To go TROPPO
A regression to “Critical Regionalism” to rethink architects’ impact on Australia’s National Identity.
1. Critical Regionalism. Romanticism or Foreshadowing.
aul Ricoeur’s reflection in “History and Truth” comments that the phenomenon of universalization associated with modernism was an advancement of mankind with a subtle destruction of all we call wrong (Ricoeur 1955). Inevitably the modernism movement capture imaginations across the world in architecture, culture, music, economics, and politics through its progressive international style. Modernist debated that there were complicated functions that architecture should or must address “machines for living in” a slogan infamously aligned with “Form follows Function” (Greenough 1947). The realisation in these comments is a disconnection with past cultural influences, the paradox of modernism is that it was born in a nation built on past successes and colonialism. In Australia, Modernism attempted to reconstitute itself outside these influences and take no expression or reflection upon them. Architects from the early period pushed models of white boxes and clean living into an eager Australian society that took it as a fresh outlook on living the glamourous alcohol pool side lifestyle stylised by American media. A prime example of the beginning of modernism was the Rose Seidler house which drew crowds every weekend after its finishing. The house took great advantage of its beautifully sitting in bushland on the fringe of the Ku-ring-gai national park and used sandstone successfully to ground itself into the outcrops (Museums 1950), this single piece of retaining wall is something that was utterly un-modernist and foreshadowed Australian architects to engage adaptively to climate. As quickly as the age of modernity grasped the Australian society many buildings that attempted recontextualised from works like Le Corbusier, the Barcelona pavilion, and the Bauhaus didn’t sit truly in the Australian climate and quickly faded literally, and in the eyes of the Australian populous. Inevitably in its success there was a steep fall out of favour to a period of conservatism in Australian society, this was backed up with a period of postmodernism ideals and then a greater onset of regionalism. Nevertheless, Australian society had a taste and subsequently looked for a new provider of living.
Why talk about modernism in Australia? The contextualising of Australian society reaction to modernism helps to identity the cultural influences of architecture and how romanticism and technology can blind a true evaluation of place. It also critical to identity the influence on architects (discussed later in this essay) and how they began their careers in and subsequent divergence away from hegemonic architecture that they developed.
The resistance of hegemonic architecture began foremost in 1980s as a doctrine of “architectural resistance” a term popularised by Kenneth Frampton and then described as the movement Critical Regionalism. The movement began in text with works by Alexzander Tzonis, Liane Lefaivre and Kenneth Frampton and found its definition in essays of the period (Eggener 2002). It was “to mediate the impact of universal civilization” and to “reflect and serve the limited constituencies”. The core of the movement is Heideggerian in nature. He implied for people, identifying places comes in the form of lassoed boundaries in their minds, inevitable our imaginations in identifying these places cross over with others and build social understanding of place. The architect in deciphering Heidegger through critical regionalism then seeks to be a mediator of people, geographical and cultural sensitivities to place (Abalos 2017). Frampton’s discussion in early essays on the meaning of critical regionalism, though an exploration of architectural works without “romanticism”. His earliest essay was coined the “prospect” for critical regionalism where he mapped a phenomenological aspiration for duality between national culture and civilisation against the works of architects such as Mario Batto and Tadao Ando (Frampton 1983). The glinting result was a large group of architects worldwide looking away from “older systems of belief” and created architecture through consideration and art. The word “Prospect” shifted 1. (Museums 1950-2021) Eastern elevation photo. 2. (Museums 1950-2021) Plan, open space with spacious Un-Hierarchical living room 1. Frampton “I would argue, In regional reaffirmation – grounds, at least, form some for of collective spirituality” the key word here being ‘collective’, a global call for regionalism is layered with difficulty. 2. Frampton – “Its capacity to arouse the impulse to touch returns architect to the poetics of construction and to the erection of works which tectonic value of each component depenrs upon the density of its object hood’, object hood being almost Frampton’s rewording of Heidegger’s ‘The Thing’ “Poetry language thought, translation in 1971 by Albert Hofstadter” to “towards” critical regionalism in his most prolific essay on the topic “Towards a critical regionalism; six points for an architecture of resistance” and is a plea not so distant from Heidegger and his refuge, to reflect upon the age of transition and cultivate a more slow and framed value for architecture, to not get lost in the machine of capitalism (Frampton 1983) (PATTEEUW 2019). Critical regionalism stands for primarily the compositional understanding of context as it takes in all aspects of site dynamics and allows the surroundings to offer opportunities for genuine design to take place. Frampton shows clearly, he’s not interested in sentimental architecture “To a kind of superficial masking which modern development requires” and muses on the reality of modernism, Avant-garde and postmodern architecture failing in not capturing a holistic cultural and historical connections. He also makes a case for critical regionalism as a “cultural strategy” one that can transcend and “double mediate” between world cultures and universal civilization (Frampton 1983)1 .
Frampton’s final verse’s (“Culture vs Nature” and “The Visual vs The Tactile) (Frampton 1983) gave insight into how to be a critical regionalist and the nuances that formed within the architecture. Firstly, the realisation that the greatest asset for a building to ground itself is the topography, the analogy of an empty block with a slope and the approach of flattening the site “a technocratic gesture” instantly places the non-existent building into a state of places lessness. However, by laying and embodying the built form into the place a greater connection to the idiosyncrasies of the site can be formed and the unknown building already captures the place it wishes to stand. Another clear indicator is the linking to climate and how the building lets in and interacts with it. The generic window is the holder of the boundary of the house, to shut out the environment and mechanically disconnect any real interaction with the seasonality of place. This can occur through poor placement or discontent to view which renders the interior places less to the exterior. The argument of “there’s nothing pretty to look at” is not realistic for an architect of critical regionalism. ‘The House for the poem of the right angle’ by Smiljan Radic is retrospective of its exterior with selective openings and views (Radić 2013). It looks within its self to an external courtyard and interacts at its heart with the climate and sighting. It’s naive to ever perceive a site to not offer an occupant access to the exterior and climate, to do so is to deny the true inhabitants of their place. Frampton is critical of these two points (topography, light) however leads on to stress the importance of tectonics, referring to Stanford Anderson’s quote “the activity that raises this construction to an art form” and to give an adaptable form, expression to function as structure and holds poetic value of the place’s activity and habitation (Frampton 1983). To conclude Frampton emphasises the most critical of points, designing in balancing of the phenomenological. For a “body to read the environment in terms other than those of sight alone” connects the inhibitor directly to place, this can be done through the detail of tactile material and addressing the most intimate of human experience . Heidegger called for this type of experience in his essay “Building, Dwelling, Thinking” where he noted in modernism a “loss of nearness”, “closeness” and “true inhabitation” (Abalos 2017) (Heidegger 1971). This final call by Frampton is directed to architects to think not of materiality in visual form but in sound, touch and smell, to link the poetics of space with construction.
Frampton called for his period of time was to be cognisant of the real demons of globalisation. It was a clear foreshadowing to much of what architects continued to struggle with identifying and the ability of cities to become placeless. Without driving Marxist sediment or even nationalistic notations the truth in Frampton’s essay lies in its stark relevance in today’s architecture and building industry. A genuine contextualisation of architects who are practicing in such fashion for the last 20 years could validate genuine formulation of contemporary identity of places and disprove critics who give the notion of critical regionalism as nostalgic or romanticist. To further emphasis the point further another call went out by Le-Catherine and Verinique in the architectural review in 2019 to “dust off” these smelly books of the past and reactivate the discussion of critical regionalism for the sake of providing “valuable framework” for young architects. For a realistic approach of genuine design in the age of BIM, productivity high, and capital hungry development the essay by these two framed Frampton’s beautifully in the context of today without a hint of romanticism. Frampton himself recently stated “Our globalised capitalism is obsessed with the maximisation of profit in every field, which is a repercussion of the increasing misdistribution of wealth. Under this rubric, architecture empowered by the digital is being reduced to instrumental calculation.” (PATTEEUW 2019) Australia like many countries, faces all these issues, we do have a strong and growing connection to country that is becoming more widely accepted not only within architectural theory. Due to harsh climate variables Architects in Australia have always been strongly connected to critical regionalism concepts by accident or reason. We must genuinely investigate what “Australian architecture” means, firstly to mitigate poor buildings and then help capture the public’s imagination at a cultural and social awareness of genuine inhabitation of their places. The building industry is part of the machine of capitalism and architects could easily be afforded more power to mediate and create a greater Australian Contemporary Identity through strong grounded residential architecture.
Australia re-engaging in Critical Regionalism
A cultural shift has been occurring within mainstream Australian society if a point in the last 20 years could be seen as a catalyst there would be a tied race between the opening ceremony of the 2000 Olympics and The Uluru statement in May 2017. These two points in Australian modern history have invigorated a connection to ‘Country’ on a national level. To forge a new Australian identity, there must be a reflection on the past in clearer honest minds, a reinvestment with past knowledge and future potentials across all industry sectors. Architects responding to these shifts in practice and style which inturn has a profound impact on public view of architecture. Intuitively accessibility to architecture holds the greatest influence on the built environment for everyone’s everyday life and the key holders of Australian domestic design is strangled by developers, star-itects and liberalist agendas. The historical way to connect this cultural shift with architecture in the home occurs through core principles in design being accessible, affordable and in line with cultural trends. The Uluru statement solidifies a strong cultural drive to sovereignty “the ancestral tie between the land” to correct the coexistence and claims of sovereignty from the crown (owners 2017). When discussing Frampton’s “Towards a critical regionalism; six points for an architecture of resistance” in the sphere of residential architecture and its continued relevance; it’s easy to get hung up on the exclusivity of the theory it presents and the repercussions.
Realistically “Critical regionalism” is a heavy loaded buzzword, Frampton’s discussion of global theories is polarising and throws many off the heart of theories call for genuine placemaking. Even as critical regionalism contradictions are openly acknowledged it has fallen victim to its own warnings of globalization and become victim to inadvertent universalisation (Frampton 1983) (Eggener 2002). By looking back, we can pick at the debris and critics of critical regionalism and see how influential the conceptual has been on architects like Troppo and Murcutt. Both very similar conceptual and social basing but hugely different climate and material approach. Its unrealistic to look at Australian architecture and believe that we can have a solution to fi t all. Its realistic however to see how regionalism within Australia can bring forward a genuine discussion on how to design for climate, place and people. Part of breaking down the weight behind “critical regionalism” slogan tendency can be seen in connecting the Australian use of the word ‘country’ in discourse. Primary as ‘country’ upholds a poetic, symbiotic and spiritual reflection of everyday life on the environment and sole of Australian landscapes (Australia 2021). The new attitude towards ‘country’ and the growing uptake through legislative bodies and practitioners is paving the way for the conceptual foundation Frampton was calling for. In its heart documents like the Wingara Mura design principles that UYSD developed and designed against in new infrastructure on campus is in acting conscious decision on all levels for the building industry to construct poetically and thoughtfully. If principles such as the Wingara Mura fi ltered into residential sphere, productivity and change would occur (Sydney 2016). Obviously, part of Frampton’s call is to be wary of money, governmental red tape and to resist, nevertheless an even playing field must be establish to level developers and create a greater awareness to building in consideration of country and place in all built structures.
To subjugate this a cultural shift on all level’s society is beginning to emerge with a notion of “an invitation to listen” though storytelling, community engagement and recognition of indigenous histories. One major work to break into the realms of mainstream culture and reflect on Australian history was the book ‘Dark Emu’ by Bruce Pascoe, an engaging and insightful argument against the long-told narrative of white settlement (Pascoe 2014). Challenging historians and Australians to read between the racial dogma of colonial settlers to find truths of indigenous agriculture and settlement. Interpretation and reworking the wealth of knowledge culminating in 300 language groups with interlinking unique song lines, traditions and practices, now cross modern disciplines from philosophy, agriculture, architecture, and medicine opens opportunity for uniquely Australian perspectives. Bruce is highly critical of many industries and the governmental weakness to adopt “aborgionalism” as it would be seen to destabilise capitalism and force economical risk. The steps to acknowledgement of country and restoring ancestral pride nationally would not be economically risky but culturally beneficial. Architects must act as the speaker of truths, negotiator of culture, design and economics. The built environment played a highly impactful role in dispossession of land and indigenous culture since occupation, it can also play an even greater role in uniting the land, people and climate together through cohesive design from indigenous and non-indigenous architects.
on-indigenous architects balance the line of negotiation in the narrative of connecting the built environment to “country”, prime examples of architects testing the harmony comes from the highly tasteful industry of suburban odds and adds. Architecture firms of all sizes reshape neglected suburbs and industry areas into upmarket yuppie family homes. A notable terrace by Adele Mcnab in Redfern re-invigorates a 19th century terrace though a collective story of Victoria “dunny runs” and an arching to the climate sensitive design on a small footprint (Mcnab 2021). Architecture AU titled their article “An ingenious reconfiguration” however ultimately the design simplicity is amplified by a high quality of natural materials and fi nishes with careful craftsmanship (d'arcy 2021). Bluntly they paid a high price for design, materials, and builders. How does this building connect to “county” and why make note of it? Implicitly its Australian and carries a sense of warmth though material choice and reactivity to the Sydney climate in flexible thresholds. These attributes are something of a cult following for Australian architects and sets them apart from other nations architects, who rely on contriving elements with air conditioning and negotiated what parts of climate they want in internal spaces. An established grasstree now barely seen outside national parks, centres the courtyard and is noted to ground the building in a past landscape where Sydney’s now dense suburbs would have been home to large patches of grass trees. A landscape statement like this could be perceived as a contrived connection to country, arguably in this case it plays a greater part as a functional shading plant rather than a tokenistic throw away. Landscape plays an important role in addressing change in architecture language for Australia, it grounds buildings in terrain, gives back quality of air and gives a chance for wildlife to maintain populations within urban areas. Native plants play an import role in de-colonizing our cities but also giving new life to them, understanding the values, functionally of the plants on the built environment as shaders or protectors from bushfires is growing, and an eeriness of tokenism is being lost to the reality check of critical regionalism and a true investing in the local narrative.
Impart architects in Australia are being given the chance to re-design and recapture a new wave of Australian lifestyle. One that is seasonal, connective and climate responsive. Good placemaking is occurring in our cities and regional centres and is putting architecture back in a dynamic relationship with all Australians. The broader field of cultural change is occurring within the built environment and the fostering of discussion is occurring in reaction to this cultural shift. Conceptually there is a connection to the critical regionalism of past with a step towards understanding ourselves regionally and nationally. There is a dark shadow however that looms over the suburbs, in Sydney the expansion of housing south and west emphasis the downfall of architect’s accessibility and the greed of developers. Without getting caught up in the Mc Mansion debate, the housing stock tethers on a knifes edge of sustainability and long-term efficiency as un-Australian housing is erected on a growing level. Residential housing sector in Australia stands for 47.5% of the building industry and is valued at $30.3b, Australians are still building and at greater rates than ever (Statistics 2021). Today we see another rising in such ventures as the Nightingale houses in Melbourne exemplifies architects taking a stand and engaging in affordable solutions (Nightingale 2021). The commons project provides an ethical, economic and sustainable approach to living and serves as a health reminder of the power of good placemaking. To take points from Frampton’s call for architects to practice in resistance and to be aware of global dynamics and the placeless we see a reality check for Australian architects (Frampton 1983).
We don’t need to reinvent the wheel of designing in Australia or approach regionalism but there needs to be provided a greater network of cohesive design philosophy that is digestible and honest to the public. The cookie cutter renders and repeated design with a different column, scream increasing energy bills and increased greenhouse gases. As the northshore, east and inner city thrives in architecture of consideration, material quality and archi porn Instagram photos the rest of the city could sit beside an American suburb without a blink of an eye. The question of agency, responsibility and need for architectural solutions draws many to a nostalgia, to the era of the ‘Australian dream” and a wave of critical regionalism that established a lifestyle of bbq, larrikinism, pools and carver chairs. Affordability and design can go hand in hand and when successful like Troppos extensive works in the Top End, it can have lasting powerful impacts on the homeowners and greater community. Australia has a strong national identity, and we also have a strong history of responsive design, its imperative the maintenance of residential house vernacular is upheld.
2. Troppo and Murcutt, Critical Regionalism in practice
Troppo is a regionally responsive architecture fi rm originally based in the Top end and now across multiple places in Australia. The birth of its practice came from the investigations in the fi rst publication ‘infl uences on regional architecture’ in 1978. The larkin mates Phil Harris and Adrian Welke, founders of troppo architects’ subsequent publications began to fl esh out the principle of good design for the tropical climate and how to respond to a region that made people go ‘troppo’ from climate! (Troppo 2021) The practices foundations in simple design and structure enable a greater interaction with phenomenological and approach to the inhabitant’s experience. They are architects of appropriate climate design, affordability, lifestyle, ecological balance, local resources, and local cultural identity. The practice considered the economics of building, environment, client needs and produced architecture that didn’t need to stand out or cost a lot to positively impact the inhabitant’s everyday life. Viewing their practice through the lens of Frampton’s critical regionalism the fi rm provides a clear example of the impact critical regionalism can have on Australian architectural identity.
Glenn Murcutt established practice in 1969 after working with many Sydney School architects in his early career, his style is known for his balance between nature and space. His investigations into architects such as Jose Antonio shaped his early practice and distinctive style. Theoretically based, he uses modernist principles of planning and open living with new technologies and organic focuses. Murcutt is known for is sensitivity to place and ability to shape genuine places by drawing on cultural vernacular, landscape, poetic form and site dynamics. Murcutt and Troppo worked together on the Bowali Visitor Centre in Kakadu National Park and displayed a dramatic interpretation that weaved stories of place, material and spirituality. (OZETECTURE 2021)
Site and Climate - The veranda plays an important part in the romanticism of the Australian lifestyle and is something that has stayed strong within the Australian architectural language of housing for 225 years. It’s a perfect point to start in regressing to critical regionalism infl uences on Australian architects and how these architects’ approach to site has been contextualised. Refl ecting fi rstly on Toppo’s response to site, the Veranda is given emphasis and importance as both a transition space and living space. Within their most early works between (1980-1990) a distinctive architectural language was formulated which embeds the veranda in everyday life. Beginning with a sketch by Harris ‘the shelter number’ line we begin to formulate the inspiration of resistance in how buildings siting was formulated and how the environment needs to negotiate to the building’s exposure (Huang 2016). In context of Australia’s tropical climate, the establishment of climatic principles in their research report ‘Pukahs and Pith Helmets’ paved a way for the principles to be linked with systematic structural design and greater exploration of the boundary between outdoor and indoor (Welke 1982). The elevation of the house provided a cooling device for the above verandas and living levels whilst also enabling alternate living spaces to be placed below, this can be seen in their catalogue published in poster form. The veranda also became a key part of a spatial pattern and deeply rooted cultural connection in their practice. An emulation fi rstly of indigenous structure found in the tropics gave way to a discussion on the truth in historical portrayals of dwellings in Australia and most pointedly it came from a basic shelter, a need to block excessive sun in the dry season and rain in the summer season. A simple translation of ventilation and addressing tropical climate in which British colonials adopted after failings of traditional brick structure in tropical climates (A C Welke 1. (Huang 2016) “The shelter number line” sketch date unknown by Harris to help place the beginnings of shelter for everyday life. 2.(Huang 2016) Troppo Early Darwin Houses Elevation taken from one of there posters. You can start to see the dialogue in which the stilts and verandas create. A vernacular is very evident in expression through material and post and beam connection. Roof, private spaces allocation and need for shelter give each house a distinctive elevation. 1978). In turn the verandas became a social and economic space, notably in the late 1950s they became sleeping spaces. The veranda for Troppo is a resistant to the a/c and controlled environment housing in the top end that began to develop due to a social shift to control a great comfortable indoor space. They two said “the tropical climate is the easiest climate to design for” and in bringing the humble veranda back into the architectural expression of the regional opened the opportunity for a great sense of place, for both the residents of each home but the community too (Laurie 2014). The concept of the tenth line embraced the veranda as an exterior transparent face that could provide a house with the potential for quality indoor outdoor living. Conversely the veranda in the eyes of Murcutt in regions below Queensland acts as programmatic between closed spaces, notable the examples of the Marie short house in Kempsey which uses an enclosed veranda and internal passageway (Reads in plan as part of veranda connection). Murcutt’s interpretation of indoor and outdoor is controlled through a carefully curated façade. The internal space can be closed and heated whilst when needed can also be highly adaptable to temperature. Adaptability and inhabitants’ connection to climate is shown though the extensive use of retractable metal louvers enabling control of light and ventilations, natural heating in the winter and natural ventilation in the summer. Murcutt takes a much more intermediate and traditional approach to verandas and space, instead of Toppo’s approach embedding the verandas “living verandas” “kitchen verandas” (Lecaro 2017) This is primary due to climate factors and the effects of ‘internal spaces’ through passive cooling strategies to the sites climate nevertheless the veranda holds the same importance to the act of living the “Australian way (López-Bahut 2021)”. Murcutt explains this in the case of the Maria house perfectly: “The building opens on the front and the back, positive pressure, negative pressure. A fantastic cooling system. This is not a struggle to be visible. It is in fact, visible, but relaxes in its environment”. (OZETECTURE 2021)
Refl ecting on Frampton’s points these two architects contextualise the veranda though a historic, cultural, and site-specifi c lens. It could be said they have on paper a very similar approach to how the veranda can be adapted to suit the needs of climate. It’s clear that critical regionalism is alive and effecting an Australian lifestyle through the deep link no-matter the location of the verandas.
Phenomenological - A key factor in understanding Australian critical regionalism is the ability of an architect to program space in connection with the exterior. The identifi cation of patterns of living become apparent in how a residential home links the occupants to place and the everyday. Responsive cohesion diagrams, following the approach of Bill Hilliers’ space syntax for both architects show a clear theoretic connection and interacting with a continually dialogue on what Australian living is. Troppo’s distinctive program and rectangular shapes (which enables cost effect construction) leads inhabitants primary thought the site/ground plane, upstairs into the living platform and then down again. The critical element being the veranda/ breezeway enabling a frequent moving between indoor and outdoor in the act of living on the living level. Murcutt in turn grounds many of his homes on the site level and follows a program of minimalism, his forms are more controlled through deliberate pavilion shapes. Murcutt’s movement is controlled (notable in the Marie short house) through making the most accessible and obtainable space the living area and giving bedrooms and bathrooms the last priority. Both Architects give a large focus to living spaces with Troppo enacting a dialogue to a greater extent of informal living. The spatial principle established by Troppo lies in their development of the “Tenth line” in which the edge between exterior and interior is perceived to be not programmed ‘a view though one will always include the other’. (Huang 2016) 3. (Huang 2016) Troppo illustration taken from ‘Pukahs and Pith Helmets’ describing the four fundamental principles to create consistent and liveable space in the tropical climate. By illustrating this in such a readable way Troppo was able to engage clients directly in the process of design and provide evidence for there ‘madness’. It also provided a pillar of treatment to space that could be fallen back on to test prototypes or unique designs. 4. (Class 2008) Sketch by Murcutt date unknown. This sketches explains Murcutt’s intentions without the aid of more heavy information shows a clear intention of symmetry, clean form and simple construction. Emphasis is given to the corrugation of the roof and battening on the walls, whilst each open face is left blank to show the opportunities, they provide to refl ect the outside. 5. (Class 2008) Floorplan of the Marie Short house 1980. Demonstrates the simple logic applied by Murcutt which establishes a hierarchy of spatial orientation and use of verandas in a more traditional way. A direct breaking down of private and shared spaces is created with the veranda whilst simultaneously enabling a feeling of warmth between the two by a controlled airlock in the centre. Murcutt commented on the Troppo’s approach “whole philosophy may have seemed renegade, outrageous even to some, but it was Troppo who were focused on an authentic architecture for the tropics” (Mcmanus 2021). In the playful pattern Troppo created in veranda use, living and bedroom orientation they address the ‘hedonist life’ and connected occupants to a genuine experience of place in everyday life. The spaces created by Troppo had lasting impacts on homeowners’ lives. Residents have described a “hatred at fi rst site but love eternity”, The spaces shared between family and environment foster a compassion to others and a mentality of sharing, a responsive attitude to life “it was like holiday living in this house” (J. a. Huang 2013). These attitudes where crafted by the physical and psychological boundaries the building provided through the patterns of layout and breathable skin which in turn developed a psyche of fl exibility and climate response in the everyday life. In turn when looking at Murcutt houses more restricted response to planning came from a need to conserve heat and make priorities to an internal heart for the home. He however was able through the duality of louvers and vertical insertions to transform space and connect homeowners to the exterior. Within Murcutt’s initial siting of his buildings a deep sense of light, warmth and air is developed and enables the hierarchy of spaces to come to fruition. Both architects have solid grounding in addressing spaces and the power it can provide to living, their architecture breaths with the occupants and demands inhabitation at its deepest levels.
Technical Form – Troppo at its core developed a normative pattern in construction with post and beam which enabled easy construction, portability of materials and adaptability. They also made genuine inhabitation accessible in the top end by developing a technical ground of logic and a tactile approach to materiality that engage homeowners in the construction, living and care of the house. Simple to build and easy to maintain, robust details and local acquired hardware gave homeowners and the government, peace of mind that the technical building itself would be executed by any tradesperson. In contrast Murcutt’s architecture is much less accessible and his technical form is a resolving factor. The emphasis fi rstly on louvers within his facades (tending towards aluminium) accentuates costs and requires more skilled trades people to install. His technical form however responds emphatically to the site and in many buildings uses material sourced from local areas. The form of the Marie house shows a mastery of context, construction detail and minimalism. Murcutt’s structures arch at the core of Frampton’s call a poetic structure, The Marie house plays off with its iconic curve roof, a story of colonial Australia vernacular whilst also enacting an interpretation of a deeper connection to country. The balance of Australian themes with classic modernism shows a heightened sensitivity to regionalism and a relativism to modernism. In short, the house in comparison to Troppo’s architecture drives at the heart of place, “a casual glance might dismiss them as traditional agriculture buildings” (Lecaro 2017) Troppo also enact this reaction however through now the widespread acceptance of their signature vernacular. Both architects from the birth of design is considering the building both in macro and micro scale and the technical form responds to the dynamics of people and site, unfortunately the uptake of architectural practice south of the top end dissolves into an issue of accessibility, affordability and client’s aptitude (willingness) to respond to climate. (J. a. Huang 2013) Another main infl uence on these two architects and many Australian architects stems from Japan, The concept of ‘Ma’ (negative space) rings strong in balancing indoor-outdoor space. Its also refl ective in the Post and Beam structure used, simple and easy to build the importing of these methods enables Australian architects to formulate better adaptations of Australian built vernacular. By simplifying parts of traditional Australian architecture, a great connection to history past present and future can be found in Troppo’s and Murcutt’s houses.
Critics have downplayed critical regionalism importance due to the inability to harmonise a vernacular (Eggener 2002) (Critical Regionalism : Whatever Happened to Autonomy 2014). It’s evident however such consistent use of verandas and spatial patterns by Troppo and Murcutt across different climates provides evidence to a strong Australian Architectural identity that can cross climate and spatial boundaries. A regression to their works shows how relevant critical regionalism, most importantly its theory is to enable architects to critically design for Australia’s diverse climate whilst engage in a national coherence. The nature of the building industry and colder climates often diverts the everyday Australian away for intermediate spaces and towards a more traditional environment-controlled interior, in playing off these two architects their clear scope for a greater enacting of Australian architecture doctrine, be it though a concept of critical regionalism or through a social uptake.