Singapore: Nguan, 2016) <http://nguan.tv/singapore.htm> [accessed 03 December 2016]. Ying Kit Tham, Void Deck 2 (Singapore: arkitecturalphotography, 2016) <http://www.arkitecturalphotography.com/series-articles/void-decks-2/> [accessed 03 December 2016]. Ariffin Jamar, ‘Kampung makan at the corridor’ The New Paper, 13 July 2015, <http://www. tnp.sg/news/singapore-news/kampung-makan-corridor> [accessed 05 December 2016]. ‘Taoist Funeral’, Teckhin Undertaker, n.d., <http://teckhinundertaker.com.sg/portfolio/taoist-funeral-cantonese/> [accessed 16 April 2017]. Darren Soh, Tampiness Street 42, (Singapore: Darren Soh, n.d.) <https://www.facebook.com/ pg/darrensohphotographer/photos/?tab=album&album_id=263296830353838> [accessed 19 April 2017]. Darren Soh, 50/50, (Singapore: Darren Soh, n.d.) <https://www.facebook.com/pg/darrensohphotographer/photos/?tab=album&album_id=263296830353838> [accessed 19 April 2017]. Darren Soh, Rochor Centre, (Singapore: Darren Soh, n.d.) <https://www.facebook.com/pg/ darrensohphotographer/photos/?tab=album&album_id=263296830353838> [accessed 19 April 2017].

Darren Soh, Ang Mo Kio - Bishan, (Singapore: Darren Soh, n.d.) <https://www.facebook.com/ pg/darrensohphotographer/photos/?tab=album&album_id=263296830353838> [accessed 19 April 2017]. 1965 HDB Flats - Berita Singapura (Singapore: Prime Minister’s Office, 2009) <https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=-VosvrTlw7c> [accessed 04 March 2017]. Jerome Lim, Parting glances: Blocks 74 to 80 Commonwealth Drive (Singapore: The Long and Winding Road, 2015) < https://thelongnwindingroad.wordpress.com/tag/singapore-one-dollar-note/> [accessed 03 March 2017]. Philip Jackson, ‘Plan of the Town of Singapore’, Wikimedia Commons, 20 April 2008, <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Plan_of_the_Town_of_Singapore_ (1822)_by_Lieutenant_Philip_Jackson.jpg> [accessed 04 March 2017]. Darren Soh, Early HDB Flats, (Singapore: Darren Soh, n.d.) <http://nowboarding.changiairport.com/live-local/5-unique-ways-to-see-Singapore-like-a-local.html> [accessed 19 April 2017].