The Sociocultural Role of Architectural Types: Cultural Sustainability in Architecture and the Possibility of Convention

Year 2019, , 83 - 99, 15.01.2019

Zeynep Çiğdem Uysal Ürey

https://doi.org/10.37246/grid.491782

Cited By: 2

Abstract

This study looks at the issue of cultural sustainability in architecture
from the perspective of architectural types and attempts to question the
cognitive viability of using types in the creation of a sustainable cultural
milieu. The study conducts a multi-disciplinary and cross-comparative discourse
analysis on the subject areas of cultural sustainability, cultural schemas and
architectural types, in an attempt to find out the social and cognitive role of
architectural types with regard to cultural sustainability. Examining these
subject areas comparatively, the study respectively investigates the role of
cultural schemas in cultural sustainability, the correlation of architectural
types and cultural schemas, and the social and cognitive role of architectural
types in the formation of cultural sustainability. Consequently, the study
questions if the use of architectural types has a cognitive basis in the
creation of a sustainable cultural milieu.

Keywords

cultural sustainability, cultural schemas, architectural types

Mimari Tiplerin Sosyokültürel Rolü: Kültürel Sürdürülebilirlik ve Geleneğin Sunduğu Olanaklar

Abstract

Bu çalışma, mimarlıkta kültürel
sürdürülebilirlik konusuna, mimari tipler perspektifinden bakmakta ve
sürdürülebilir bir kültürel ortamın yaratılmasında tip kullanımının bilişsel
geçerliliğini sorgulamaya çalışmaktadır. Çalışma, kültürel sürdürülebilirlik
açısından mimari tiplerin sosyal ve bilişsel rolünü ortaya çıkarmak amacıyla,
kültürel sürdürülebilirlik, kültürel şemalar ve mimari tip konularına ilişkin
çok disiplinli ve karşılaştırmalı bir söylem analizi yürütmektedir. Bu konuları
karşılaştırmalı olarak inceleyen çalışmada, sırasıyla kültürel şemaların
kültürel sürdürülebilirlik üzerindeki rolü, mimari tiplerin ve kültürel
şemaların ilişkisi ve kültürel sürdürülebilirliğin oluşumunda mimari tiplerin
sosyal ve bilişsel rolü incelenmektedir. Sonuç olarak, mimari tiplerin
kullanımının sürdürülebilir bir kültürel ortamın yaratılmasında bilişsel bir
temele sahip olup olmadığı sorusu cevaplanmaya çalışılmaktadır.

Keywords

Kültürel sürdürülebilirlik, kültürel şemalar, mimari tipler

References

• Argan, G. C. (1996). On the typology of architecture. In K. Nesbitt (Ed.), Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture: An Anthology of Architectural Theory 1965-1995 (pp. 240-248). New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
• Assi, E. (2001, December). Typological analysis of Palestinian traditional court house. Paper presented at the International congress of UNESCO – ICOMOS, Paris.
• Axelsson, R., Angelstam, P., Degerman, E., Teitelbaum, S., Andersson, K., Elbakidze, M. & Drotz, M. K. (2013). "Social and Cultural Sustainability: Criteria, Indicators, Verifier Variables for Measurement and Maps for Visualization to Support Planning". AMBIO. 42 (2): 215–228. doi:10.1007/s13280-012-0376-0.
• Bonta, J. P. (1979). Architecture and its interpretation. New York: Rizzoli.
• Colquhoun, A. (1996). “Typology and Design Method”. In K. Nesbitt (Ed.), Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture: An Anthology of Architectural Theory 1965-1995 (pp. 248-258). New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
• Collins, P. (1971). Architectural judgment. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
• D’Andrade, R. (1987). “A folk model of the mind”. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models of language and thought (pp. 112-151). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• D’Andrade, R. (1989). “Cultural cognition”. In M. Posner (Ed.), The foundation of cognitive science (pp. 795-830). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
• D’Andrade, R. (1992). Schemas and motivation. In R. D’andrade & C. Strauss (Eds.), Human motives and cultural models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• DiMaggio, P. (1997). Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 263-87.
• Donald, M. (1998b). “Material culture and cognition: concluding thoughts”. In C. Renfrew & C. Scarre (Ed.s.), Cognition and Material Culture: The Archeology of Symbolic Storage, Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archeological Research.
• Du Gay, P., Hall, S., Jones, L., Mackay, H., & Negus, K. (Ed.s.). (1997). Doing Cultural Studies: The Story of the Sony Walkman (pp. 10-18). London: Sage publications.
• Habraken, N. J. (1985). The appearance of the form: four essays on the position designing takes place between people and things. Cambridge, MA: Awater Press.
• Hall, S. (1997). Representation: cultural representation and signifying practices. London: Sage Publications.
• Holland, D. & Quinn, N. (1987). Culture and cognition. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Ed.s), Cultural models of language and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hylland-Eriksen, T. (2001). Small Places – Large Issues. London: Pluto Press.
• Johnson, M. (1987). Chapter 2: The Emergence of Meaning through Schematic Structure. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Kroebe, A.L & Kluckhohn, C. (1965) Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions. NY: Vintage Books, NY.
• Lawrence-Zuniga, D. L. (1997). Studying culture and history in exotic places and at home. In G. Moore & R. W. Marans (Ed.s), Advances in environment, behavior, and design, volume 4. New York: Plenum Press.
• Medin, D., Unsworth, S. & Hirschfield, L. (2007). “Culture, categorization and reasoning”. In S. Kitayama & D. Cohen (Ed.s), Handbook of Cultural Psychology. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
• Moneo, R. (1978). On typology. Oppositions, 13:23.
• Nisbett, R. E. & Norenzayan, A. (2002). Culture and cognition. In D. L. Medin (Ed.), Stevens’ Handbook of Experimental Psychology, Third Edition, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• Oxman, R. E. (1990). Prior knowledge in design: a dynamic knowledge-based model of design and creativity. Design studies, 2(1), 17–28.
• Oxman, R. E. (2001). The mind in design: a conceptual framework for cognition in design education”. In C. Eastman, W. Newstetter & M. McCracken (Eds.), Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education, (pp. 269-295). Oxford: Elsevier Books.
• Oyserman, D., Sorensen, N., Reber, R. & Chen, S. X. (2009). Connecting and separating mind-sets: culture as situated cognition. Journal of personality and social psychology, 97(2), 217–235.
• Petrucciolli, A. (1998). “Exoteric, polytheistic, fundamentalist typology: gleanings in the form of an introduction”. In A. Petrucciolli (Ed.), Typological process and design theory, Proceedings of the international symposium sponsored by the Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture at Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge, MA: Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture.
• Robinson, J. (1989). Architecture as a medium for culture: public institution and private house. In S. Low and E. Chambers (Ed.s), Housing, culture and design, a comparative perspective. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Shore, B. (1996). Culture in mind: cognition, culture and the problem of meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Soini, K. & Birkland, I. (2014). "Exploring the scientific discourse on cultural sustainability". Geoforum. 51: 213–223.
• Sperber, D. & Hirschfeld,L. (1999). Culture, cognition, and evolution. In R. Wilson & F. Keil (Ed.s), MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, (pp.111-132). Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
• Tesar, P. (1991). The other side of types. In G. Rockcastle (Ed.), Type and the impossibility of convention. Minnesota: University of Minnesota.
• Tesar, P. (2010, June). Types as intersubjective expressive systems. Paper presented at EDRA 41/types-II Symposium - Annual Conference of the Environmental Design Research Association.
• Tice, J. (1993). Theme and variations: A typological approach to housing design, teaching and research. Journal of Architectural Education, 46(3), 163-164.
• Type. (2012). In Merriam Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved from: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/type.
• WCCD (1995). “Our creative diversity”, Paris: WCCD, p. 64.
• Wertsch, J. (Ed.). (1985). Culture, communication and cognition: Vyogotskian perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Wittkower, R. (1971). Architectural principles in the age of humanism. New York: W.W.Norton.