I have recently taken up an new habit in which i take images like the one above and take a sort of snapshot of my initial thoughts.  My knee jerk reactions are then reviewed as I take a step back.  Often times I then interrupt my wife from her writing and online discussions a she is doing for her masters degree while she works a full time job(sorry Toscana) to bounce my ideas off of her and get her opinion and reaction/critique.  I value her input greatly for not only is it an outside perspective, it is  a psychological perspective(from which her Bachelor degree is in) and from her perspective of living abroad in very similar conditions in the above picture.  This  usually gives me a pretty good exercise in perception and analysis and basically helps me with my understanding.  So in a way I am  treating this exercise as a sort of Rorschach test.

Recently I received my master’s degree from the School of architecture and Design at University of Louisiana at Lafayette.  So i spent 6 plus years immersed in Architecture studies and now I work in the field of architecture.  I still have a long ways to go until I am licensed and can even call my self an architect.  Even if and when that happens i don’t know if I will fully identify myself as an “architect”.  Not because I don’t like the term or the profession but because I feel like it is limited by the perception of what we truly and are taught in the invaluable studio environment.  The image or architect stereotype is so attached to the idea of a building or object  that I feel it undermines what we can do.  It is similar to those memes of professions what you do versus what your friends and parents think you do.

During my time spent in architecture school i gravitated to this idea that was constantly pushed that we had to discover the right questions to ask before we could propose a project/building.  This really stuck with me, this idea that what separates us, from those who studied say engineering or biology .  Is the idea of questions holding value and priority over pre established answers that really interested me.   I know that this can come off as rebellious, and i know I tend to lean towards the rebellious side.  Hell my own thesis was a rebellion against the defined values of architecture by questioning if it had value?  So in a way I felt the architecture itself was the question.  This i feel is in complete contrast to Architecture’s image now. With it typically viewed as a solution or answer.  It prefer the idea of architectural insertion as a proposal or the way in which a designer as addressed an issue through deep questions.  Maybe this means it will attempt to resolve a problem or it can be part of a bigger dialogue or question.

Now that i have laid out a little bit of context to my approach I can talk about the image above.   My first thought when I saw the image was a typical Latin American fevela/barrio and a typical residential high rise.  Something else I saw was a typical problem linked to poverty and impoverished countries and a architectural solution, a symbol of modernist architectural solutions for housing.    The solution being based off of ideals that I myself being from America and also being a student of design and architecture know well.  A building like this addresses a lot of problems that are associated with the other side of the image.   With these ideas I I began to discuss, with my wife toscana my ideas based off these reflections.  Starting with the idea or questioning of the success or perceived success of this high rise tower.  I believe this is due to my rebellious nature, but I also felt justified in my questioning.  The difference between now and my protected bubble in architecture school was that now I have access to real time feed back from a different perspective that actually experienced this scenario.  So I  have heard the stories of people being robbed all time, including my wife and her friends and the flawed structures.  I also know that living in countries outside of the U.S. sometimes means buildings like these do offer safety and security and they are viewed as a solution.  However I still pushed with our discussion because I still feel that even though I know the  building on the right is a viewed as a solution the  question still remains whether it is a correlation or a causation.

This questioning is the same approach I initially applied to the left side of the picture.  I found that i was struggling with the image of the left being so directly associated with the cause of the problem.  I personally struggled with the idea.  For I knew from stories of first hand experience that places like these do suffer from crime and are generally inhabited by people suffering from extreme poverty.  That part is obvious from the handcrafted do it yourself structures and overall organization.  But that is exactly the aspects that  sparked my curiosity and questioning.  As I looked at the two sides I could not help but be drawn to the interesting ways in which people address their problems.  They embody a textural richness and a organic component.    Along with all of this they, meaning the Latin culture in general, have a strong and unique culture and focus on family, centered around intense socializing.  People are engaged with each other like nothing I have seen over here, even though I am from the south I find the sense of community  pales in comparison.  They are also very altruistic and usually put the success of the family and siblings above all else.   The fact that places like the left side of image embody both the negative aspects of crime and poverty and the positives of rich culture and community overall challenges my ideas and perceptions.

Towards the end of our discussion I sort of realized that issues I have may stem from my own perceptions.  I found that I am associating this building on the right with the ideal version or solution for housing in countries like my own.  This for some reason does not sit well with me.  It somehow feels like a missed opportunity and possibly a mistake.  Even though we have achieve great things as a country and culture.  I do not feel that this should merely be copy and pasted abroad.  This method not only can be insensitive issues inclusive and unique to different cultures and countries but also I believe grossly irresponsible on our part.  What I mean by that is knowing what we know now about environmental issues and the massive miss use and waste of resources. We have a standard of living that may not be realistic for every one in the world to have.  In that aspect we have to admit that we cant provide every one in the world with our standard of living,  finite resources and  economics makes that clear.  But even with this I still feel optimistic. Which is an ironic trait for architects to have because it exist directly along side our cynicism that makes us always question.

Overall after looking at this image and writing about it for the better part of the day I feel that I have some clarity on my initial reactions to it.  In it I see two contrasting elements that in them selves have so much association to things like problems and solutions.  I feel that while I am cognizant to these  and understand the driving issues I cant help but feel a sense something is being missed.  That there are elements of great value within the communities and culture that we are attempting to help by solving their problems.  We are blind to them not because we choose to be but because we just don’t understand.  Within these communities lay a completely unique set of values and culture that if giving the opportunities and help though resources can yield not only solutions for them selves but possibly lead us to a better world.  This would call for possibly a more holistic approach as designers  that priorities smaller insertions through multiple areas and multiple scales expanding beyond just simply architecture or the built environment.  Its not about what can we teach but what can we learn.  It may call for less solutions and more questions.