Skip directly to content

D. How the History of Architecture Works

     From historical point of view, cities in the world can be divided into two grosstad and metropolis. Groesstad is a city which grew for along time such as Paris, Rome, and London, cities which has a very long history. While metropolis means instant cities, cities which was fragmented in a very short time, those cities are  in North America or Developing Countries. History of architecture concerning both, in Europe it is a sort of idea of reconstruction of the cities, while in developing countries it can be a potential idea for city planning in the future.

D.1. Groβstad and the history of the city.

     First we will discuss the Groβstad. Aldo ROSSI wrote that the value of history seen as collective memory as the relationship of the collective to its place, is that it helps us to group the significance of urban structure, its individuality, and its architecture which is the form of this individuality. "The soul of the city" becomes the city's  history, the sign on the wall of the municipium, the city's  distinctive and definition character, its memory.(18)

     Digging from the history makes the use of European city became an interesting set of tourists area, no other place in the world has bigger number of tourist then Europe. The second world war and the emerge of modernity and destruction of old buildings last out with a great protest and awareness of continuing the past in city planning.(19)

     The concern for the 'crisis' of modern movement which destroyed the historical cities bit by bit, was first appeared in Italy two trends which contrasting in their assessment of dialectics between history and modernity could be distinguished. One interpreted the changes that had taken place in international architecture after second world war as a sign that modern movement was alive and well just coming of age. The other aimed at reestablishing the basic principles which history had validated in the past before the break brought about by classical Avant-garde.

     The first trend conceived the history as a sort of natural forces which could be beneficial only when not prevented by a deliberate consciousness of the past. The second trend looked deliberately into the past for a renewed definition of the boundaries (20)

     The second trend win the debate as the '75 economic crisis in Europe emerged. The need of new building was last out, architects thought about the renewal and functional modification of old buildings, old ware house, empty church to be a new function.

     In European context, history of architecture became very important in its city planning, a new tendency of  revitalization of the decline area emerged every where. The new design will try to adapt the old. The real new such as La Defence of Paris should be out of the city's ring road. The idea of history as the structure of urban artifacts is affirmed by the continuities exist in deepest layers of the urban structure, where certain fundamental characteristic that are common to the entire urban dynamic can be seen.(21)

D.2. Metropolis, The Short History of the City.

     Second is the metropolis, the instance city, which was still a village one or two century ago. I  do not say that New York or Bangkok has no history, but the booming of its population in a very short time (compare with European city) make them to be categorized into metropolis city.

     The metropolis was a stage of drama of a modern man. It is the locus for the exchange  and circulation of mental economic value in the same time it is also the locus for the mind, for the development of rational system of thought. This rationality leads to the dissolution of personality and religion, which will lead towards typical cosmopolitanism. Although Groesstad like London, Paris, Brussel are still hold the bigger stock exchange compare with Bangkok and Jakarta, but the mentality of their inhabitants are different. In Jakarta one (with power of money and the corrupt country situation) can destroyed an old railway station and change it to a new building and a new function in a very short time without any feeling of loosing one of their inheritance.

     In strong countries, metropolis became a symbol of richness and glamor along with the high rate of criminality. But as an opposition, metropolis in the developing countries became a symbol of the gap between the rich and the poor, the composition of their urban artifacts which are crowded with skyscrapers and squatter settlement, show the weakness of the country, poverty. The independence day which was not accompanied by democracy, create a depression among the poor and sometimes a civil war, then the winner (the new regime) overthrow everything which was done by the loosing regime. History is something that is cut in certain point, and should be forgotten, the planning of the metropolis it self is changed almost every decade.

D.3. The deminishing of the history of architecture in the third world countries.

     The military power who controls the urban development seems that does not understand that the artifact which was built ten years ago by the older regime is a history of the city today. Destruction are every where along new development and new power competition between top rank government officers.

     In this sense, history of architecture should be presented as a basic idea for future development. Although indifferent with gr””stad, Jakarta and Bangkok need to continue their history too. Since not only is Architecture serving capitalism, but also like  Aldo ROSSI said, that it is a collective memory of the past. The destruction of old part of the city in Jakarta for instance should be condemn, they are cutting the line of the country's history. History is not a broken off line. It is a dynamic and continuous system, just like  hegel said centuries ago. I believe with TZONIS that history is needed at this time to unearth the roots and reconstruct the mechanism that have shaped the present design practice.(22)

Old Bridge Florence
Old Bridge Florence