Talk:Vernacular architecture

Untitled
Erauch, good collaborating with you. After some thought, "Those who use...." didn't seem true in every case. Some examples of vernacular are long-lasting and inhabited by users centuries after construction.

Pictures would be good -- examples too. Are there any in Oliver's book judged as the best or most sophisticated?

cheers --Lockley 15:04, 5 May 2005 (UTC)


 * It really depends on what I find on it. 2601:C4:8100:4860:1CFC:CF2:178C:A0D8 (talk) 17:48, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

The article is progressing nicely, though of course there's much more to say. Pictures would be good.

I was wondering about the sentence "Those who use the building are often involved in its construction or at least have direct input in its form", why it was removed.

--Erauch 23:46, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

'' After some thought, "Those who use...." didn't seem true in every case.''

That's true. See if this version is more acceptable.

 Are there any in Oliver's book judged as the best or most sophisticated? 

I'd be willing to go look and scan them. I'll try writing to Oliver. --Erauch 21:41, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

No offense intended, because I am sure the article was written with the best intentions. But I cannot help but feel like it is an article with a Western point of view, trying to "be nice with the little savages (I would be one of the savages)" by inventing a term that validates their architectural heritage, while still establishing it as intellectually inferior to 'real" architecture.Themalau 21:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello!! in Indonesia there is a conference about the vernacular architecture and from the conference i have the information and things to be discussed with you all

Vernacular architecture is the building that represent the construction, and shape, basic on the culture, historical, and people lifestyle in the certain area/or spesific area From the conference they give example about the traditional batak house,gadang house,and the other traditonal for cultural (i will scan it later)

for historical they give example about the european colonial building which build in indonesia by the european long ago before the independence ( well we can say heritage building). how you all think about this ???

there is also explanation about 'vernacular post disaster'. its tell about the building after natural disaster like tsunami or mountain eruption.

i want to discuss this (sory for the wrong phrase and grammar im still new in english)--brucesama 3:20, july 29, 2006 (UTC)

Duncan house photo
I assume the photo of the Duncan house is supposed to illustrate vernacular architecture. How? Could someone please add an explanation to the caption so readers like me can understand why that particular house’s architecture is considered vernacular? --Rob Kennedy 20:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Aalto's Viipuri Municipal Library photo
Can someone give an explanation for why the municipal library photo is included in this section? It seems less expressive of the subject than the Duncan house photo. --Dalejarvis 14:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Critique
This article seems to have a lot of information, but I still don’t feel like I have any idea what vernacular architecture is. Here are some comments and questions I had after reading it again.

To begin with, the first two paragraphs give conflicting definitions of what vernacular architecture even is. If we can’t define it, then how can there be an article about it? Is there a lowest common denominator?

What do the Latin roots of the word vernacular have to do with this style of architecture? Was the architectural term first used to describe slave dwellings? If not, then I suspect the style got its name based on the modern English meaning of the word, not the original Latin one.

“Vernacular architecture may, through time, be adopted and refined into culturally accepted solutions, ….” Was that sentence supposed to imply that vernacular architecture is not initially accepted, culturally? Which culture? Are there examples of cultures that built various buildings yet rejected the style? (What problems were they solutions for?)

The second paragraph doesn’t seem to like the idea that the Duncan house is given as an example of vernacular architecture. If nobody can yet explain what that photo’s doing in this article, then just remove it. Don’t try to justify the photo by saying the style “might” refer to that building. Does it, or doesn’t it? If there’s disagreement, tell who’s disagreeing.

Can we lose the “white man” reference? Perhaps “Europeans” would be a less racially charged term. But either way, it’s assuming that the building in question was built by a white man. Are there any sources available to back that up? Besides, I thought vernacular referred to the nativeness of the architectural style or of the building materials, not to that of the architect or of builder. So what does race have to do with anything?

Readers don’t need an encyclopedia to tell them a term is ambiguous. They’ll figure that out for themselves by the fact that the article gives ambiguous and conflicting definitions. This article should strive to help readers, not confuse them further.

The article says Bernard Rudofsky wrote “in defense of vernacular.” In defense from what? What was attacking it, and why? What was Rudofsky’s MoMA exhibition?

The article is making the POV claim that vernacular buildings have legitimacy and hard-won knowledge. (And hard-won knowledge is in quotation marks — who is being quoted?) Who considered the book iconoclastic?

Why is Paul Oliver’s book “more serious” than Rudofsky’s? The stuff that Oliver “has argued” — was that in his book? If so, then the sentence should be something like this: “In the book, Oliver argued that vernacular architecture ….” If he instead argued it elsewhere, then cite that source instead. Did Oliver give any reasons why vernacular architecture would be more important in the future? What is cultural sustainability, and how will vernacular architecture help sustain it?

Did Christopher Alexander succeed in identifying any adaptive features? (Or did he just attempt to identify them?) If he succeeded, what were they? How do they relate to vernacular architecture?

Which culture enabled vernacular traditions? What is an example of a vernacular tradition? And doesn’t the second paragraph pretty much say that vernacular architecture is distinguished at least in part by its lack of tradition?

What is the relationship between regional modernism and vernacular architecture? That is, why is Viipuri library shown in this article? What should I focus on as I look at that picture? The wavy ceiling? The stools from Ikea? The giant windows? What is that photo illustrating? (Apparently, “regional modernism” is a redirect to this page, but that term is never used except in the photo’s caption.)

Who, specifically, extends the term vernacular architecture to include stuff outside the academic mainstream? Any citations? Is commercial vernacular actually related to regular vernacular? What are off-the-shelf aethetics? Are there any sources more specific than simply “those who study these types of vernaculars”? Where have those people written what they think?

Are there any sources available from architects and academics that praise or discuss Samuel Mockbee’s work?

What is the question of everyday life? Of the people who are interested in that question, what questions of sociology do those people lean toward? Has their study of vernacular architecture answered any of those questions? In what way did Michel de Certeau’s book influence them? --Rob Kennedy 04:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

To the Critique
The term “vernacular architecture” is design industry jargon. It’s defined as much by what it is as by what it isn’t. Defining vernacular architecture is a little like the US supreme court on pornography; you know it when you see it. Architects and designers who use the term don’t need all the answers to the questions posed in your critique. Get over yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.131.101.100 (talk) 05:15, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Global definition?
I thought to have learned years ago that vernacular architecture for much of our history was traditional architeture below the "polite threshold". Inovations would be slow or be generated by copying examples of those on a higher social level that may have had an architect design their building or introduce something they have seen abroad. Is there a difference in the way the word "vernacular" is used in the USA to the UK or other parts of the world? --T.woelk 19:03, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * from Introduction to Material Culture
 * "House size-type, Brunskill (4) in a field guide to vernacular architecture in England divides houses first by size, then by polite or vernacular.  He classifies houses first as the Great Houses (castles, country seats, swollen villas), Large Houses (people of some local importance, successful farmers, mill owner, squire etc) and Small Houses (miller, smith, shopkeeper, tenant farmer), Cottage (laborers, artisans at subsistence level, widows or elderly dependent on charity).   A second classification is by polite vs vernacular.  A polite house (also called 'academic') will have been designed by an architect or someone taking that role, will follow a set of conventions that are national or even international, and will use local or imported materials to achieve a certain style.  In contrast, a vernacular house may be built by the owner using the cheapest locally available material, and with no pretensions to style.  As in the cases of slave quarters, it may be in forms that derive from African building methods, possibly modified to meet the approval of the slave owners." --T.woelk 20:36, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I found the article quite interesting, but kind of vague as others have said. I am an American with some interest in the subject of architecture and I have never heard the expression before now. Is it more of a British thing? Steve Dufour 06:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm a geologist, not an architect - but I've recently become involved with the Vernacular Architecture Forum, a mostly US organization. Within that eclectic group (architects, academics, folklorists, planners, tour guides, and more), vernacular architecture would seem to me to comprise two primary (and only partly overlapping) definitions:  One is the architecture that characterizes and defines a place, whatever that may be - skyscrapers in Manhattan, adobe in Tucson, antebellum Greek revival in the South, etc.  It also seems to mean architecture out of the mainstream - that is, designed by non-major architects, sometimes (but sometimes not) including local architects who follow mainstream ideas.  So with New York City's mainstream skyscrapers, the group focused on the idea of characterization of a place, and ignored the idea of excluding big-time architects.  My further understanding, such as it is, of the "pure" meaning, is that vernacular architecture is that which uses local or easily available materials - thus concrete with aggregate of shells in coastal towns, and with smelter slag in mining towns.  None of these concepts is mutually inclusive or exclusive, at least not for this group, as far as I can tell.  Cheers Geologyguy 13:17, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the information. How can I check out the Forum? Oh, I see there is a link in the article.  BTW, are the Watts Towers really an example? I would think they were more like outsider art. Steve Dufour 15:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe the use of the term Vernacular was first used in relation to architecture in the 19th century, most notably with the Arts and Crafts movement. The interest with architecture that we now call vernacular started mostly with John Ruskin who influenced not only William Morris but artists and architects for generations to come. What is most important about William Morris is his socialist ideas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gumbelina (talk • contribs) 15:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If I may say it here:
 * * "vernacular" I receive translation to ´area-related´, in place. Groups, as architects for example, may create a label of it, in their intentions. Wikipedia may ignore this and use the term as usual.
 * * A more important, and, trouble I find in crossing the, this, topic with many other names meeting the same topic. Earth structure, Rammed earth, Tulou, Fujian Tulou, Vernicular architecture, and there will be more. The ´See also´s aren´t a solution to this. It needs an other section for this, I am convinced. For example Other words, Other wordings, Other names, (including links to articles, if exist).
 * Sorry, for the pointing this topic here. Don´t just really know a fitting place for this. Thanks.
 * --Visionhelp (talk) 10:16, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

The totora reed islands of the Uros - A supreme example of vernacular architecture
I read the first paragraph of Vernacular Architecture, and immediately thought of the Uros of Lake Titicaca, Peru. I think they should be considered for inclusion in the article, but I'm not sure, perhaps I just think that because of the novelty factor and it would not illustrate anything new about the subject, but I do think their architecture may be a supreme example. The regularity with which they have to harvest reeds implies resource management (allowing recently harvested reed banks to grow back while moving on to harvest other banks), and may help illustrate the conservation efforts that often go hand in hand with vernacular architecture.

Hobrob (talk) 11:34, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps from interesst:
 * the Hakka architecture, redirects to Hakka_walled_village,
 * the takyentas construction of the Tammari people and
 * the Koutammakou (quote) "The area features traditional mud tower-houses which remain the preferred style of living".
 * Visionhelp (talk) 21:30, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Vernacular architecture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.vernaculararchitecture.com/,
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071008030543/http://www.sheltercentre.org/shelterlibrary/publications/112.htm to http://www.sheltercentre.org/shelterlibrary/publications/112.htm
 * Added tag to http://southernspaces.org/2005/roadside-architecture.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:52, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vernacular architecture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100219111852/http://www.charlevoixlibrary.org/research/young/young-art26.htm to http://charlevoixlibrary.org/research/young/young-art26.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:41, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

I plucked out this picture,
the first picture in the article, and have moved it here to talk about. This building, and the several more somewhat similar ones found in the picture, do not look like vernacular architecture to me. They look like architect designed structures that draw on vernacular traditions such as thatched roofs and eyebrow dormers. I am not even sure that the roofs are thatched, rather I suspect that they are faux-thatch of some sort. This, in my opinion, is not what we need for the first image in this article. Having it show up later in a section about vernacular inspired architecture would be fine. But that is just my thought. What is yours? Carptrash (talk) 17:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes they are vernacular-styled, rather than originals. I'd be prepared to give the thatch the benefit of the doubt though. Johnbod (talk) 18:05, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right. Amandajm (talk) 13:33, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Removed a section
I hadn't lookied at this article for a while. I want to point out here that sometimes well-meaning additions by people who are enthusiastic about there own particular branch of the tpic can be almost as destructive to the coherence of an article as a deletion can. An addition in the wrong place acts like a red herring or may give much too much emphasis to something that, in the contect of the article, is of minor importance.

The article has a section Influences on the vernacular, with subheadings "Climate", Culture", "Nomadic dwellings" etc.

Right into the middle of this section, someone had pasted their own particular enthusiasm - Candaian Railway Stations with a list of them!
 * Amandajm (talk) 13:33, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Question: remarkable ´World Heritage Earthen Architecture Programme´ ?
https://whc.unesco.org/en/earthen-architecture/ --Visionhelp (talk) 08:13, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Dogtrot house HFizer (talk) 20:15, 7 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I miss the term "dogtrot house" (sometimes called "possumtrot house") in both the article and th gallery. A dogtrot house was occasionally seen in the American South in the 18th and 19th centuries. It consisted of two side-by-side structures joined by a covered breezeway, or dogtrot. Definitely a vernacular style. HFizer (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

...but vernacular revival is?
So vernacular architecture isn't "really" architecture, until it gets the revival treatment, or is imitated (usually badly), or has the word mock- put in front? Tudorbethan style is architecture, but the style it's imitating isn't?!?! Nuttyskin (talk) 10:30, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * No. Johnbod (talk) 15:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I second that "No". Netherzone (talk) 15:50, 16 March 2024 (UTC)