by Jon Lackman | 13 July 2010 | Architecture, Books, Theory
In his new book What is Architectural History? Andrew Leach surveys the history and current state of the discipline. His book is written for students and professionals, and assumes a certain familiarity with architecture. There is considerable new material for him to synthesize — architectural history and historiography have both been expanding. He argues that numerous excellent works of historiography have been produced in recent years, although these are almost always focused on individual architectural historians, a national tradition, or a narrow epoch, and so provide little help for the scholar seeking an overview. He notes also that the discipline is hard to define, having been written by both architects and historians, for a diverse array of audiences. It feels to him like a still young and unformed discipline that really only came of age institutionally in 1975, when MIT first offered a PhD in the history, theory, and criticism of architecture (though UPenn and UC-Berkeley had started programs earlier): “Under the guidance of Standford Anderson and Henry A. Millon, architecture faculty and students alike sought to intellectualize architecture and its history on terms that ensured the full participation of architecture in the wider development of the critical humanities.” Surveying the current scene, he finds an emphasis on postcolonialism and, unsurprisingly, a certain dissatisfaction with “theory” and a concomitant call for a “return to history,” however problematic.
For what it’s worth, I sometimes teach an introductory survey of architecture course, and I find the relative lack of development in the history of architecture liberating. It has its problems for sure, but it forces me as an instructor to to be more analytical and creative in constructing my course content.