Abstract:
Discussion within architectural Place–identity theory has taken a
shift. It has moved toward a more fluid condition. With traditional
structures of identity holding less value to society, and imagery
becoming more prevalent, new models of Place–identity are
necessary. This is relative to a decreasing Nationalist view point and
an increasing critique of the Post–Modern. Neil Leach, through his
theory Camouflage, offers a way to rethink our relationship with
Place. Camouflage describes the application of aesthetics as a tool.
This becomes important when it is used to form a relationship
between the self and Place. The research presented here tests the
architectural application of Leach’s theory. This is done by the design
of a building for the International Institute of Modern Letters in New
Zealand. The design is broken into four components, concentrating
on four key areas of the theory. Rather than looking at the building
as a whole object, the skin and the planning of the building test
the concepts of the visual image and inherent engagement this calls
for. The strategic idea of becoming other is studied through the
design of a writer’s studio and a theatre. These ideas work together
in the design of the roof as an aesthetic interface. This architectural
design is critiqued against Leach’s theoretical context and the
building’s environment—against Place. Camouflage architecture
sees the building itself become a background element. The focus
shifts toward how the users of the building might accumulate
identifications through the somatic relationships that the building
facilitates. The results of this application are presented as an
architectural explanation of Camouflage. This is further distilled
into a doctrine of Place–identity. These conclusions offer a model
for the application of Camouflage architecturally. More importantly
they show how this application benefits the shift in Place–identity
theory and practice.
