So if so some very fundamental common sense beliefs in Japan are different from the West, the effects can inevitably be seen in the design of architecture and especially housing. Therefore before discussing contemporary Japanese architecture, it is crucial to have a basic understanding of the traditional one as well as the environmental factors that influenced its development. While it is certainly possible to compare modernist housing models within the context of Europe and America without preparatory studies of local architectural traditions and climate, using the same framework for making assumptions about Japanese case studies may lead to confusion. The comparative relevance of my thesis topic is a good example of the problem. In Europe, postwar modernist architecture is generally regarded as cultural heritage, so in such a context it is natural to try to conserve or reuse such housing whenever possible. It was therefore easy for me to apply for thesis scholarships, organize lectures on the subject in Russia, write articles for architectural magazines, and find academic support. In Japan, however, most of my Japanese colleagues and professors questioned my intentions as for most of them it is common sense to get rid of outdated housing and build something better. While shrines, temples, and other public monuments can be more easily accepted as architectural heritage, common people’s housing in Japan is regarded as temporary and eventually disposable. Even something as old and seemingly culturally valuable as wooden machiya townhouses, a defining architectural feature of Kyoto, were widely destroyed or heavily altered for commercial activities in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Machiya were given some protection and financial support by a private fund only in 2005. Sixteen Dojunkai Apartments, the first reinforced concrete public housing complexes from the 1920s and the one of the most notable architectural experiments of prewar Japan, having survived the wartime bombing, were all sold to private corporations and torn down for site redevelopments in the period from 1984 until 2013. Postwar modernist projects are even further from receiving any protection in this sense. It was difficult to understand and accept this tendency when I started my research in Japan, but after a while I realised there are multiple environmental reasons behind the local architectural “epistemology” that fully justify such public attitudes towards reuse, preservation, and other important values of the built environment.
Actually, this was just an introduction... In the next post I will outline my personal findings about traditional Japanese housing and prewar dwelling models that can provide you with a good context for understanding contemporary Japanese architecture better.
See you soon!
TK