Draft

“What is the Filipino identity in architecture?
” It would most likely, to many, sound like a

simple question is being thrown around. But, knowing how that question’s simplicity and
directness drew out a long-standing debate among peers – it is rather tough to ask and tougher
to answer. Today, several Filipino architects and aspirants concern themselves it. It is now
deemed as the search for the ultimate truth. And to understand the truth, we must rediscover
our roots.
During a close encounter of mine with some higher year students in school around 2
years ago, the very same question was brought up – “Ano saimo bi ang ginatawag ta na
Pilipino na architecture?” In translation, “What do you think can we call Filipino architecture?”
With that ‘getting-to-know the lower years better’ kind of query, a little session went over my
head briefly. For all we know and from what we had studied, the Philippines, throughout the
course of history embraced numerous cultural remnants hither and thither. It diversely ranged
from pre-colonial commerce and trade, to the infamous Spanish invasion, American
Commonwealth, the Japanese, and then what we have now – modern and contemporary. Thus,
sharing the same thoughts, my first-year friend answered bahay kubo. Sad to say, it was
immediately rebutted with an argument: bahay kubo is not exclusive to the Philippines. Trying
again, my friend this time answered bahay na bato. Again, it was rebutted with an argument:
bahay na bato was not purely Filipino for it was brought by the Spaniards. It wasn’t a year later
that I realized this debate wasn’t really going to end anytime soon, and that there are two sides
of the coin. In short, there are two parrying ideals involved in this ceaseless conversation.
To specifically name them, according to Cabilao (2018), there is what we call the
tangible and the intangible. Tangible, wherein the identity of Filipino is closely linked with those
aspects that are native. Such as aforementioned, an example would be claiming that our
identity is closely tied to the, or is the bahay kubo itself. Alongside, Filipino architecture is
conceivably said to use native materials – nipa, bamboo, coco lumber, etc. – in its construction
phase. On the other hand, the intangible aspect is where the vernacularity of the country is
taken into consideration. Whereas, being tropical climate, religiously, and culturally responsive
is what it takes for a work to mirror the true Filipino identity in architecture. Both, in their own
rights, make sense. But, more to it, why are we Filipinos ourselves divided?
Making an analogy to this; Let’s have a take on Keena Vasquez’s experience as she had
enumerated for CNN Philippines. “You don’t look Filipino,” I believe is a comment that we
probably heard at least once from somewhere before, even if we weren’t the subject of such
scrutiny. Well, exactly as what Vasquez had spoken in response – “What is Filipino supposed to
look like?” In architecture, what is Filipino even supposed to be like? What was there to expect?
Our country is technically a melting pot of centuries worth of cross-boundary cultures. Yet, just
like that, an identity crisis was formed. An identity crisis that stemmed from pure curiosity,
intrigued maybe, which was mentally forced upon by external forces to our already colonially
tainted mindsets. As a result, the community became confused, grew apart and decided to
focus on other important matters. Meanwhile, many Filipino architects and aspirants alike are
profoundly taken aback – starting to think of ways to reconcile with the lost identity. Thus, the
search began, two main different ideologies manifested, and the battle of discourse continues
till today.
If I am to express my dissent, it may be true that our Filipino architectural identity does
not run that deep compared to other countries. But whether it may be native or vernacular,
tangible or intangible – the unclear distinctions and the influences brought upon by various
historical and political events, they are all part of a single identity. Unified as one, they are
beautifully what we can call as Filipino. We have reached that point, notably visible from
Francisco “Bobby” Mañosa’s works. Filipinos have the drive, the next stepping stone is to
cultivate.
More so than affecting, I give credence that this conquest for Filipino identity in
architecture poses as a challenge for the architects not only of today’s but also for future
generations. To end, from the inspiring words of Budji + Royal Architecture + Design’s Co-
Founder and Lead Architect, Ar. Royal Pineda, “Let’s not be so conscious about the look of
Filipino architecture. It’s the freedom to be able to create something that works for the Filipinos
and works with the resources of the Filipinos.” To add, Ar. Pineda shares that “Collaboration is
our way to make our country better. Collaboration for me is the modern bayanihan and part of
this process that I need to come up with in defining our nation.

Draft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Draft

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Draft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

“What is the Filipino identity in architecture?

” It would most likely, to many, sound like a

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.