distortion of time and culture
in rural Asturias
In architecture palimpsests refer to constructed landscapes in which earlier buildings or building remnants remain visible along with recent additions. This is analogous to a reused parchment where partially erased earlier images show through more recent inscriptions. Through intent, accident or indifference forms, technologies and spatial traditions from different eras are revealed simultaneously in the current composition; they older elements may evoke memories that accord, contrast, even conflict, with contemporary experience.
Actual architectural constructions and conceptual images come about by interaction between memory, experience, material work and imagination: conceptual images lack material components of actual projects but otherwise are ‘constructed’ in mind. Thus the term palimpsest can apply, as well, to cultural and political notions, or visions, which governing entities have in mind when interpreting, imagining or constructing new architectural projects. Since formal and informal political processes determine peoples' living spaces, psychological and political control of human experience is at stake.
architectural production
Attempts by local citizens, provincial level planners and architects to introduce sustainable architectural design and construction technologies into rural Asturias has made almost no progress. Innovation is met with regulatory obstacles and official harassment often orchestrated by local and regional economic entities who dominate and control local politics. This essay will explain how local tradition and customary ways of conducting business thwart attempts to introduce architectural innovation and introduce energy-efficient, sustainable construction technologies.
It will be argued that: 1) building practice in rural Asturias is not about sustainability but, instead, serves as a mechanism for rural elites to dominate and control the local power hierarchy; 2) those century old legacy groups maintain dominant positions by obscuring and manipulating local zoning and permit granting procedures to turn project permits into a means to maintain traditional of local resources and the local hierarchy .
The authorities’ historic domination over architectural practice is based on people’s customary experience with political power. Historically only applicants who understand the stakes and subscribe to the field, as it is currently constituted and managed by the local power hierarchy, win construction permits. Because almost all who want to construct buildings tolerate extortion to get the project underway, authorities are not experienced bringing a recalcitrant adversary into compliance with ‘their way of doing things’. Thus they are surprised when their repertoire of verbal intimidation, bodily posturing, extortion, regulation manipulation, boycott, ostracism and physical threat fails to quash the challenge.
(site under under development)
But the escalation of power tactics is necessary when a newcomer contests existing power positions in the field’s political hierarchy. Because what is at stake is who will have privileged access to one or several forms of capital - usually monetary - but also political, social or symbolic. These power positions are critical to the maintainance of the status quo of power and economic relationships within not only the field in question, but throughout the broader local community as well. The point of the extortion is not only an exaction of ‘special fee’, but a reminder to all that they must defer to political authority. And when ‘special fees’ or bribes are not paid, authorities will create legal problems, attempt to ostracize and imply physical threats: the community must see what happens to those who do not submit.
It is ironic that architectural forms, elements and styles of what are marketed as 'traditional' houses are not at all historical except in a naive and literally superficial sense. For permitted styles do not refer to the actual autochthonous building traditions that locals had historically developed, but rather to illusionistic inauthentic styles, which only make a superficial references to past technological habits and craft practice.
Almost no houses are designed and constructed taking into account ecological sustainability or cost effective engineering. This has been the case for many decades. Design and construction standards are almost always set by politicians, civil servants or contractors, none of whom understand current architectural issues. Much of what is referred to as architectural 'style' is a pale legacy of forms and materials found in the 19th century when there was little understanding of ecological and energy issues.
Local builder architectural style represents in the present a decades, even centuries old political culture characterized by client-patron relationships and submission to authoritarian and corrupt cacques.
Ancient houses with their ancient techniques and materials were modern and functional in their day. Stable and hayloft were constructed around the house to preserve heat. Openings faced south for solar gain. Shallow rooms required shorter ceiling timbers, but their depth also allowed daylight to better illuminate the house. For an authentic architecture always builds for function, economy and comfort, and not 'style.'
living is natural evolution of architecture
reiteration is a superficial continuation of false facades.
Political culture controls this process.
vision replaced by ideology.
But this occurs at different scale: merely of the building or all the way to mindset or worldview. And by means of different cultural-political processes.