Evolution

Ensuring the continual development of identity by both physically and functionally integrating proposals within their environment.

This final principle highlights the relationship between ‘Spatial layout and functionality’ and the final outcome of ‘Identification’. For identity to remain as a constant adversary of generic design, it must continue to evolve and adapt to the changing dynamics of place. However, “new technologies, globalization and ‘time-space-compression’ have sought to represent localized identities as historical, regressive characteristics, and have worked to undermine the old allegiances of place and community.” (Mohammed Qasim Abdul Ghafoor, 2013, p.934). The historicism and social perceptions of place identity can “often give the false impression that good local architecture requires us to freeze in some celebratory fashion a moment in the evolutionary process of our cities and villages” (Derakhshani, 2012, p.31). However, if a form of historic presence and place identity is not maintained, could generic arrangement formulate future design decisions as exemplified in Rem Koolhaas’s “the generic city”? (Fig.20) The repetitive nature of the concept suggests “in its profound sameness, the generic city was a more accurate reflection of contemporary urban reality than nostalgic vision” (Girvin, 2020).

Generic City Image

Fig.20 Rem Koolhaas, Generic City (Koolhaas, 1995)

This extreme example demonstrates the perceptions of nostalgia and contemporary in the physical outcome. Despite this, the process of identity sensitive design is place dependent and therefore indefinable. If a proposal is to be integrated into a place that is losing touch with its history, then historic foundations should be highlighted within the output. On the other hand, if limited development is evident through initial analysis, then an expansion on material and spacial identification may be required. A balance between these must be determined (Fig.21) “to enable society to absorb new developments and new demands without suffering from identity diffusion” (Yilmaz and Maz, 2006, p.141)

It was executive director of INTBAU (International Network for Traditional Building, Architecture & Urbanism) Harriet Wennberg who noted that people who reside in a place are arguably the most aware of where they are situated on this scale. She states “we are all to some extent able to recognise when a place has become unrecognisable as itself” (Wennberg, 2015, p.12), claiming it is illustrated when “continuity in time of the distinct material components of place identity – shape, texture, material, colour, and detail – is overtaken or overwhelmed by broad societal change” (Wennberg, 2015, p.12).

Depending on the response, it is both the representatives of place and architect’s responsibility to assess the level of manipulation of identity. A sudden change may reflect poorly on perceptions of both the architect and the place. Experiential

Developing place meaning and strengthening place attachment through direct, frequent and positive experiences in places.

Combined

Environmental education often combines two approaches nurturing sense of place

Conveying predetermined and developing new place meaning, and strengthening place attachment using discussions, texts, art and other indirect means.

Instructional

Fig.21 Combining two approaches influencing sense of place. (Authors own image) (Based on Kudryavtsev’s sense of place diagram)

An example of progressive utilisation of identity is Anna Heringers METI school project in Radrapur, Bangladesh (Fig.22). Completed in 2007, the design adapted local building techniques and materials (Fig.23) in conjunction with limited modern elements, with the aim of achieving both environmental and social sustainability.

Locals were also encouraged to take part in the construction process, in order to acknowledge collective identities within the community (Fig.24). However, the consensus was that “the project was an interesting experience, but one they will be unable to repeat due to a lack of equipment and resources” (Lim C.S, J., 2007, p.4). This display of identity constitutes a lack of consideration for maintenance over time. Although the project was considered a success in its singular vision, this opinion suggests the gradual evolution of identity could not be maintained without further external assistance.

If individual identities are to continue through the medium of architectural design principles, we must not only consider the life cycle of the physical but also how future users can maintain symbolism through function and appropriation. This will prioritise sustainability both through material application and sociological understanding in future proposals; producing an environment that becomes more resilient to the generic.

Fig.22 Handmade School (Hoerbst, 2010)

Fig.23 Building techniques (Hoerbst, 2010)

Fig.24 Local integration (Hoerbst, 2010)