What Is Vernacular Architecture?

Nick Ladd ARCH 420 September 30, 2003

To me, the purest definition of vernacular architecture is simpleit is

architecture without architects. It is the pure response to a
particular persons or societys building needs. It fulfills these needs
because it is crafted by the individual and society it is in. In addition
the building methods are tested through trial-and-error by the
society of which they are built until their building methods near
perfection (over time) and are tailored to the climatic, aesthetic,
functional, and sociological needs of their given society. Because
the person constructing the structure tends to be the person who will
be using it, the architecture will be perfectly tailored to that
individuals particular wants and needs.
One of the most important things that we can learn by looking at
vernacular architecture is the seemingly simple (almost low-tech)
methods of which we can create a building that is perfectly
adapted to the buildings users and the buildings locale. At face
value these methods seem trivial yet are in fact quite complex and
extremely effective because they have been tested over time and
have evolved to fit a societys needs. We can learn from this and it
can help prevent some of the devastating things architects do,
namely sacrificing a buildings function, comfort, or ecological
friendliness in the pursuit of some aesthetic quality or even worse, an
architects egotistical pursuits. I believe in general, that architects
have good intentions but fall short because many of the basic
principles that are taken into account in all forms of vernacular
architecture are often neglected by modern day architects.
Vernacular architecture is perfect because it is derived through the
application of local materials and building techniques to create
buildings that function as what they are meant to function as.
Because the buildings design and construction is intimately inner
twined with the person who will be using the structure, the final
product functions exactly as intended. These building maximize the
local knowledge of how buildings can be effectively designed as
well as how to effectively use local materials and resources.

Nick Ladd
ARCH 420
10/9/03

Tradition
Many of the traditions that have existed or continue to exist were formed
out of the necessity to explain unknown events. It is mans nature to never
be satisfied by his surroundings and the current status quo. Because of
this, we have always strived to seek new knowledge and technology.
There is an ever present need for us to somehow better our lives and to
justify progress with the self-righteous notion that were improving the
lives of future generations. This has progressively obliterated many of the
traditions that explained unknown phenomenon by demystifying them
through the use of modern science and knowledge. While this is generally
seen as positive by the intellectual society (justified by more self-righteous
notions) it is at the same time denying future generations a sense of
tradition. This sense of tradition is immensely important because it bestows
upon us a sense of history and genesis. In addition, it gives a sense of
belonging and ancestral heritage.
It can be argued that one of the strongest traditions is that of religion.
Religion has managed to survive in a relatively pure form since the
beginning of man (or at least the history of man as dictated by written
record, largely from religious organizations). This has not happened by
accident. The strength of the church up until fairly recent times has strictly
imposed religious traditions on their people. During not-so-long-ago times
the church carefully kept their traditions pure and fought anything that
was contrary to their traditions (just look at what happened to Galileo).
Now, in a time of purer religious freedom (at least in the U.S.), I believe
that many of the traditions of the church are being questioned and
thrown away in favor of progress. Many of the phenomenons that
people have always relied on the church to explain have been explained
by science. People no longer rely on spiritual faith, but lean on empirical
facts and evidence. This can be clearly seen when comparing the
relative reliance on religious belief when looking at highly industrialized
societies and less technologically advanced societies. This is diluting our
largest source of tradition. But then again, isnt it mans tradition to be
constantly questioning and altering our given traditions in the name of
progress?

Nick Ladd
ARCH 420
10/15/03

An Excess of Material Choice

For the most part, vernacular architecture has always been dependent
on the availability of local building materials to construct homes. There
was a symbiotic relationship between the use of local materials which
could easily be obtained, and local craftsman that knew how to skillfully
use local materials to build architecture. The local craftsman knew how
to turn these raw materials into buildings and knew the structural
limitations of what they were building with. In addition, they could
effectively predict how these materials would weather and how to
optimally build with these materials.
In a modern era, we are no longer limited to using only local materials to
construct our homes. There is an influx of largely untested materials
constantly being introduced to the building industry. This is breaking the
once symbiotic relationship we had between materials and builders
(whether they are architects or contractors) and killed the tradition of the
builders being masters of the materials they use. When using new
materials we enter a grey area where the consequences of our actions
are not necessarily know. Materials are often misused. Sometimes
materials do not function as we thought they would and buildings
weather prematurely requiring excessive upkeep. In addition, the use of
none local materials contribute to the depletion of far away resources
and a loss of embodied energy that is thrown out in the process of
transferring the materials to the building site.
There is a parallel that can be drawn between the vernacular architects
of the past and modern day architects. Vernacular architects were
limited to the use of materials that were available and could be physically
obtained locally. Today, architects have the same limitation, this one not
being based on geographic location but on a buildings budget. This
offers an interesting question, just because architects have these choices
available, should we choose to use non-local materials just because we
can?

Nick Ladd
ARCH 420
10/22/03

The Vernacular Trend

Vernacular studies have largely been ignored in the past by architectural
scholars. Our studied history has primarily been that of Western Europe,
with everything else that was worth studying simply being a derivative of
this architecture. To some extent the vernacular may have been covered
by cultural anthropologists but it has largely not fallen within an architects
studies. Throughout history architects, in the non-vernacular sense, have
an air of arrogance that prevents them from believing that this type of
architecture is up to their caliper and therefore worth studying.
I find it somewhat ironic that in a modern era where vernacular
architecture is practically extinct we now find value in studying it. It plays
on the fact that in some sense we dont like to study things until they are
dead. We feel that we can get a better grasp on exactly what
something is without having to worry about it changing over its life cycle.
Vernacular architecture is a huge and complex field that was in a
constant state of flux and studying the corpse was much easier than
studying the living creature. Only now that weve finally taken the time to
do in-depth studies are we realizing that there is a tremendous amount
we can learn from this kind of architecture.
The fact that a school of architecture is now devoting a class to
vernacular architecture is one of the things I believe Cal Poly is actually
doing correctly. It is nice to know that I will be learning about this
information before the knowledge is lost and some new architectural
trend catches everyones attention.

Nick Ladd
ARCH 420
10/28/03

Humanist Values and Needs in the

Vernacular
Along with resources, knowledge, culture, and tradition, human needs
have served as a key determinant of vernacular architecture. One of the
basic human needs is shelter. The vernacular house is a direct product of
this. We have always felt a need for a home to provide shelter, warmth,
and security. Within the cultural and resource constraints of vernacular
architecture we have developed a means to provide this.
By combining our cultural needs (aesthetics, social, traditional) with
humanistic needs (shelter, warmth, food) the vernacular was born, most
often reflected in the home. A selective balance was born to satisfy both
sets of needs without compromising either. In addition, the vernacular
home provided the correct balance between social and private life,
whatever it may have been as determined by the culture where it existed.
There is a key link between vernacular architecture and humanist
principles of architecture. Through the use of vernacular elements, like
the works of Anatolian textiles, people of a vernacular era where able to
project a piece of themselves into the place where they lived. Not only
were these pieces functional in the sense of defining space, providing
warmth, and providing comfort, they also provided the deeply humanistic
need to project oneself on their given environment. This created a
wonderful balance of various uses that was quite common in the
vernacular world. By utilizing an individual item such as a textile for several
different uses they were able to efficiently use the limited materials they
had available.

Nick Ladd
ARCH 420
11/6/03

The Cyclic Nature of Urban Growth

Turkey and the United States are not that different in the way weve
grown. A parallel can be drawn between the United States during the
industrial revolution and the Turkish growth in a post World War 2 era.
During the industrial revolution in the U.S. (and most of Western Europe)
the mechanization of traditionally labor intensive hand done jobs resulted
in an exodus from the country side to the factory and high density life style
of the cities. This, in conjunction with a great number of immigrants
resulted in the high density cities found on the east coast. In order to
cope with this influx of people, and aided be new technologies that
enabled larger buildings to be feasible, high density apartment blocks
were built to deal with overcrowding issues caused by this rapid influx. This
is the model that Turkey looked to in a post World War 2 world (and even
before that) as a way of Westernizing and Modernizing their cities, and
to deal with the movement of people from the county side to the city.
At the same time that this was going on in Turkey, the U.S. was
experiencing a different kind of growth. Spurred by cheap land, cheap
energy, GI Bills, and the desire to live the American Dream with its
unattached single family home, plenty of yard space, and a white picket
fence new suburbs started springing up outside of cities. These new
suburbs created what we now call sprawl and has led to the permanent
destruction of farm land, a loss watershed, and energy waste, a result of
the commuter lifestyle that went along with these suburbs.
We are now starting to look at this suburban leap frog development
within academia and striving to go back to a more urban model featuring
higher residential densities and the possibility of living close to your place
of work within our cities. Within the academic world this is being
encouraged and taught while in the real world it is still not the norm as
the majority of people in the U.S. with the means to purchase homes grew
up in a suburban era where city life was looked down upon and the
individual detached home was a status symbol and something to strive
for. There is a strong fight against this and things may eventually get
moving towards a more city oriented lifestyle. It is ironic that when we
look at it academically we see that it took 50 years of suburban growth
and sprawl to get back to the original model we had before World War 2.

Hopefully Turkey can look at what weve done over the past 50 years and
spare themselves the same mistakes weve made in the U.S. by keeping
their high density city lifestyle but, improving on it and bringing in their
cultures maxims and traditions to keep their heritage alive. It is important
to know where you are coming from but, at the same time not to be
imprisoned by it and allow yourself and your culture to evolve in
contemporary times.

Nick Ladd
ARCH 420
11/12/03

Yard and Yard Shrine: Deeper Than Religion

At first glance the yard shrine appears to be just another part of the
ritual related with Catholicism, especially when located in a deeply Latino
context. While this is a component of the greater whole, it is superficial to
look at it only from this perspective. The shrine must be looked at from a
wider view, especially when taking in the context of the yard it sits and the
socio-cultural climate they exist.
The yard serves as a connection between the public world of the
street and the private world of the home. It is a transition zone and
demarcation point between these two worlds that everyone is a part of,
even though they sometimes conflict with each other. In conjunction with
the yard, the yard shrine strives to lessen the gap between these
seemingly contradictory worlds. The shrine allows you to bring deeply
personal believes from the private world and communicate them with the
public world. In the concurrence with the yard, it fulfills the need to be
part of society while imposing a small piece of yourself on it. The yard
and yard shrine help to lessen and mediate the constant struggle
between individualism and communalism, ensuring that you become a
component of society without getting lost in it.
It is human nature to try and communicate to the greater whole
who you are, what your beliefs are, and what you are worth (both
spiritually and fiscally). By placing a yard shrine in the transition land of the
yard you are communicating all of these private attributes to the outside
world in an unobtrusive and tactful manner. They are a metric for the
outside world to look at in order to determine what your spiritual and fiscal
values are by looking at your monetary means and personal beliefs.
All of what I have mentioned is very important to all people but is
especially obvious when examples are given from the Southwestern U.S.
This is not based on the fact that the people are usually of Mexican
descent but, because they tend to be new immigrants to the U.S. New
immigrants of any nationality face the challenge of somehow assimilating
and becoming part of the community to which they have immigrated.
Part of the process of becoming part of the community is communicating
who you are to that community in order for them to accept you. At the
same time the yard shrine keeps traditions alive and allows people not to
forget where and from what culture they have came. Lastly, the

individual yard shrine gives a sense of individuality that is so easy to lose in

the generalizations that get applied to massive influxes of immigrants.

Nick Ladd
ARCH 420
11/19/03

Affordability and Choice

The catalog home offered a unique balance of affordability and
choice. New homes were made available to those whose financial
means would not of typically allowed them to purchase a new home.
Owning a home is a primarily American value that was not available to
many Americans because of their financial limits. This excluded them
from the idealized American lifestyle and thus put them in a position to be
looked down upon. Where renting and apartment/condo living is
common in most places of the world within all financial levels, it is primarily
something of the lower class in America.
The catalog home helped to close this gap. Catalog houses
looked and felt like normal houses and made this style of living available
to a larger section of society. People could now be part of the American
lifestyle within their existing financial means.
American perception is at the root of many of the housing problems
we have. The American dream involves the single detached house with a
white picket fence and a large yard. This is what has been driven into our
minds as a goal to be achieved since we were small children; it is not the
best solution to housing. In many parts of the world high density
apartment/condo living is the norm and it tends to work better. It helps
create affordable, safe, high quality housing without the negative aspects
of the typical American dream home. Now more than ever, the
American dream home is produced by the thousands in large leapfrog
tract developments that destroy virgin land, eliminate watershed, and kill
farmland. Once the land in that particular tract is full of low density sprawl
developers move on to the next tract of land further outside the city core
and destroy it with their mindless sprawl.
The catalog home was unique because more variety and choice
was offered than you typically receive in a standard housing tract. They
were highly affordable and tended to be made of quality material.
However, it was not free of problems. The fact that they still tended to be
low density single family homes helped contribute to the problem of
sprawl. In addition, picking your home out of a catalog tended to
weaken ones sense of individuality. For the most part though, the
catalog home was positive and helped create a new generation or
home owners who would have not been able to normally afford this.
Whether this was good or bad is up for debate.

Nick Ladd
ARCH 420
12/04/03

Does Architecture Matter?

Who really cares about architecture? Sitting here in a laundromat
doing my laundry and writing in my sketchbook I find it difficult to believe
that the people around me really think architecture matters. People
dont care about this; they are just getting by day to day living their lives
and taking pleasures in the small things in life that they have control over,
the types of things that positive memories are made of.
As an architecture student I would like to believe that it does
matter. I believe that as architects we are put into a position and
situation where we can make a difference and make architecture
significant, not only for the upper class that we tend to serve but also to
the average everyday person. This is where architects have failed. The
most powerful thing an architect can do is make someone happy. This is
what the goal of every project we take on should be yet, it can easily get
lost in the concerns over budget, turning a profit, and our own egotistical
illusions of glory. In addition, our architecture, like many other policies and
attitudes in America, is very shortsighted. We are focused on solving short
term problems while the solutions we give create much worse long term
problems. This is the legacy we leave our future, letting them deal with
and solve the problems we create only to have them create more
problems for the next generation.
So how can we use architecture to make people happy? This is a
question that the study of vernacular architecture can give some
suggestions to. The study of vernacular architecture is not about learning
how to replicate the structures and methods of a different place and a
different time. It is about learning how we can better the interaction
between the architect and the person occupying that building.
Vernacular architecture managed to solve the need for a built
environment while at the same time provide choice to the person
occupying the building through active participation. At some point this
was lost in the egotistical, exclusive world of architects where our job
somehow became telling people what they wanted and not actually
giving them what they needed and wanted. This killed user participation
and choice. It should be the goal of every architect to allow user choice
because once you achieve this, your client will be happy. It is an amazing
thing how powerful choice can be. It need not be something huge. It is
the little choices that matter the most. We can give these to the user and,

while they may not have a huge impact on the architecture, it will have
an infinitely larger impact on how the user perceives the architecture. It
magically makes that piece of architecture theirs, it makes them happy.
I think that it is easy to recognize that architecture can become a
catalyst for change. Unfortunately architecture often drives negative
change. Helping a select few at the cost of many if often the norm. This
didnt typically happen in vernacular architecture and this is why
vernacular communities did not have many of the problems our society
faces today. The lessons to be learned by vernacular architecture are
sitting in front of us. We now need to be able to look and them,
understand them, and use them to make a better architecture.