Article:

During the decade of the 1920s Mexican Architecture abandoned the traditional home design scheme to embrace Functionalism. In the international scene, new technologies and materials were regarded as the solutions for society, and in the Mexican case, it was also a demonstration of progress. During the following decades functionalist government-funded architecture prevailed, but it lacked the elements to consider it as “Mexican”. In spite of the official support to this architecture, other currents emerged, sparked by a rediscovered national identity. It was, as David Leatherbarrow (2002) describes, a conflict between place and production in modern architecture as a disruptive relationship of technology destroying topographical coherence and cultural continuity. This idea draws from the conception that technical objects are produced independent of territorial considerations, while buildings never are. It can also be understood as an issue between the globalities, represented by modern functionalist design (buildings conceived as technical objects), its construction materials and technologies; and localities, characterized by traditional hand crafted materials and techniques associated with the building site. Due to the qualities of his built work and design, Manuel Parra did not address the issue by combining industrialized materials with traditional crafts, but rather by introducing an atypical use of traditional and recycled materials, colonial and archeological, and their techniques with the site’s topology. The resulting compositions represent an alternative form of home building and interior design for modern living that retain cultural identity.