Masterpiece: Touch the Earth Lightly
SBS
Monday, September 26, 8.30pm (AEST)
Reviewed by Arun Pradhan
In a different society, architecture might be more than just another elitist profession. An architect might take account of local environments, cultures and forms and play a role in empowering communities. Design might be accessible, be energy efficient and actually have some meaning to the people who live in and around it.
Unfortunately, for now, we are not in such a society. Housing is not even a basic right, let alone a forum for artistic expression. As terms like the "housing industry" and "housing market" imply, homes are just another product.
The nature of the market has shaped the availability and form of this product. In Australia, half a dozen major companies dominate the industry by relying on limited plans and economies of scale. Implications of this include the use of display homes (ready designed houses which can be bought "off the shelf"), the rise of project managers (a mix between a lawyer, accountant and manager who in many instances replace architects) and a greater emphasis on how a house is marketed and sold, rather than how it is built or designed.
Energy-efficient design in particular is ignored in the drive to produce en masse and in ignorance of specific site conditions. A telling example of this still occurs in several states when display homes receive "a five star energy rating", but are then built on a different site with different orientation, making the rating meaningless. Thus concern for the environment becomes nothing more than a superficial selling point.
This context puts clear limitations on what even the most progressive architect can do. But despite its importance, this context is largely ignored by the documentary Touch the Earth Lightly as it introduces the work and life of Glen Murcutt.
Phillip Adams contrasts Murcutt's democratic and useful architecture to the arrogance that usually pervades the profession. "He is to architecture what Fred Hollows was to medicine", Adams continues. Such accolades flow throughout the program, presenting Murcutt as a creative genius who is an architect of the people.
Murcutt has a different approach to architecture. His childhood influences from Papua New Guinea and his work in Aboriginal communities alone are enough to distinguish his work. He embraces site conditions and is keen to break with European tradition in utilising sun and wind energy in an Australian climate.
Murcutt also demonstrates sensitivity towards cultural considerations, despite his continual emphasis on the new and modern. This is manifested in the materials he uses (the program is sponsored by BHP steel) and even by his unsympathetic designs amongst heritage buildings.
But with these peculiarities touched upon, it is unfortunate that the documentary goes no deeper. Is Murcutt really an "architect of the people" or just an elitist professional who occasionally chooses to mix it with the masses? What does "democratic architecture" actually involve and is it possible within today's society? Is Murcutt's design for a house in Arnhem Land a one off, or can it be done on a larger scale? What are the limitations of ultimately being at mercy of the market?
Watching this documentary won't answer such questions. You'll get glimpses of Murcutt's designs, while being told how beautiful they are and how talented he is. Certainly many would agree, but surely the points would be more effectively made in delving more deeply into the broader issues, rather than presenting a relatively superficial promotional.