Authenticity and Architecture Representation and Reconstruction in Context Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan Tilburg University, op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof. dr. Ph. Eijlander, in het openbaar te verdedigen ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties aangewezen commissie in de Ruth First zaal van de Universiteit op maandag 10 november 2014 om 10.15 uur door Robert Curtis Anderson geboren op 5 april 1966 te Brooklyn, New York, USA Promotores: prof. dr. K. Gergen prof. dr. A. de Ruijter Overige leden van de Promotiecommissie: prof. dr. V. Aebischer prof. dr. E. Todorova dr. J. Lannamann dr. J. Storch 2 Robert Curtis Anderson Authenticity and Architecture Representation and Reconstruction in Context 3 Cover Images (top to bottom): Fantoft Stave Church, Bergen, Norway photo by author Ise Shrine Secondary Building, Ise-shi, Japan photo by author King Håkon’s Hall, Bergen, Norway photo by author Kazan Cathedral, Moscow, Russia photo by author Walter Gropius House, Lincoln, Massachusetts, US photo by Mark Cohn, taken from: UPenn Almanac, www.upenn.edu/almanac/volumes 4 Table of Contents Abstract Preface 1 Grand Narratives and Authenticity 2 The Social Construction of Architecture 3 Authenticity, Memory, and Truth 4 Cultural Tourism, Conservation Practices, and Authenticity 5 Authenticity, Appropriation, Copies, and Replicas 6 Authenticity Reconstructed: the Fantoft Stave Church, Bergen, Norway 7 Renewed Authenticity: the Ise Shrines (Geku and Naiku), Ise-shi, Japan 8 Concluding Discussion Appendix I, II, and III I: The Venice Charter, 1964 II: The Nara Document on Authenticity, 1994 III: Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage, 2003 Bibliography Acknowledgments 5 6 Abstract Architecture is about aging well, about precision and authenticity.1 - Annabelle Selldorf, architect Throughout human history, due to war, violence, natural catastrophes, deterioration, weathering, social mores, and neglect, the cultural meanings of various architectural structures have been altered. This continuous change in our social environments is evidenced by the destruction of countless cities during WWII, the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in NYC, and in recent memory by the damage and loss created by the earthquake and tsunami in Japan and the Philippines, to name just a few. Our environments are constantly being altered, and these changes contribute to the disruption of our sense of continuity, our memories, and our shared meaning. Our reactions to these changes and the subsequent construction of multiple 1 David Netto, “The Form Mistress”, Wall Street Journal, April 28, 2011, online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704495004576265481351056202, (accessed on September 3, 2013). 7 narratives also vary according to the layers of cultural, historic, and artistic identity that have been disrupted. Among the various aspects of life, that have been challenged, are our perceptions of the authentic. We ask ourselves: What is now the “real”? What is the same as it once was? What has been made false? What has been erased? What is fantasy or fiction? What is our shared history? What do we mean when we look at buildings and claim them to be authentic, real, or original? In asking this question, we begin to challenge the notion of authenticity and its various interpretations. Furthermore, what we come to identify as authentic in architecture and culture is rarely very original, and more often comprised of reconstructed narratives and a collusion of collective memories created to serve certain cultural, political, and artistic purposes. These competing claims and definitions are especially important to understand the multiple perspectives presented, and in challenging biases, fixed constructs, and preconceived meanings. While collective memory and archival evidence may be primary sources for constructing the meanings of architectural structures and settings, sometimes repression and forgetting are required. In such cases, people reduce or omit portions of their complex histories to a single narrative for many reasons, including touristic appeal. Their traditions, history, and cultural events may be selectively omitted or marginalized, thus, suppressing the richness that came before. Of particular interest to this research are the varying layers of relationships found in collective memory, archival evidence, and invented traditions. This research examines how they intersect in the creation (and re-creation) of the target’s identity, 8 history, and significance. To what extent does the target achieve authenticity? In considering these complex issues, the preliminary focus will be on a number of architectural examples in America, Europe, and Asia that address varying aspects of authenticity through reconstruction and restoration. This initial investigation will then culminate in an in-depth exploration of the notion of authenticity in relation to the Fantoft Stave Church in Norway and the Ise Shrines in Japan. By studying these seemingly disparate examples, I hope to generate a discourse in the design community, primarily, as to both the merits (and lack thereof) of various representations and reconstructions in their respective contexts, and the nature of authenticity. 9 10 Preface [You] begin to realize that the important determinant of any culture is after all – the spirit of place.2 - Lawrence Durrell Each architectural period has typically adopted, incorporated, and revived aspects of previous cultures, styles, and technologies, progressively building upon that which came before. For example, the architecture of the ancient Romans, which has traditionally been identified by vaults and arches, was in actuality culturally influenced by earlier Greek interpretation and style (and one could even take that further back to the Egyptians and even further to the Sumerians). Regardless of its identification as Greek or Roman, its architectural meaning can often be varied and subjective, and based on a host of variables, even in the act of creation. 2 Lawrence Durrell, Spirit of Place, (London, England: Faber and Faber Ltd., 1969), 156. 11 Cultures throughout history have also created meaning through their buildings and landmarks, and architects have always shared a vision that later could be stereotyped as belonging to them or their community as a whole. The creation and interpretation of architecture has typically incorporated value judgments, metaphorical inspirations, personal perceptions and tastes, historical contexts, cultural assumptions, and research into various functional requirements. A key component of determining the various functional requirements in the design process is architectural programming, the preparatory research that addresses sociological, contextual, and psychological issues of various user groups crucial to a building’s success. According to architect Robert Hershberger, author of “The Architecture Student’s Handbook of Professional Practice”: Architectural programming is the thorough and systematic evaluation of the interrelated values, goals, facts, and needs of a client’s organization, facility users, and the surrounding community.3 Throughout history, architectural programming has also played an important “story-telling” role, as a repository of traditions and cultural ideas, passed down through the centuries by reflecting and documenting its social context. For example, the Greek revival movement in America (ca. 1820-1845) was architecturally fashioned in honor of the first democracy, Greece, as an aspiration of America’s newfound democracy and as a form of national legitimacy on the world stage. Architectural historians are well aware of this programmatic relationship between individual meaning and value and a building’s social setting and context. Put simply, 3 Robert Hershberger (for the AIA: American Institute of Architects), The Architecture Student’s Handbook of Professional Practice, (Chichester, England: John Wiley and Sons Ltd., 2009), section 6.3. 12 this meaning of an architectural structure cannot be traced to just one aspect of experience, but must take into account a range of layered ideas, images, feelings, memories, and so on, that contribute to the experience as a whole. Architectural programming thus allows architects to look at those diverse layers that contribute to the broader experience of the structure. Even to the untrained eye, by examining architectural forms, one can become aware of external (socio-cultural) and internal (programmatic and aesthetic design) influences. This broader awareness in architecture is often referred to as the genius loci, or spirit of place. Social constructionism (a micro-social theory of how knowledge is constructed to make sense of the social world) opens an additional way of understanding the meaning of architecture. It invites exploration of the ways in which individuals or societies “construct” or perceive their surrounds. Social constructionism emphasizes the variety of ways social meaning is created, institutionalized, and made into tradition. Entering into these social understandings and perceptions of architecture are matters of history, aesthetics, nostalgia, myth, and commercialism. A social constructionist inquiry (of questioning taken-for-granted assumptions and singular perspectives) may reveal a diverse layer of voices and issues, and enable us to recognize various cultural biases. One such bias in architecture, of significance to this study, centers on issues of authenticity and