Vernacular architecture: (Re) Visiting the concept
LAMZAH Assia
Abstract. Vernacular architecture refers to buildings produced using local materials and construction techniques that reflect specific social and cultural contexts and environments. It is widely described as an architecture that is the product of the geographical, social, economic, and cultural contexts and is mostly presented as eco-friendly, functional, and community-driven. Moreover, vernacular architecture is constructed with the empirical accumulated knowledge of the building masters using local resources and bears important lessons about the cultural, social, and technical contexts that produced it. Such buildings and landscapes are immovable cultural heritage assets that reflect the lifestyle of the region where they are located. However, in our postmodern world, where our understanding of the local has changed, and the spatial constructs of culture are shifting under the pressure of globalization and global networks –both physical and virtual– the concept of vernacular architecture is far from being unproblematic. The meaning, scale, and symbolism of vernacular architecture are not universally agreed. Recent literature shed light on some of its problematic aspects, such as its multiple and shifting meanings, and more importantly its exclusion from the mainstream discourse of architecture and its history. Vernacular architecture has been widely understood as the architectural language of the people; the non-experts. To some extent, Architecture started to be seen not only as different from vernacular but as superior.
The present paper provides a critical reading of the content and evolution of the concept of vernacular architecture since the rise of Western modernism. It analyses two main aspects of the concept of vernacular architecture. The first aspect is its meaning and its evolution over time: does it mean local? traditional? authentic? has this meaning changed over time? How? It argues that its meaning is dynamic and that the vernacular is more about the process than the final architectural result. The second aspect is the place of vernacular architecture in the mainstream of the history of architecture. Knowing the power of conventions and their system of authority, the paper critically analyses the vernacular as other than official, professional, real Architecture. Finally, the paper provides new methodologies and perspectives on the definition, understanding, and analysis of vernacular architecture.
Keywords
Architecture, Vernacular, Postcolonial, Historiography
Published online 1/10/2025, 5 pages
Copyright © 2025 by the author(s)
Published under license by Materials Research Forum LLC., Millersville PA, USA
Citation: LAMZAH Assia, Vernacular architecture: (Re) Visiting the concept, Materials Research Proceedings, Vol. 47, pp 1-5, 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21741/9781644903391-1
The article was published as article 1 of the book Vernacular Architecture
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
References
[1] Olivier, Paul, Built to Meet Needs: Cultural Issues in Vernacular Architecture, Routledge, London, 2006. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080476308
[2] Olivier, Paul, Built to Meet Needs: Cultural Issues in Vernacular Architecture, Routledge, London, 2006, and Al Sayyad, 2004. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080476308
[3] Jackson, John, Discovering the Vernacular Landscape, Yale University Press, Massachusetts, 1989.
[4] Brown, Robert and Daniel Maudlin, “Concepts of Vernacular Architecture”, in Greig Crysler, Stephen Cairns and Hilde Heynen (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Architectural Theory, London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2012, pp 340-355. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446201756.n21
[5] Venturi, Denise Scott Brown, and Steven Izenour, Learning from Las Vegas: The Forgotten Symbolism of Architectural Form, Cambridge, MIT, 1972; rev. ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1977.
[6] Robert Venturi, Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture, New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1966.
[7] Venturi, Denise Scott Brown, and Steven Izenour, Learning from Las Vegas: The Forgotten Symbolism of Architectural Form, Cambridge, MIT, 1972; rev. ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1977.
[8] Augé, Marc, Non-places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity, New York, Verso,1995. And Chase et al, 1999 in Greig Crysler, et al (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Architectural Theory, London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2012, pp 347.
[9] Brown, Robert and Daniel Maudlin, “Concepts of Vernacular Architecture”, in Greig Crysler, Stephen Cairns and Hilde Heynen (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Architectural Theory, London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2012, pp 340-355. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446201756.n21
[10] Fuss, 1989, cited in Brown, Robert and Daniel Maudlin, “Concepts of Vernacular Architecture”, in Greig Crysler, et al (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Architectural Theory, London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2012, pp 345
[11] Rapoport, 1969, in Victor Buchli, An Anthropology od Architecture, London, Bloomsbury, and Lawrence, R, Learning from colonial houses and lifestyles’, in M. Turan (ed.) Vernacular Architecture: Paradigms of Environmental Response, Aldershot: Avebury, 1990, and Asquith, L and M. Vellinga (eds), Vernacular Architecture in the Twenty-First Century: Theory, Education and Practice, London, Taylor & Francis, 1982.
