Lower studio dining room, Mooloomba House, Point Lookout, North Stradbroke Island

View through courtyard to lower studio dining room, as seen from upper living area.

Lower studio dining room, Mooloomba House, Point Lookout, North Stradbroke Island

View through courtyard to lower studio dining room, as seen from upper living area.

Mooloomba House, Point Lookout, North Stradbroke Island

North elevation, deck below and belvedere above, as seen from path to beach.

Lower studio dining room, Mooloomba House, Point Lookout, North Stradbroke Island

View through courtyard to lower studio dining room, as seen from upper living area.

Internal cladding to north-east facade, Mooloomba House, Point Lookout, North Stradbroke Island

View of internal cladding to north-east facade as seen from dining studio.

Dining studio, Mooloomba House, Point Lookout, North Stradbroke Island

View through courtyard to dining studio as seen from upper living room.

Mooloomba House, Point Lookout, North Stradbroke Island

North elevation, deck below and belvedere above, as seen from path to beach.

Cladding detail, Mooloomba House, Point Lookout, North Stradbroke Island

Detail view of cladding to upper level dining studio.

(FAB11_2_003) Authentic Japanese architecture after Bruno Taut: the problem of eclecticism

This paper will examine attitudes to eclectic stylistic borrowing in Japan in the twentieth century in light of the concept of authenticity. I am particularly interested in how an earlier claim correlating European modernist and traditional Japanese architecture continues to colour conceptions about what is an 'authentic' response for Japanese architects to make to contemporary conditions. Non-Western and vernacular architectures generally have been the repository for touristic desires for regional authenticity and difference. Yet Japan's unique role in the development of modernist architecture has given a peculiar intensity to the demand for its architecture to resist a perceived postmodern decadence.

The myth of the nation: Historiography of New Zealand architecture since 1907

This paper considers the relationship between the recent historiography (of the last quarter century) of “New Zealand architecture” and the historical notion of “New Zealand-ness” invoked in contemporary architecture. It argues that a more recent programmatic uptake of post-War discussions on national identity and regional specificity has fed the tendencies of practicing architects to defer to history in rhetorical defences of their work: the beach-side mansion as a contemporary expression of the 1950s bach; a formal modernism divorced from the social discourse adherent to the historical moment that it “restates”; and so on. The paper will consider instances in the historiography of New Zealand architecture where historians have compounded, consciously or accidentally, a problem that is systemic to the uses made by architects of historical knowledge (in the most general examples), identifying the difficulties of relying upon the tentative conclusions of an under-studied field in developing principles of contemporary architectural practice under the banners of New Zealand-ness, regionalism, or localism, or with reference to icons of New Zealand architectural history. At the heart of this paper is a reflection on historiographical responsibility in presenting knowledge of a national past to an audience that is eager to transform that knowledge into principles of contemporary production. What, the paper asks, is the historical basis for speaking of a New Zealand architecture? Can we speak of a national history of architecture distinct from a regional history, or from an international history of architecture?