Editorial
Architecture and urban planning have always been instruments of identity construction. Not only does this apply to the reconstruction of lost historical buildings and city ensembles—much of which is currently being undertaken in Europe with underlying right-wing agendas— it also applies in a special way to the epoch of modernity. The vision of an ideal past and the design of a better future are two sides of the same coin. This political context serves as the backdrop for this issue’s understanding of architectural modernisms in Cambodia, Indonesia, Myanmar, and Singapore as an expression of these societies’ struggle for a postcolonial future.
Taking a political angle opens up this topic to more than purely architectural and historical considerations, bringing it into the present-day discourse. Indeed, the relevance of this issue is that it reminds us, in our encounters with Southeast Asian modernisms, how closely architecture and ideology are intertwined, for better or worse. For worse, because modernism has been used, top-down, by rulers of various stripes to advance their nationalist interests. For the better, because designing the future was always associated with some progressive notion of society. Given the triumph of the depoliticized International Style in the wake of the Second World War, it is exciting to discover just how politically charged modernism was in Southeast Asia.
But to view architecture solely from the perspective of ideological superstructures would be to overlook the decisive aspect of its agency. That would mean, as Indonesian curator Setiadi Sopandi aptly notes in this issue, “reducing the complexity of architecture to a mere representational function.” Among all human cultural products, architecture stands out in that it is an embodiment of both the ideological superstructure and the economic base, as Marxist architectural theorist Douglas Spencer pointed out in ARCH+, The Property Issue (p. 130). Not only does it shape our thinking as a social narrative, it also intervenes as a substructure—as the material basis of everyday life, in the reality of the lives of the people who live and work within it. Because of this dual nature, architecture is able to transcend not only ideologies but cultural boundaries as well. The original invention, interpretations, and adaptations of modernism in Cambodia, Indonesia, Myanmar, and Singapore, which are presented and critically discussed in this issue, impressively illustrate this balancing act.
Finally, the examination of Southeast Asian modernisms reminds us, once again, that the modern movement was not an exclusively Western development, but multivoiced, multilayered, and globally integrated. However, this is not about the cultural appropriation of stylistic features alone, but also, and even more importantly, about the openness of modernism to adaptation in order to meet the lifestyles of its users and inhabitants. Architecture only becomes effective on a local level if it enriches people’s lives from the bottom up. This insight—which is not at all new—also makes clear what task still lies ahead of us: balancing the tension between universalist claims and specific social contexts. Only then can we become at home in modernism.
PS: As we wrap up this issue, democratic protests in Myanmar are being brutally put down by the military. The struggle for an emancipatory future continues. In shedding light on a hitherto little-known side of the country—the struggle for a local modernism—we express our respect and solidarity with the people of Myanmar.
Acknowledgements
This issue owes much to the pioneering work of the Encounters with Southeast Asian Modernism project by Sally Below, Moritz Henning, Christian Hiller, and Eduard Kögel, who initiated and curated the project in 2019 to explore the many important voices and perspectives on modernism(s) in Southeast Asia as part of the Bauhaus centenary. I would like to thank them, as well as all the contributors, for their fruitful collaboration as guest editors. A big thank you also goes to the ARCH+ team for transforming this body of knowledge into an exceptional issue, first and foremost Mirko Gatti (project manager), Nora Dünser (managing editor), Max Kaldenhoff (creative director), Melissa Koch (editor), as well as Julius Grambow and Leonie Hartung (editorial assistants).
