Manifesto
KR / EN
1. Introduction
The arrival of modern architecture disrupted the millennia-long tradition of East Asian timber construction. Despite numerous attempts over the past century to reconcile these disparate approaches, a comprehensive synthesis has remained elusive. This persistent challenge may be attributed to fundamental divergences in tectonic principles, encompassing materiality, structural systems, and construction methodologies. These disparities manifest in distinct formal and spatial qualities between traditional and modern buildings. Mere emulation of traditional timber aesthetics fall short of capturing the essence of its internal and external character. Consequently, eclectic approaches, such as the Imperial Crown Style of early 20th century Japan and the Korean-Western Eclectic Style of the mid-20th century, which prioritized stylistic imitation, proved ultimately unsustainable. [Fig. 01]
JR Nara Station (1934)
Hoam Museum (1982)
[Fig. 01] Eclecticism in Japan and Korea
2. Background of Criticism
The resurgent interest in East Asian architecture often reveals a symptomatic disconnect from its historical precedents. This phenomenon arises from a broader cultural clash between modern construction methods and the traditional techniques that define East Asian architecture, resulting in the adoption of hybrid forms and styles that are frequently superficial.
Consider the wooden bracket system, a quintessential element of East Asian architectural tradition. Historically, this system showcased a complex interplay of meticulously joined, finite elements in three dimensions, exemplifying the intricate craftsmanship and structural logic of its era. Appreciation for its aesthetic rigor has spurred numerous contemporary attempts to revive the traditional wooden bracket system, as illustrated in [Fig. 02]. However, when faced with the demands of modern construction, these applications often result in a diluted version of the original system, reduced to a simplified stacking of repetitive elements [Fig. 03]. Such applications strip the bracket system of its core structural logic, risking its transformation into mere decoration, only to serve as a haphazard nod to East Asian architecture.
Korea Pavilion at Montréal Expo 1967, Swoo-Geun Kim
China Pavilion at Shanghai Expo 2010
Japan Pavilion at Seville Expo 1992, Tadao Ando
Yusuhara Wooden Bridge Museum 2011, Kengo Kuma
[Fig. 02] Modern applications of the bracket system
Projects like the China Pavilion at the Shanghai Expo 2010 epitomize this trend. Constructed out of steel and concrete, this monumental reproduction of the bracket system is completely divorced from its tectonic principles and is consumed solely as a symbol and an image. This shift transforms the rich, historically grounded practice of East Asian architecture into a series of decorative gestures, devoid of their original significance and structural rationale.
This trend raises critical questions about the integrity of architectural revivalism and the ways in which contemporary architectural practices engage with historical forms. The renewed global interest in wood construction marks an opportunity to reinvigorate East Asian timber construction, and to shift away from a superficial adherence to traditional aesthetics that lack corresponding engagement with underlying structural principles.
Modern application: simplified stacking of repetitive elements
Traditional joinery: combination of diverse methods
[Fig. 03] Difference between a traditional bracket system and modern application.
3. Two principles for the reinvention of East Asian timber architecture
To critically reinterpret East Asian timber architecture, it is essential to transcend superficial stylistic imitation and delve deeper into the underlying structural principles. This requires a dual approach below:
3. 1. Tectonic analysis of East Asian Timber Architecture
Traditional interpretations of East Asian timber architecture have often exclusively focused on outward appearances, such as curved roofs, overhanging eaves, and facade proportions. While joinery is occasionally mentioned, the discussion often overlooks the full extent of its tectonic implications. These exterior aesthetics are ultimately the product of an internal rationale composed of pillars, beams, and purlins, roof structures. Also, this structural ingenuity generates characteristic quality of interior space. A comprehensive reexamination of the tectonic principles underpinning East Asian timber architecture is necessary to fully appreciate its intricate design and construction.
[Fig. 04] Visual analysis of East Asian architecture
3. 2. Leveraging Technology for Reinvention
The decline of East Asian timber architecture a century ago stemmed from factors such as timber shortages, challenges in knowledge transfer, and difficulties in mass production. Today, the globalized market and advancements in engineered timber production have addressed these issues of scarcity and scalability. Digital fabrication tools also offer new possibilities for reinterpreting joinery techniques. Contemporary East Asian timber architecture has been unduly influenced by Western models. To foster innovation, architects must embrace cutting-edge construction and design methods to unlock the full potential of this rich architectural heritage.
[Fig. 05] joint methods invented by JK-AR in Tree IV
4. Work of JK-AR
JK-AR's work is centered on two primary objectives united by the overarching theme of "The Rebirth of East Asian Timber Architecture." As illustrated in [Fig.04], the work is based on meticulous studies of monumental timber structures in East Asia which serve as the foundation of our design approach.
Through a fusion of tradition and innovation, termed "digital craftsmanship," JK-AR pioneers new frontiers in design and construction as exemplified by the joint research and the tree series. Ultimately, the built projects, such as [Fig. 07], aim to revitalize the often-overlooked cultural and regional identities transforming them into rich sources of architectural inspiration.
5. Conclusion
The essence of East Asian timber construction lies in the fact that it is a system which overcomes the intrinsic material limitations of wood through tectonic meticulousness. Unlike modern construction, which relies on the plasticity of its materiality, it triumphs matter through architecture.
To achieve a genuine reinterpretation, a thorough examination of historical examples is crucial. This analysis will reveal the underlying principles and logic behind the construction methods, fostering a deeper understanding of the architectural tradition. Coupled with the advancements in production and fabrication technologies, this presents an opportunity to reengage with the tectonic rigor unique to traditional wood joinery techniques which have largely been sidelined by standardization. By embracing these advancements, one can breathe new life into this architectural legacy.