View / Download 11.1 Mb
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Architecture and the Performance of Citizenship in a Global City: Singapore, 1965-2015 by Nathan Foster Bullock Department of Art, Art History & Visual Studies Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Annabel J. Wharton, Supervisor ___________________________ Gennifer Weisenfeld ___________________________ Kristine Stiles ___________________________ Elizabeth Grosz Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Art, Art History & Visual Studies in the Graduate School of Duke University 2019 i v ABSTRACT Architecture and the Performance of Citizenship in a Global City: Singapore, 1965-2015 by Nathan Bullock Department of Art, Art History & Visual Studies Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Annabel J. Wharton, Supervisor ___________________________ Gennifer Weisenfeld ___________________________ Kristine Stiles ___________________________ Elizabeth Grosz An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Art, Art History & Visual Studies in the Graduate School of Duke University 2019 Copyright by Nathan Foster Bullock 2019 Abstract In this dissertation, I present the ways in which architecture was used to perform citizenship in post-colonial Singapore from 1965-2015. During the first fifty years of independence, architects, alongside other artists and activists, contested the restrictions and exclusions of de facto and de iure citizenship through alternative proposals for the urban built environment. I make the case for an alternative architectural history based on those buildings which are excluded from the canon by virtue of their status as unbuilt and rejected projects. Through archival research and interviews, I provide an historical narrative and visual analysis of these alternative proposals for architecture and politics. I argue for an understanding of both citizenship and architecture’s agency as performative. I begin with the Singapore Planning and Urban Research (SPUR) Group’s proposals and continue with alternative unbuilt projects from its co-leaders’—Tay Kheng Soon and William Lim. The rejection of these architectural projects by the state reveals the rejection of the postcolonial social democratic politics on which they were based. This evidence demonstrates the continuity between British colonial control and one-party planning. I conclude that these architects were the forefront of envisioning and advocating for an alternative democratic ideal. Their contributions paved the way for visual and performing artists as well as for civil society organizations to continue contesting the state’s oppressive politics. iv Dedication Cui dono lepidum novo libellum? v Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... ix 1. Introduction: The Search for an Alternative Approach to an Architectural History of Singapore ...................................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 Methodology, Theory, and Framework ...................................................................... 14 1.2 On an Irigarayan Architectural History ...................................................................... 22 1.3 Key Terms ........................................................................................................................ 30 2. The Architectural History of Singapore: The Time of Independence ............................. 38 2.1 Singapore’s Place in Global Modernisms .................................................................... 43 2.2 Visual Analysis: Megastructures .................................................................................. 53 2.3 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 59 3. “Citizenship” According to the Singapore Planning and Urban Research (SPUR) Group ............................................................................................................................................ 62 3.1 SPUR’s Origins ................................................................................................................ 62 3.2 SPUR’s Definition of Citizenship ................................................................................. 64 3.2.1 Athenian Democracy ................................................................................................ 65 3.2.2 American Activism.................................................................................................... 67 3.2.3 SPUR’s “Democratic Socialism” ............................................................................. 69 3.3 SPUR’s Opposites ........................................................................................................... 70 3.3.1 Historical Opposites .................................................................................................. 70 3.3.2 Contemporary Opposites ......................................................................................... 72 vi 3.4 SPUR as an Expression of Postcolonial & Countermodern Citizenship ................ 74 3.5 Performing Malayan Citizenship ................................................................................. 77 3.5.1 Citizens’ Participation in Planning and Design .................................................... 79 3.5.2 Citizens’ Right to Criticize and Petition the Government ................................... 81 3.5.3 Clear Planning Principles: Concern for the Total Environment and Citizens First ....................................................................................................................................... 85 3.6 Malayan Citizenship as Critique of Singaporean Citizenship ................................. 88 3.7 SPUR’s Alternatives for Realizing Malayan Citizenship .......................................... 96 3.7.1 Political Alternatives ................................................................................................. 98 3.7.2 Urban Planning Alternatives ................................................................................. 107 3.7.3 Architectural Alternatives ...................................................................................... 115 3.8 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 126 4. Post-SPUR Architectural Alternatives, 1980s-2000s ......................................................... 127 4.1 Bu Ye Tian (不夜天) ...................................................................................................... 128 4.2 Kampong Bugis ............................................................................................................ 139 4.2.1 URA Proposal: Design Principles & Planning Values ....................................... 141 4.2.2 SIA Proposal: Design Principles & Planning Values .......................................... 142 4.2.3 Audiovisual Analysis of URA and SIA Proposal Presentations ....................... 143 4.2.4 Architectural Analysis of URA and SIA Proposals ............................................ 146 4.2.5 The SIA’s “Tropical City” as Architectural Alternative for Malayan Citizenship ............................................................................................................................................. 156 4.3 SMU/National Library ................................................................................................. 162 vii 4.3.1 Tay’s Alternative Plan............................................................................................. 166 4.3.2 The State’s Responses to Tay’s Alternative Plan ................................................. 170 4.3.3 Tay’s Alternative Plan as Performative Malayan Citizenship .......................... 173 4.3.4 SHS’s Public Forum as Performative Malayan Citizenship .............................. 175 4.3.5 The State’s Responses to Performative Malayan Citizenship ........................... 182 4.3.6 The Controversy of the SMU Campus Architecture Competition ................... 185 4.4 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 188 5. Architects, Activism, and the Arts ...................................................................................... 190 5.1 Spaces of Activism ........................................................................................................ 191 5.1.1 Spaces of Activism: Select Books ........................................................................... 193 5.1.2 Spaces of Activism: AWARE ................................................................................. 195 5.1.3 Spaces of Activism: The Singapore Heritage Society ......................................... 196 5.1.4 Spaces of Activism: The Substation ...................................................................... 199 5.2 Alternative Architectures’ Importance to Contemporary Arts .............................. 202 5.3 Alternative Architectures’ Importance in the