Design for the Individual: Analysis of the Work of Hassan Fathy Countless work has been published on the phenomena of dwelling. How people inhabit spaces, seek shelter from the elements and gather in communities is a topic of great interest to architects in order to fully facilitate harmony between the space and the inhabitant. Modernism brought about a reorientation in these ideals, a new view at dwelling. A key text to mark the end of this movement as noted by Diane Ghirardo in her book Architecture After Modernism is the book Architecture for the Poor by Hassan Fathy.1 In his work Fathy addresses key changes to the way one should think about public housing from a design standpoint as well as a bureaucratic one. Fathy had the opportunity to design and build a new settlement for a group of people, the Gourni, who were at the time living among the tombs at Luxor and making a living from grave robbing. Placing an emphasis on individuality as well as culture and tradition, the Gourna Project had a chance for success beyond that of typical government housing, but bureaucratic powers were startled by the project’s attention to detail and the project was ultimately terminated for fear of the project’s cost. Design for the Individual will attempt to address how culture, tradition, and individuality are important in public housing and how the lessons of Fathy could potentially be used in similar projects outside the third world and in today’s standards. Much of the critique about architecture has to do with specific styles, an interesting dilemma because many architects insist that their designs decisions are not stylistic. However, one cannot argue that different regions, cultures, and religions create such different designs that sometimes referring to a specific style is the most coherent way of researching specific groups of buildings. Also from a construction point of view, style can be helpful when attempting to create something that fits with the regional specifics. A style can be a source of pride for a specific culture. Egypt however, did not have a style that was original to itself. While Egypt’s temples and palaces are studied the world over simple domestic architecture was typically borrowed and so became a medley of traditions from the surrounding regions, the result being a complete lack of cultural pride by Egyptians in their architectural heritage. 2 “Tradition is the social analogy of personal habit, and in art has the same effect, of releasing the artist from distracting and inessential decisions so that he can give his whole attention to the vital ones” 3. Tradition in architecture is typically given the role of public buildings and residences because in the modern world it seems like what is coined “Traditional Architecture” has somehow taken a back seat to the contemporary. The ease and cost of building traditional architecture in the United States makes it the prime choice for structures where form is less important than function and so it has become boring without any thought to the spaces themselves. In Fathy’s work however, a need for tradition was demanded because of the climate and availability of building materials required that he work using the methodologies created by his predecessors. This is a valuable lesson for contemporary architects today. “Modernity does not always mean liveliness and change is not always for the better” 4. With the world progressing thoroughly into a global economy and the ability to have parts made in China with materials from Germany all being assembled at a site in New York, the architect can easily loose sight both of the intended occupant but also the tradition for that region, resulting in bland layers of technicality that lack a sense of placement and depth. “The individual artist’s duty is to keep the tradition going, with his own invention and insight to give it that addition momentum that will save it from coming to a standstill, until it will have reached the end of its cycle and completed its full development”.5 Before the advent of the architectural profession, the occupant would work directly with the buildings, expressing each desire and watching his wishes be carried out. The disconnect between
DESIGN FOR THE INDIVIDUAL