Thoughts on Singapore Architecture [part 1 of 2]

[Image: Mr Tai Lee Siang, Source: Mr Tai Lee Siang].

Interest in Singapore Architecture has grown steadily over the recent years. With a booming economy and the rapid development going on at Singapore’s new downtown- Marina Bay, all eyes are fixed on what our built environment will become.

While we experience rapid growth and development of our cityscape, the old buildings and city spaces within the city have also been attracting much interest but of a slightly different nature. The recent incidents surrounding 23 Amber Road is one thing to note; it has brought to light the deep emotional relationship that we all have with our built environment. Clearly, architecture is more than just about the building as a built entity.

In the first of this 2 part interview, FFW Magazine Editor, Adib J seeks some opinions from Mr Tai Lee Siang, a Director at DP Architects and President of the Singapore Institute of Architects. In their conversation, they attempt to explore the relationship between architecture and the society at large - talking about shared memories and appreciation of architecture. Mr Tai also expresses his opinions on the future generation of architects and their education and what this might mean for the future of Singapore’s architectural fraternity.

——————

Five Foot Way (FFW): “The relationship between architecture and its users is what creates a sense of collective memory and sense of place.� What is your opinion of this statement?

Lee Siang (LS): The key word is “relationship�. How can architecture form a “relationship� with its users? Just like people, users can only have a relationship with the architecture they occupy only if they “love� it. Architecture can be loved if it is unique, beautiful, meaningful and inspiring to its users. This is why the architect’s role is so important to ensure that buildings are more than functional elements but something that the end-users will fall in love with. In this way, users will learn to care for the place. Generations will grow up endearing themselves to the place and in so doing creating a sense of place.

FFW: If it is not enough to justify conservation purely on emotional attachment, how then can we save the magical spaces that are loaded with memories and emotional treasures? Or for that matter, should they even be saved?

LS: A city or a place cannot be static. Like the people who occupy them, there is a time of life, sometimes a time of death and, to survive, a time of renewal. There are places where people endear themselves to but fail to meet the aspirations of time and future generations, they will inevitably vanish. I personally prefer the word “conservation� rather than “preservation�. The latter smells of “keeping in vain something that is already gone�! Conservation must start with the spirit and not the hardware. Conserving the hardware will lead to preservation. In conserving the spirit of a magical place, one takes cognizance of what makes the place special. In recognising and synthesizing the strengths and success factors of a place, the conservation effort should redefine the magic and memories to engage the present and not just the past treasures. A real magical place is one that breathes of past, present and future.

FFW: In a recent article in International Herald Tribune, you were quoted as saying, “Too few people in Singapore appreciate any kind of architecture.� Is this a problem and if so, what do you think can be done?

LS: The background of the IHT interview was on the en-bloc sale and fast disappearance of Singapore’s landmark buildings built in the 70s. Part of that problem is the lack of knowledge on architecture in general. Singapore like many new Asian economies lacks appreciation of architecture due to the constant struggle for survival and economic growth. Take our school education for example; architecture is not even mentioned or included at least as a topic in lower level school education. The post 60s generation grew up with little appreciation of environment and architecture. The redeeming factor is that our government has the foresight to pre-emptively construct a garden city with sound infrastructure. The sense of orderliness and sound planning has instilled in the populace an appreciation for order.

However, herein lies the difference between a top-down planning and internalisation of values. Singaporeans must internalise an appreciation for good environment and architecture to safeguard the eventual excellence of our country. This can only be achieved by education. The professionals have a moral responsibility to take architecture education to the general public through seminars, talks, media to help inculcate a public opinion and value system that will in turn insist on good environment and architecture. Only in this way will the citizens become guardians for their own city.

[Image: An exhibit at the NUS City Exhibition 07 at Vivocity, photograph by Tan Szue Hann]

FFW: Singapore only has one architecture school and within a short span of 5 years, it must produce competent architects ready for the industry upon graduation while at the same time use the psuedo-real environment of the academic studio to push design thinking. What is your opinion of this state of architectural education in Singapore?

LS:Architecture is life-long learning. I hope the school could completely erase the idea that architecture education ends within a short span of 5 years! The idea of real work and industry engagement is important to blur the line between education and industry. In the past, there is a nagging worry that practice will “corrupt� education with all the “evil� commercial thinking and bad practices. This was probably true during my time but is increasingly changing. The industry is faced with such stiff competition worldwide that status quo or ordinary cannot survive. New ideas are constantly being sought. The practitioners who are at the forefront of creative industry will understand what I am saying.

I feel that the school could collaborate more with the leading industry players to shorten the learning curve faced by students when graduating. It may place a lot of pressure on students to learn the basic skills quickly but will lessen the pressure when facing the real world. In my opinion, the senior years should all be “practice-link� education led by the most creative practitioners.

FFW:You were guest of honour at the recent NUS, Dept of Architecture City Exhibition where the works of the next generation of Singapore’s architects were on display. Judging from what you’ve seen, what do you think lies ahead for Singapore?

LS:Two words describe my feelings; tenacity and savviness. There is no doubt that the current batch of graduates share the same hardworking attitude as their predecessors. This is the hall mark of Singaporeans. I can see amazing amount of effort even from the junior years. Savviness can be a double edged sword. On one hand, there is an increasing utilization of technology and keeping with the trends of the world; on the other hand, there is a danger of being carried away by technological issues without tackling the core of social and architectural issues. Given the time constraints of curriculum, one cannot expect too much.

However, I hope to see greater synergy between industry and school; not to short-cut learning time, but to collectively tackle some of the larger issues faced globally and locally. The universal problems of a greying population and global warming would be good examples. There is one more conclusion I would like to draw. Singapore students display a maturity due to the very intense education process since young. It will be excellent if there is wider awareness and engagement with society.

——— end of part 1 of interview ———

Next week: Part 2 of Interview.

In the next instalment of this 2 part interview, Adib and Mr Tai Lee Siang discuss the role of the Singapore architect within the larger realm of architecture. Subscribe to our email updates to make sure you don’t miss it.

Adib is the co-founder of 5ft Creatives and he loves to walk on the FIVEFOOTWAY.