My Future of Malaysian Architecture

A couple of weeks ago, I set my group of dissertation students a small assignment: to write a short essay of what they think or wanted the future of Malaysian architecture and design would be like.  I have already read some of these essays on their blogs and I think it is only fair that I too write a short essay on what my vision of the future to be.  This is strictly wishful thinking of course, and might even be rather utopian.

And the first key ideal would be Pluralism.  In a country so diverse it is impossible to have a singular identity.  Strictly apolitical, the 1 Malaysia idea is not applicable to architecture and design.  Not in Malaysia or anywhere else in the world for that matter.  Instead of trying to formulate one particular 'look' or identity and attempt to force it into every and any circumstance or situation; each region, state and community should have their own architectural and design identity.  If we could have region based architecture, then that would be my utopian vision of Malaysia.  And as most of Malaysia has commonalities, these underlying themes or concepts can be integrated into the different regional designs.  These commonalities include shared history, language etc.  So imagine if you could, each region in Malaysia having their own architectural identity i.e. Penang (as I am from there) would embrace its island geography and built buildings that respond to that.  Architecture in KL could respond to its status as a cosmopolitan city and the centre of the country.  These are two very simple examples to be sure, and other states have their own identity that should be integrated into the architecture.  The criteria for each region should consists of its geography and topography, the lifestyle and beliefs of the community, the economy and of course the idea of sustainability (environmentally and economically).  I am sure these criteria need further studying as I am sure there are others that are as pertinent.

Again, identity here is not limited to the history of the state, but should be a reflection of contemporary culture of that community.  All architecture should be contemporary.  All architecture should be responding to the needs and changes of the times.  It should not follow archaic laws nor should it bow down to history (something I feel that our local architecture does too often - in its extremes).   So if we create architecture FOR the people of a specific region, then we should have created an architectural identity indigenous to that place.  After all, architecture built for KL will not work if it is transplanted to say, Sarawak.

From reading this, it is fair to conclude that I am a big believer in Kenneth Frampton's idea of Cultural Regionalism; and this is what Malaysian architecture (or world architecture even) should subscribe to.  This essay is a bit short, as most of the things mentioned here are really at the top of my head, but it is my hope that it will generate greater discussion and debate; and to eventually formulate something that we can all aim to achieve in terms of a greater Malaysian architectural identity.