Dynamic Identities and the Construction of Transcultural Architectures Felipe Hernandez M rTINGyqý Ga 2/GFRSITY 0 0Q`PQ Thesis submitted to The University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2002 PAGE NUMBERS CUT OFF IN ORIGINAL Acknowledgements This thesis is the materialisation of a dream, and it fills me with satisfaction. However, there were many obstacles along the way, which, in some occasions, turned the dream into nightmare. I am therefore indebted to many people who helped me overcome every difficulty. First, I would like to dedicate this thesis to my parents Eduardo and Lucia whose constant loving support did not only make adversity bearable but also gave me an example in life. I am especially grateful to Professor Mark Millington because his invaluable academic assistance and criticism made possible the realization of this thesis. But, above all, because he believed in me and gave me his unconditional support when it was most needed. I must also thank Jonathan Hale for his insightful architectural comments and Jane Rendell and lain Borden for their criticism, advice and continuos support. I would not be thorough if I did not thank Neil Leach who drove me into the project in the first place but left in the early stages to pursue of a more dynamic lifestyle. Henriette Hoffmann-Jensen gave me her love and provided support in the darkest hours. She made the whole process much easier. I would like to thank the International Office of The University of Nottingham and the ORS for granting the scholarships that enabled me to carry out this thesis. Many other people and friends helped me to accomplish my PhD. I would not want them to feel unrecognised for my omission of their names here. But I will mention Professor Bernard McGuirk and Professor Ricardo Castro, my examiners, for their critical and personal support. Also, all the members of the Department of Hispanic and Latin American Studies where I found a friendly and appropriate academic atmosphere to study. In memory of Mona. Contents. Abstract Introduction Chapter One: The Transcultural Phenomenon 17 1.1 Tracing Transculturation in Latin American Theory 19 1.1.1 The Politics of Transculturation: Fernando Ortiz and Cuban Theory 19 1.1.2 Transculturation Theory in the Andean Region 26 1.1.3 Narrative Transculturation 29 1.1.3.1 The Lettered City 33 1.2 Becoming Transcultural:A Post-StructuralistApproach 40 1.2.1 The Rhizomatic Model of Becoming 42 1.2.2 The Analogy with the Orchid and the Wasp 46 1.2.2.1 The Concept of Becoming 48 1.2.2.2 Power and the Majorities 50 1.3 Rethinking Transculturation 52 1.3.1 ReconcilingTransculturation 54 1.3.1.1 Displacements:The Problem of Migration 54 1.3.1.2 The Question of Consumption and the Dynamics of Transculturation 58 1/1.3.2 Transcultural Architecture 62 Chapter Two: Translation and the Evanescence of the Category of the Original 69 2.1 On the Notions of Literary and Cultural Translation 71 2.1.1 Unsettling the Primacy of the Original 71 2.1.2 Translation as Transformation: Or Difference in Translation 75 2.2 The Case of Postcolonial Translation 81 2.2.1 Translation as the Performative Nature of Cultural Communication 81 v 2.2.2 The Disruptive Capacity of the Notion of Translation in the Postcolonial Context 84 2.3 Cultural Translation in the Latin American Context 88 2.3.1 Appropriating,Translating, and Transgressing in Latin America 88 2.3.2 From Cultural Translation to Cultural Hybridization: The Unfinalizabilityof the process 94 Chapter Three: The Cultural Politics of Hybridization 99 L/3.1 Cultural Dialogics 101 3.1.1 Heteroglossia as a Cultural Condition 103 3.1.2 Dialogue and Dialogization 108 3.1.3 Hybridization 113 3.2 Cultural Difference, Hybridity and the Postcolonial Situation 117 3.2.1 Multitemporal/Multidimensional:Building the Ambivalent Modem Nation 118 3.2.2 Cultural Difference and the Agency of Minorities 123 3.2.3 Hybridity and its Subversive Value 127 3.3 The Hybridization Debate in Latin America 134 3.3.1 The Quest for a Differential Identity: Against Monolithic Views of Latin American Culture 137 3.3.2 From Cultural Heterogeneityto Cultural Hybridization 140 3.3.3 The Current Debate on Hybridity in Contemporary Latin American Culture 146 Chapter Four: Theorizing Latin American Architectures 157 4.1 Post-IndependentReactions: A Historical Excursus 159 4.1.1 Neo-Classicismand the Arrival of the European Styles 160 4.2 Recent Architectural Discourses in Latin America 165 4.2.1 Appropriating Architecture 167 4.2.1.1 Fernändez's Critique to the Notions of Modernity, Modernism and Modernization 167 4.2.1.2 The Process of Appropriation in Fernandez's Discourse 172 4.2.2 An-Other Latin American Architecture 177 4.2.2.1 Spirit of Place and Spirit of Time 181 4.2.2.2 "Other" Architecture 186 4.2.3 A Divergent Architecture 189 4.2.3.1 Critical Background 190 4.2.3.2 The Notion of Symbiosis 194 4.3 Architectural Theory in Colombia 197 4.3.1 The Notion of Syncretism 198 4.3.2 The Notion of Architectural Hybridization: A Concept Thoroughly Mistaken 204 Chapter Five: Dynamic Identities and the Construction of Transcultural Architectures 215 5.1 The Unseen Side of the Museum: Reading Between Architecture, History and Cultural Theory 218 5.2 Can the User of Architecture Speak? 227 5.3 Cultural Difference and the Architectural Practices of the Minorities 235 Conclusion 244 Bibliography 267 Abstract. Latin American architectural theory has not been successful in dealing with the complexity of Latin American cultures, and in engaging with the whole range of architectural practices that take place in the continent's cities and buildings. On the contrary, in most cases, architectural theories have been used as means to create hegemonic architectural narratives and systems of referentiality through which a sense of homogeneity could be reconstituted. Consequently, architectural theory appears to be in radical opposition to the realities of Latin American cultures and societies. This thesis does therefore engage in detail with cultural theory and postcolonial discourse, and uses post-structuralist methods of critique, as a means to engage with the whole range of politics and sociolcultural practices with which architecture is inherently related. Approached via the work of various cultural theorists, the complex reality of Latin America is not seen as a problem that requires resolution through the elimination of differences. On the contrary, and unlike architects and architectural theorists, cultural theorists aim their efforts at revealing those areas of conflict where the very fractures of Latin American cultures can be found, and where diverse and often antagonistic sociocultural groups clash while attempting to negotiate their differences. Only in this way would it be possible to create a cultural politics of difference in order to deal with cultural multiplicity in situations of inequality. Engagement with broader aspects of cultural theory will provide the possibility of questioning the validity and sufficiency of existing methods of architectural analysis in Latin America. That is why the most prominent theoretical models that have been created in Latin America during the past twenty-five years will here be placed under scrutiny. Greater engagement with issues outside an exclusively architectural discourse will not only bring to light the shortcomings of existing methods of analysis, but also provide the means to correct and enhance them. In this way, aspects that have been little theorized or which have remained invisible to the eyes of architects and architectural theorists will be revealed. The theories examined throughout this thesis will also provide the means to validate minority architectural practices that have so far been dismissed for not corresponding to parameters established by hegemonic architectural narratives. Introduction. During the past twenty-five years, various theoretical models have been created in order to describe and analyze contemporary architectural practices in Latin America. However, none of these models has been entirely successful in dealing with the complexity and dynamism of the Latin American cultures in respect of the particularities of architectural production. In fact, in many cases, architects and architectural theorists have been exclusive in their approach to cultures, in general, and architecture, in particular. Consequently, they have failed to incorporate the totality of architectural practices that participate in the development of Latin American cities and buildings, and have overlooked the existence of cultural difference. Recent Latin American architectural theory, with very few exceptions, strives towards the construction of monolithic and univocal architectural narratives with which to validate certain practices and disqualify others. Hegemonic architectural narratives have generally been created and appropriated on the basis of an exclusive selection of paradigmatic buildings that can be used as referents for the continued judgment of architectural production. The theoretical work of the Chilean architects Cristiän Femändez Cox (Modemidad apropiada) and Enrique Browne (Otra arquitectura latinoamericana) can be taken as examples of this trend. As with the work of other architects and theorists like Carlos Comas (Brazil), German Tellez (Colombia), and Marina Waisman (Argentina), among others, Fernandez and Browne's theses are supported by the same case studies. Particular attention is therefore paid to the work of Luis Barragän in Mexico, Eladio Dieste in Uruguay and Rogelio Salmona in Colombia. It is not coincidental that, while the buildings designed by the latter group of architects are taken to represent Latin American architectural practices, they also comply with the parameters of modernist Euro-American architectural narratives. In other words, the buildings designed by Barragän, Dieste and Salmona are celebrated 1 because they have reached a high degree of refinement in comparison with Euro- American architectures despite the fact that they were designed and built in Latin America.