Agile architecture: cross-cultural critical considerations of mutability in design

Abstract

[EN] Modern architecture is, with limited exceptions, designed and constructed in ways that prove static, staid and resistant to change. Iconic design, crafted by genius architects as sole authors, considered solidity and permanence before responsivity and adaptability. In principle architects knew best what society needed spatially and provided artful designs with expectations that were beyond challenge and not subject to modification. Over the past century there were numerous efforts by designers, such as Gerrit Reitveld, Cedric Price and Kisho Kurokawa, to anticipate change in program, to consider user influence in operations, and to challenge conservative thinking around the monumentality of buildings. In most cases thinking of these innovators outpaced technology’s ability to keep pace. However, in recent years and especially in Japan, technology has advanced in ways permitting greater mutability and heighted agility in architecture. Considering pre-fabrication for example, as one means to increase adaptability and customization in architecture, the Japanese market proves a clear leader, a proven innovator and a pronounced success story. North America, on the other hand, has been intensely resistant to agile design, modularized construction and open building. The present research critically considers these two realms, Japan and North America, deploying case studies to illuminate differences in approach. Included in facets considered from an agile architecture vantage point are psychological posturing around change, legal systems around construction, political attitudes around policy and societal expectations around monumentality. Japanese influences of history, spirituality and culture contribute to a willingness to have architecture that’s transient, temporary and unfixed. In North America values around ownership, materiality and capital resist architecture that’s mutable. This paper analyzes differences in approach and develops a conceptual frame for more appropriate, responsive and responsible architecture for the 21st century.