Considering Ephemeral Monuments: Towards a Greener Architectural Theory

Abstract:

The existence of buildings employing perishable material, however, is often marginalized partly because architecture is primarily understood as permanent structure built to last forever. This notion is heavily supported in Western architectural theory considering “permanence” (or “firmitas” in Vitruvian term) as one of the fundamental characteristics of architecture, especially monumental architecture which is intended to be “eternal”. To construct a permanent architecture, in general, requires greater amount of resources compared to the ephemeral. The marginalization of ephemeral architecture causes the depletion of resources due to the effort to make most of the buildings permanent since only those which withstand the ravage of time are deemed valuable as architecture This paper explores some meaningful pieces of architecture having values of monuments in Java yet they are constructed as ephemeral architecture requiring periodical renewal. The discussion on these ephemeral monuments will focus on the way perishable material is composed, the way renewal actions are conducted and the meaning of the monuments for their people are enhanced by these actions. In the conclusion, some criticism towards mainstream architectural theory is addressed by including ephemerality in the notion of [monumental] architecture so that we may proceed towards greener architectural theory in which the ephemeral has respectable roles.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volume 747)
• Pages: 192-197
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.747.192
• Online since: March 2015
• Authors: Revianto Budi Santosa, Josef Prijotomo*, Murni Rachmawati
• Keywords: Architectural Theory, Ephemeral Architecture, Material Sustainability, Monument

References

[1] Vitruvius, The ten Books on Architecture. Transl. by Morris Hicky Morgan, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, (1914).

[2] L. B. Alberti, The Architecture of Leon Batista Alberti in Ten Books, London, 1775.

[3] A. Riegl, The Modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and its Origin, Opposition, 25 (1982) 21-51.

[4] T. Arrhenius, The Fragile Monument: On Alois Riegl's Modern Cult of Monuments, The Nordic Journal of Architecture Research (2010) 51-55.

[5] B. Berge, The Ecology of Building Materials, Architectural Press, Oxford, (2001).

[6] T. E. Behrend, Kraton and Cosmos in Traditional Java, Archipel, 37 (1989) 173 – 187.

DOI: 10.3406/arch.1989.2569

[7] A.G. Muhaimin, The Islamic traditions of Cirebon: ibadat and adat among Javanese muslims. The Australian National University, Canberra, (2006).

DOI: 10.26530/oapen_459298

[8] S. Poedjosoedarmo and M. C. Ricklefs, The Establishment of Surakarta, A Translation From The Babad Gianti, Indonesia 2 (1961) 88-108.

DOI: 10.2307/3350906

[9] V. Zimmerman, The Northern Palace Square in Yogyakarta, in Stuart Robson (ed. ) The Kraton: Selected Essays on Javanese Courts, KITLV Press: Leiden, 2006, pp.13-40.

DOI: 10.1163/9789004487932_004

[10] P. B. R. Carey, The Power of Prophecy: Prince Dipanagara and the end of an old order in Java, 1785-1855, KILV Press, Leiden, (2008).

DOI: 10.1163/9789067183031

[11] T. Kwanda, The Tradition of Architectural Conservation and the Intangible Authenticity: The Case of Ki Buyut Trusmi Complex in Cirebon, Indonesia, Unpublished dissertation, Department of Architecture National University of Singapore, (2012).