1 Doroteo

Jan Doroteo
ARC239 Literature Review
February 14, 2016

Kenneth Frampton enters the populated scene of regionalism like figure of authority with a seal of
approval. However, Towards a Critical Regionalism, the essay’s title, seems to be vouching for a different
approach. As Frampton pursues an “architecture of resistance,” so does he pursue a resistance of preceding
regionalisms. The essay critiques modernism’s “dogmatic principles” and engages with the popular post-
modernist movement during the 1980s; it is rooted and/or influenced by ideas of pluralism, phenomenology,
new concepts of “place” and post-colonial liberation. He also makes allusions to ideas of environmental or
sustainable architecture in a time when such discourse was not yet popular. Ultimately, the essay tries to
offer what Architecture’s response could become to the question which philosopher Paul Riceour asks:
“How [can we] become modern and yet return to sources. How [can we] revive old dormant civilizations and
[yet] take part in universal civilization.” (Frampton 1983, 16)

While rooted from the same word, regionalism and critical regionalism are not one and the same.
However, critical regionalism is part of the larger discourse of regionalism, a theme in Architecture which
Mallgrave et al. argues to be as old as modernism itself. (Mallgrave 2011, 97) Names like Richard Streiter,
Frank Lloyd Wright, Greene & Greene and Irving Gill are just some of its proponents in the early 20th
century. However, it is arguable that regionalism then was thought of as an expression or a style for a certain
locale, like Wright’s Usonian and Prairie Style Houses. The connotation lives today, but that is not what
Critical Regionalism is about. Thus, this paper’s main goal is to steer away from what one might usually
think of as critical regionalism. It might actually be easier to say what Critical Regionalism is not, than to say
what it is.

The most important of Frampton’s predecessors in regionalism seems to be Lewis Mumford, because his
arrival at the scene signals the beginning of what is characterized as “Critical Regionalism”. Lianne Lefaivre
writes that Mumford’s views, at the time, were very novel and departed from the regionalism developed out
of the renaissance. (Lefaivre Tzonis 2003, 33) In a 1947 article, entitled Skyline: The Status Quo, Mumford
seemed to simultaneously refute the worst attributes of both modernism and historical revivalism, but he also
sought for architecture that was in between the two. He provides the architecture of the Bay Region School
as a good example and writes: “It absorbed the universal lessons of the machine…reconciled them with
human wants…with full regard for the setting of nature, the climate, topography and vegetation” (Mumford
289). Most crucial in the statement is Mumford’s inclusion of the environment (the surroundings or
conditions in which people live or operate) as a means of expressing regionalism. Mumford did not describe
 2 Doroteo

these ideas under the term “Critical regionalism.” Interestingly, Frampton echoes the very same sentiments
in his 1983 essay but makes no mention of Mumford in the piece.

Ideas regarding “regionalism” seem to emerge at the turn of Architecture’s pendulum swing, where the
anti-institution takes over the institution. In the 1940’s, as Modernism (or the International Style) was
starting to take over predominant discourses in architecture, Mumford’s opinion on regionalism are
published and widely talked about. In the 1980’s, as the anti-institution (post-modernism) starts to take over
the new institution: Modernism, talks of regionalism re-emerge thru Lefaivre & Tzonis as well as Frampton.
The “shifting” of worlds incites ideas of regionalism to re-emerge because regionalism has always asked for
the best of both worlds, beginning from Richard Streiter in 1890 who wished for a “modernism that would
take into account the local milieu and building’s tradition” (Mallgrave 97) to Mumford who wished for
architecture which has absorbed the universal lessons of science and the machine but reconciled with human
wants and considered the environment (Mumford 197), to Frampton who wished for his Critical Regionalism
to “mediate the impact of universal civilization with elements derived indirectly from the peculiarities of a
particular place.” (Frampton 1983, 22)

It is in the 1980’s that the term “Critical Regionalism” is originally published, though not by Frampton
but instead of Alexander Tzonis and Lianne LeFaivre. They coined the term describing the work of Dimitris
Pikionis (Landscaping of the Acropolis at Athens), an appropriate place of regionalism. Thus it is from the
pair that Frampton has borrowed the term for his own agenda. Tzonis and Lefaivre continue to write
publications regarding regionalism but it seems as though their critical regionalism differs from Frampton’s,
or perhaps the other way around. Frampton seems to be aware of this difference in opinion. In TCR he
describes his use of Tzonis and LeFaivre’s term as follows: “In order to ground arriere gardism in a rooted
yet critical strategy, it is helpful to appropriate the term Critical Regionalism as coined by Alex Tzonis and
Lianne Lefaivre” (Frampton 1983, 20).Frampton’s Critical Regionalism is first and foremost arriere-
gardism which he defines as an “architectural style that distances itself equally from the Enlightenment
myth of progress and from the reactionary impluse to return to pre-industrial styles” (Frampton 1983, 20) .
However, arriere-gardism does not come with a friendly and approachable name. While Tzonis and Lefaivre
seem to keep humanist/populist considerations for regionalism explicit (Mallgrave 99), Frampton takes
efforts to redefine common ideas of “place” “region” “culture” and “civilization” in order for him to a
liberating architecture of resistance.

Frampton’s formulation of Critical Regionalism become more widely disseminated of the two (Canizaro
375) and that is because Frampton engages with the zeitgeist. Given the time frame of publication (1980s),
Frampton’s Critical Regionalism characterizes popular post-modernist thought. At the surface level, the very
inclusion of “Towards a Critical Regionalism” in the book “Anti:Aesthetic: Essays on Post-Modernist
 3 Doroteo

Culture” makes it obvious how Frampton has allied himself with the Post-Modernist movement, while
Tzonis and Lefaivre have elected to forge their own path in terms of publications. Frampton proposes similar
conditions which Mumford has written about decades prior and perhaps even of Streiter’s. However,
Frampton re-invigorates the rhetoric of regionalism with “Post-Modernist” contributions to architecture
theory. Thus, mentioning the full title of “Anti-Aesthetic” becomes fruitful because culture (which to
Frampton is more about material culture) is the concept which links Frampton with the Post-Modernist
movement. He believes that “culture” is under attack by Modernism’s optimizations by restricting it
(Frampton 1981, 17) Thus, his solution: Critical Regionalism is to be a “bearer of world culture” (Frampton
1981, 21) by being self-critical and aware of the factors which shape culture itself. It is easy to think of Post-
Modernism as a “defiant anti-modern resistance” characterized by the Vanna Venturi House or worse the
Portland building. However, the movement’s truer essence is to be critical of the world’s productions: our
culture, by deconstructing the different factors which ultimately shape it.(Foster ii) Tith that in mind
Frampton writes: “To deconstruct world culture is to remove oneself from that eclecticism of the fin de
siècle which appropriated alien, exotic forms in order to revitalize the expressivity of an enervated society.”
(Frampton 1983, 21) Frampton’s condemnation of appropriated ethnic forms also echo the thoughts of Hal
Foster in “The Primitive Unconscious of Modern Art” wherein he provides examples ethnic forms (from
Africa) being exoticized, rather than celebrated, and juxtaposed with modern, abstract art as seen in Les
Demoiselles D’Avignon.

Critical Regionalism does not advocate to revive vernacular forms of architecture (Frampton 1981, 21).
By including new ideas about environment, and phenomenology (through tactility) into the conversation,
Kenneth Frampton steers away from this tendency. The latter demonstrates the further depth of Frampton’s
relationship with the Post-Modern era; phenomenology became a trendy concept by which post-modernists
found a way to resist Modernism (Mullgrave 2011, 101), rooted ultimately from the ideas of Gaston
Bachelard. Frampton particularly found the ideas of Martin Heidegger influential. In 1974, Frampton wrote
an article titled On Reading Heidegger. Through this, he has come to subscribe to a phenomenological view
of consciousness, something which is no more abstract as previously thought, but as something permeated
with “the moods, emotions, and contextual layers of meaning to the act of perception.” (Mullgrave 2011,
101) This is how Frampton invalidates one’s common assumption of identity (which may be formed by
ethnicity, nationality or otherwise hegemonic ideals) and proposes an alternative, an arguably subjective and
tactile feel of one’s reality. He articulates this most under the heading: Visual versus Tactile (Frampton 1983,
28)

At points, Frampton’s ideas seem to be inconsistent and its pluralistic nature reveals itself. As an
introduction, Frampton tries to tackle the onerous task of representing an autonomous cultural expression of
 4 Doroteo

regions, but his recommendation is to do away with culture altogether if manifested through vernacular
traditions. An alternative which he offers is a “more directly dialectical relation with nature.” ( Frampton
1983, 27). This is most illuminating of Frampton’s essay because it reveals his own definition of
regionalism which is to embrace the region’s conditions. (the sunlight, the temperature, the topography, etc)
He seems to be hyper-aware of the techniques he proposes and captures them under the umbrella term of
“double mediation” (Frampton 1983, 21). Thus, Critical Regionalism seems to be an idea which tries to
situate itself at the true middle of a spectrum, the purest neutral that one could reach. Given how easy it is for
society to develop the right wing and the left wing, conservative and liberal, or traditionalist and modernist,
the neutral becomes a point of (con)tension. Frampton’s ideas seem complex and contradictory. Perhaps the
best way to encapsulate Frampton’s ideas are to juxtapose seemingly contentious ideas, which will then be
rationalized.

Modernism / Post-modernism
Frampton is against both tenets of Modernism and Post-modernism. He problematizes Modernism’s restricting
impositions but also condemns the neo-traditional wing of Post-Modernism in their attempt to break free with avant-
gardist motifs. Thus, he seeks to find an alternative to both. However, his alternative seems to want to embrace both
fields. He maintains that modernity must be upheld, but filtered through the Post-Modernist tradition of critical
theory. (Jencks 97)

Environment / Place: The Place is reliant on the Environment.

These two words seem to refer to the same thing: an area which one occupies or claims. However, Frampton finds
that a “place” is too abstract and therefore is actually placeless (Frampton) and in order to imbue a sense of placeness
within an area, the environment (in terms of climate, topography and conditions) has to be engaged and mediated by
the Architecture (Cite)

Identity / Self: A sense of Self is better than an Identity.

Identity and Self are another pair of words which may seem to mean the same thing. However, Frampton seems to
find identity to be a production of civilization (cite) and is thus tainted by hegemonic definitions. He finds that a sense
of self is a more appropriate way of combatting such hegemonic/modern forces. Architecture’s role is to be a channel
for phenomenon (phenomenology) it has to be tactile so that the user feels within the space.

While lamentations of modernism’s failures are inherent in Frampton’s Critical Regionalism, his 1987
follow-up: Ten Points on Critical Regionalism reveal his paranoia of Modernism’s success. He proposes
Critical Regionalism because he believes that modern society (with its pre-occupation to economy through
corporations) has managed to pave over all landscapes and turn them into megalopolis(es) with arterial
 5 Doroteo

freeways and freestanding highrises as the only urban condition. (Frampton 2007, 376) This is where
critiques of Frampton are rooted from because “complexities arise when [Critical Regionalism] is introduced
into contexts where Western tradition of critical thinking is not dominant or even inexistent.” (Botz-
Bornstein 1) Thus, while Critical Regionalism seems to promise a universal, global answer, it is in fact a
specialized technique for a presumed condition. To “nations just rising from underdevelopment” Frampton’s
answer does not seem liberating against colonial forces after all. If developing countries/regions want to be
part of the conversation, Frampton seems to impose that they must ultimately adopt the “modern
civilization” of their colonizers and then subsequently develop their resistance within it (Botz-Bornstein 2).

To this end, Critical Regionalism is not what it sounds like it is. Frampton’s Critical Regionalism does not
advocate for traditional/ vernacular architecture in accordance with regions. Critical Regionalism is not a
universal concept applicable globally. Critical Regionalism, if in need to be characterized, actually look
more like sustainable, environmentally-conscious architecture. However, there is beauty in his ideas. His
proposed technique of embracing the landscape and environment are reasonable and should be adopted. It
only seems as though he is writing for an ideal condition. A condition of “modern” paved American cities
coined as “non-places” by Melvin Webber and Robert Venturi (Mallgrave 100) like the suburban conditions
of Los Angeles with its strip malls. In fact, most of Frampton’s cited examples of Critical Regionalism are
based in North America (demonstrated in his book: 5 North American Architects) such as Patkau Architects
based in Vancouver, Canada. North America does not have much to particularly historicize. Canada, for
example, has long struggled to find a regional style to express itself in World’s Exhibitions. Employing
Classical Revivalism seemed contrived, but there was a vast natural landscape to derive from. Thus, during
the 1986 World Expo in Vancouver, The North West Territories pavilion (which arguably has the least
material culture throughout Canada’s provinces and territories) received critical acclaim for its explicit
allusions to the landscape. In order to render Kenneth Frampton’s ideas more positively I want to explore the
following question: How has Frampton’s Critical Regionalism facilitated the identity-forming capabilities of
architecture in places with little historical identity. How has his concept of regionalism (specifically
embracing the region) made up for the “placelessness” in North American cities? With this question in
mind, I would refer to the following projects: The North West Territories Pavillion (designed by Bing Thom
architects) during the Expo ’86 because of its explicit relationship with identity formation; The Strawberry
Vale School (by Patkau Architects) because its site and intervention embodies most of the presumptions and
expectations of Frampton’s Critical Regionalism in regards to the urban landscape and how one should resist
it; and finally the Tula House (also by Patkau architects) because of the structure’s explicit relationship with
the landscape. It could be an example of how “Critical Regionalism” can still be employed in non-
modernized urban conditions. Critical Regionalism remains relevant because it pertains to the “now.” It
argues against imitating the past, and to be wary of fully adopting the future (or futuristic). That instead we
 6 Doroteo

should deal with what we have now. The context of now, the environment of now. Today, what we have in
front of us is the huge question of environmentalism. Can the ideas of Critical Regionalism be appropriated
under this discourse?

Bibliography

Botz-Bornstein, Thorsten. Transcultural Architecture: The Limits and Opportunities of Critical Regionalism. , 2015.
Print.

Canizaro, Vincent B. “Introduction: Kenneth Frampton” Architectural Regionalism: Collected Writings on Place,
Identity, Modernity, and Tradition. Ed. Vincent B. Canizaro. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007.
374. Print.

Foster, Hal. “Postmodernism: A Preface.” The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture. Ed. Hal Foster. Port
Townsend, Wash: Bay Press, 1983. Print.

Frampton, Kenneth. “Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of Resistance.” The Anti-Aesthetic:
Essays on Postmodern Culture. Ed. Hal Foster. Port Townsend, Wash: Bay Press, 1983. 16-31. Print.

Frampton, Kenneth. “Ten Points on an Architecture of Regionalism: A Provisional Polemic.” Architectural Regionalism:
Collected Writings on Place, Identity, Modernity, and Tradition. Ed. Vincent B. Canizaro. New York: Princeton
Architectural Press, 2007. 374-385. Print.

Frampton, Kenneth, and Kenneth Frampton. Five North American Architects: An Anthology. Zurich: Lars Mü ller
Publishers, 2012. Print.

Foster, Hal. “The ‘Primitive’ Unconscious of Modern Art”. October 34 (1985): 45–70. Web.

Jencks, Charles, and Karl Kropf. Theories and Manifestoes of Contemporary Architecture. Chichester, West Sussex:
Academy Editions, 1997. 96-100. Print.

Lefaivre, Liane, and Alexander Tzonis. Critical Regionalism: Architecture and Identity in a Globalized World. Munich:
Prestel, 2003. Print.

Mallgrave, Harry F, and David Goodman. An Introduction to Architectural Theory: 1968 to the Present. , 2011. 96-103.
Print.

Mumford, Lewis. “The Skyline: Status Quo” Architectural Regionalism: Collected Writings on Place, Identity,
Modernity, and Tradition. Ed. Vincent B. Canizaro. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007. 289-291.
Print.

Canizaro, Vincent B. “Introduction: Kenneth Frampton” Architectural Regionalism: Collected Writings on Place,
Identity, Modernity, and Tradition. Ed. Vincent B. Canizaro. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007.
374. Print.