What is Malaysian Architecture?

At UM, the students study Asian Architecture and Western Architecture as two separate subjects under history. I was preparing for the introductory lecture to the History of Western Architecture the other day, and the situation forced me to rethink about how to present the theoretical aspect in a different way. What I am saying is that:

Asian Architecture = Western Architecture

I realised that in this day and age, you cannot separate Architecture from other disciplines any more. Things are moving too fast. Students in general and myself as an old student have to be sharper at managing information and using it.

I realised the importance of thinking conceptually and technically at the same time.

But...can you accept that?

Asian Architecture = Western Architecture

Yes, of course, if you place a Shinto shrine next to the Parthenon side by side there is a big difference in terms of form, material and construction. Most of all the difference is in terms of identity and character. You certainly know that there is a difference.

But in this day and age, for whatever building built, the form, material and construction, may even be the same. The identity and character may have been diluted and could even be argued to be the same. For example, Mosques abd Synagogues that used the ubiquitous dome motif.

1) What had happened?

2 ) Who conquered who?

3) Is this the impact of globalization?

My answers to the above is:

1) The Industrial Revolution in Europe set the pace for change and the Modern Movement with its idealism and utopian ideas radically assimilated itself everywhere in the world and made it easier to manage and manipulate mass consumption of forms. However, does the Industrial Revolution and the Modern Movement belonged exclusively to the West. For example, the Metabolists in Japan had new ideas that were exclusively Eastern in origins.

2) No one conquered any one. Asian Architecture readily accepted modernism and there are examples in this day and age that says 'Asian' although using similar methods of construction, form and materials in the West. (Yes, that contradicted with my earlier statement on ubiquity...but it says a lot in terms of confused origin state...)

3) Certainly, but the argument is globalization started when the West came to East and vice versa. Surely an Englishman eating Tandoori and Nan was influenced by the East himself, wouldn't you say so.

So...why is the title of this post - What is Malaysian Architecture?

Because I happened to be Malaysian, and I need to know whether there is such a thing.

It is inevitable that we need to study the past in order to understand the future. Architecture is not merely about the physical and aesthetic aspects of a building, but more importantly we need to understand the context of how architecture developed. So, Malaysia is a context... is it not?

If:

Building + Art = Architecture

The Art would be the part that creates the identity and character. One would see Western Art as oppose to Eastern Art then?

The Prime Minister’s Office in Putrajaya would be a good example to ask the question, is this Western Architecture? Pound per pound of construction material and style of architecture weighed out on this building, including the pseudo-Egyptian obelisks as fencing, then it could be argued that Putrajaya should be classified as Western Architecture. Apart from the dome motif of course, and even that has its roots in Byzantine Architecture via Turkey. And Turkey is East or West?

Having said that, being trained to be an architect in the United Kingdom for a total of 10 years, including my undergraduate years, my approach to studying architecture history has always been biased towards understanding styles of architecture and more towards criticizing the building in terms of physical attributes. There were little content on the context. I remembered very well the different elements in the Classical Orders and I had visited numerous buildings in the UK and Europe that were built in the Gothic and Renaissance period.

There are many examples of the International Style of the Modern Movement in Malaysia, even in the Universiti Malaya campus. I belong to the group that admire Malaysian architecture from the 50s and 60s, pre and post Merdeka (post Independence 1957) period. I also belong to the group that was appalled at the lack of sensitivity to the renovation of the Dewan Tunku Canselor building after it was razed by fire, especially in the use of decorative glass panels that was not in keeping to the Brutalist principles of the architecture. I so love my Malaysian Brutalist building and to me it has Malaysian characteristics...

Malaysian Architecture could be identified in not just the form but space. The space of a Malaysian place could be very different from an English place for example.

There is something that is missing from the debate on Identity. But Identity don't have to be the main crux of the debate on Malaysian Architecture. If Identity is the 'Form', then Linkages is the 'Space'....

Debate continues...

---