ancient cities

40 Architecture
important question in this context. Critical regionalism’s
defense of cultural particularism and use of
appropriate technology in the face of perceived
homogenization was particularly resonant in the
context of postmodernism.
The architectural discourse of postmodernism
served to reinvigorate discussion of architecture’s
social meaning, not least by opening up the potential
for multiple readings of buildings and spaces,
and by celebrating a plurality of stylistic traditions
and incorporating “nonpedigreed” architecture
into existing canons. In general terms, postmodern
perspectives were underpinned by a commitment
that architecture should become a more “opened”
discourse and practice, with the spaces created by
architecture reflecting a plurality of social standpoints
and supporting a range of different ways of
being in the city, generally emphasizing democratic
rights to public space. The notion of multiple readings,
crucial for postmodernism in general terms,
rendered the architects’ reading of the symbolism
in their building as just one among many, which
opened the way for playful architecture that challenged
the relationship between signifier and signified
(and architect and user). Accordingly,
postmodernism sought to challenge elitist conceptions
of architecture—as profession and social
practice—that had been dominant in modernism,
including the capacity of the architect to offer
definitive “truths” about the correct use and interpretation
of urban spaces. Critical scholars engaged
with the postmodern debate sought to demonstrate
the superficial nature of much of postmodern
architecture’s promise for new “open” spaces by
drawing attention to the synergies between postmodern
discourse—albeit as one that unquestionably
did disrupt previously deeply held values and
practices within architecture—and the recasting of
long-standing compliances with the economically
powerful.
A major challenge for urban researchers is to
both maintain a sense of architects’ position as a
cultural elite working in definite urban political
economies, while at the same time engaging with
architecture’s status as a socially resonant form
that is loaded with social meaning. In other words,
although overwhelmingly conceived and funded
by dominant political and economic actors, the
built forms of architecture become meaningful to
users and other citizens as markers of urban space
and as reflections of a diverse range of social realities.
At the same time, a primary focus on architecture’s
capacity to support diverse social meanings
can often be at the expense of a deeper critique of
the unequal power relations that underpin the
social production of architecture. It is this ambiguous
backdrop that means—far from being an
unproblematic reflection of societal values—architecture
reflects many of the tensions between elite
and non-elite visions of urban space.
Paul Jones
See also Gendered Space; Landscapes of Power; Other
Cities; Placemaking; Racialization; Urban Design;
Urban Semiotics
Further Readings
Blau, J. 1984. Architects and Firms: A Sociological
Perspective on Architectural Practice. Cambridge:
MIT Press.
Bonta, J. P. 1979. Architecture and Its Interpretation.
London: Lund Humphries.
“Brussels, Capital of Europe.” 2001. Retrieved May 9,
2009 (http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/policy_advisers/archives/
publications/docs/brussels_capital.pdf).
Cuff, D. 1992. Architecture: The Study of Practice.
Cambridge: MIT Press.
Dovey, K. 1999. Framing Places: Mediating Power in
Built Form. London: Routledge.
Frampton, K. 1983. “Towards Critical Regionalism:
Seven Points for an Architecture of Resistance.” In
Postmodern Culture: The Anti-aesthetic, edited by
H. Foster. London: Pluto.
Ghirardo, D. 1984. “Architecture of Deceit.” Perspecta
21:110–15.
Gutman, R. 1988. Architectural Practice: A Critical
View. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Architectural Press.
Jencks, C. 2005. Iconic Buildings: The Power of Enigma.
London: Frances Lincoln.
Larson, M. S. 1993. Behind the Postmodern Façade:
Architectural Change in Late-Twentieth Century
America. Berkeley: University of California Press.
McNeill, D. 2009. The Global Architect: Firms, Fame,
and Urban Form. London: Routledge.
Stevens, G. 1998. The Favored Circle: The Social
Foundations of Architectural Distinction. Cambridge:
MIT Press.