In understanding the relationship between the built environment and technology integration/dependency, the component parts of individual "culture" ought to be understood as autonomous input that individually inform the collective expression that we ultimately classify as "culture." Understanding the distinctions in cultural values and perceptions towards technology use, innovation and society is an important value in working towards bridging the formal and conceptual gap between the modern and developing sectors. Considering social expressions of culture (represented along the "Abstractness" Axis), individual or vernacular environments tend to respond to the greatest range of familial and social networks. These types of social systems have been studied and quantified by anthropologists so that data can be applied and related to the corresponding built environments, as cultural landscapes, nomads, agriculturalists, and urban contexts. These relationships and distinctions become clearer by contrast with one another and are also related to the nature of "groups." For example, seen cross-culturally all contemporary groups tend to conform, perhaps with slight differences, but the groups observed in smaller vernacular environments can be expected to conform much more closely. This clarifies the role of social norms and the importance of tradition in understanding cultural identity and its expression in both built form and the use of socially appropriate tools and practices.
The diagram above compares the cultural factors of the formal sector with those of the informal sector to illustrate the discrepancies in cultural input that contribute to the development of the built environment. The diagram applies the same standards of quantifying cultural expression and input as the definition model above, but applies it lineally to coincident models.
Notes:
Lindsay Asquith and Marcel Vellinga. Vernacular Architecture in the Twenty First Century: Theory, Education and Practice. 2006
No comments:
Post a Comment