Modernisation of Building

2014

Chomchon Fusinpaiboon’s PhD dissertation titled ‘Modernisation of Building: The Transplantation of the Concept of Architecture from Europe to Thailand, 1930s–1950s’ challenges the idea of the importation of ‘Modern Architecture’ to Thailand by examining the ‘modern’ concept of ‘Architecture’ in Thai society between the 1930s and 1950s.

By analysing archival materials and case studies in relation to their socio-political contexts, the introduction of the modern concept of Architecture is treated as an interactive and non-hierarchical process, involving translation, reinterpretation, and transformation.  

The thesis argues that what happened in Thai architectural culture between the 1930s and 1950s was not a mere importation of ‘Modern Architecture’ from Europe to Thailand, but a redefinition of what ‘Architecture’ was, and how it was differentiated from ‘buildings’. The transformation of Thai architectural culture, promoted by the first generation of modern Thai architects who had graduated from Europe, under a transforming period experiencing the fall of the absolute monarchy, the rise and fall of the People’s Party, the wresting between foreign powers in Southeast Asia, and World War II, was a systematic yet complex and hybrid process that modernised the act of ‘building’ in Thai society.   This process reassured the Thai elite that Thailand was a civilised country, not only able to catch up with the west without falling into a colony but also maintain its own culture.

Accordingly, traditional practices, rituals, and beliefs, related to Architecture, buildings, and the act of ‘building’, were not completely eliminated but were transformed and mingled with the modern concepts. The modern ones modernised the traditional ones but the latter also indigenised the former in many respects. By examining the transplantation of the modern concept of ‘Architecture’ in Thailand, the thesis questions the complex concept of modernity in architecture even before the presence of the Modern Movement.   More broadly, it also questions the dichotomy between western/modern and non-western/traditional in transcultural modern architecture.