GLOBAL ARCHITECTURE

Sign and symbol – expressions of writing identity – where am I going with this? There is a distinction between sign and symbol, or rather between indicating and representing. They can occur simultaneously or one can defer to the other. Deferring can lead to, or indicate, some other thing.

I have hitherto linked identity with a sense of place and, to some extent with place attachment.  This concept of sense of place which emerges from our personal histories (where we were born, bred, educated, lived, worked etc.) is eroded by the increasingly mobile population,  now characteristic, of the late 20^th and 21^st centuries; however, it is not only the diaspora and redistribution of populations, but the spread and dissemination of  particular signs and symbols which construct a homogeneity of place signs and symbols thereby eroding the heterogeneity of people and places.  

One need only observe the proliferation of current architectural trends to see that the concept of site specificity becomes increasingly difficult. The building blocks of steel, glass and photoelectric cells are used across the globe. To some extent, concern for environmental pollution and global warming, are instigators of this trend; but, it is nonetheless creating a type of overall habitat, a universal neighbourhood, so to speak, which is now part of everyone’s personal history. A particular sense of place therefore becomes either far more narrow in its scope or completely worn away and superficial.

So where are signs and symbols? What price identity? Is the new identity to be identical, or does individuality remain?