ASA Journal 06/57

ISSN 0857-3050 

ISSUE 06.2014 

 

 

 

THE ARCHITECTURAL JOURNAL 

OF THE ASSOCIATION OF 

SIAMESE ARCHITECTS 

UNDER ROYAL PATRONAGE 

LA BIENNALE DI VENEZIA | BIENNALE ARCHITETTURA 2014 

LA BIENNALE DI 

VENEZIA | BIENNALE 

ARCHITETTURA 2014 

FUNDAMENTALS: ABSORBING MODERNITY 

/ OUTLINE OF THE HISTORY OF MODERN 

THAI ARCHITECTURE, 1914-2014 / THE 

POLITICS OF THAINESS / THAI FUNDAMEN- 

TAL ‘SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT’ / THAILAND 

PAVILION / POLICIES AND PRESENTATION 

FOR THE VENICE BIENNALE: THE EVOLU- 

TION OF THAILAND’S PARTICIPATION / 

FUNDAMENTALS / HISTORY, KNOWLEDGE, 

AND BACK TO THE ‘FUNDAMENTALS’ / 

INTERVIEW: ASA & VENICE BIENNALE 2014 

06 

2014

THEMES 

32 Fundamentals: Absorbing Modernity 

36 Outline of The History of Modern 

Thai Architecture, 1914-2014 

44 The Politics of Thainess 

52 Thai Fundamental ‘Schools of 

Thought’ 

56 Thailand Pavilion 

66 Policies and Presentation for The 

Venice Biennale: The Evolution of 

Thailand’s Participation 

74 Fundamentals 

82 History, Knowledge, and Back to 

The ‘Fundamentals’ 

88 Interview: ASA & Venice Biennale 

2014 

74 

 

 

 

 

6 ASA CONTENTS

SECTIONS 

NEWS 

16 Architect Esan 2014 

57 ‘’ 

20 Lanna Architect 2014 

2557 

22 Sathapad Samai 

 

16 

WORKS 

IN PROGRESS 

24 Honda Showroom Nakornchaisri 

 

28 RAMA II House 

2 

28 

22 

PROFESSIONAL 

92 The Challenges of Urban Design 

and Development in The 21 st 

Century 

21 : 

 

100 DETAILS 

104 MATERIALS 

106 REVIEW 

110 PRODUCT NEWS 

112 ASA CARTOON 

8 ASA CONTENTS

FOREWORD 

ADVISORS 

PICHAI WONGWAISAYAWAN 

SMITH OBAYAWAT 

PONGKWAN LASSUS 

ASSOC. PROF. TONKAO PANIN, PH.D. 

ANEK THONGPIYAPOOM 

ASSOC. PROF. M.L. PIYALADA 

THAVEEPRUNGSRIPORN, PH.D. 

WIRAT PANTAPATKUL 

MAADDI THUNGPANICH 

MONGKON PONGANUTREE 

EDITOR IN CHIEF 

SUPITCHA TOVIVICH 

CONTRIBUTORS 

ASST. PROF. APIRADEE KASEMSUK, PH.D. 

MATHAR BUNNAG 

NITIS STHAPITANONDA 

ASST. PROF. PIRASRI POVATONG, PH.D. 



SORAVIS NA NAGARA 

SUPREEYA WUNGPATCHARAPON, PH.D. 


PROF. VIMOLSIDDHI HORAYANGKURA, PH.D. 

WORARAT PATUMNAKUL 

SPECIAL THANKS TO 

BUNNAG ARCHITECTS 

FATTSTUDIO 

OFFICE AT 

CHAT ARCHITECTS 

ENGLISH TRANSLATOR 

TANAKANYA CHANGCHAITUM 

GRAPHIC DESIGNERS 

WILAPA KASVISET 

MANUSSANIT SRIRAJONGDEE 

VANICHA SRATHONGOIL 

COVER DESIGN 

BUNNAG ARCHITECTS 

CO-ORDINATOR 

KETSIREE WONGWAN 

THE ASSOCIATION OF SIAMESE 

ARCHITECTS UNDER ROYAL 

PATRONAGE ORGANIZES 

248/1 SOI SOONVIJAI 4 (SOI 17) 

RAMA IX RD., BANGKAPI, 

HUAYKWANG, BANGKOK 10310 

T : +66 2319 6555 

F : +66 2319 6419 

W : asa.co.th 

E : asaisaoffice@gmail.com 

PRINT 

FOCAL IMAGE 

248/1 SOI SANTINARUEMAN RD. 

SUKHUMVIT RD. BANGKOK 10230 

T : +66 2259 1523 

E : ASAJOURNAL@GMAIL.COM 

ADVERTISING DEPARTMENT 

T : +66 2397 0582-3 

F : +66 2747 6627 

SUBSCRIBE TO ASA JOURNAL 

T : +66 2319 6555 

(La Biennale di Venezia | 

Biennale Architettura 2014) 14 .. 2014 

() 

.. 2554 ‘Spirituality - Freedom and Creativity, a Fundamental in 

Thai Architecture’ 

 

 

 

Rem Koolhaas Koolhaas 

Fundamentals 

 

 

The annual International Contemporary Architecture Venice Biennale Exhibition 

(La Biennale di Venezia | Biennale Architettura 2014) was recently held for the 14 th 

time in the year 2014. The Thai booth in the exhibition was designed by Mathar Bunnag, 

who was named a National Artist in Architecture in the year 2011. This exhibition 

was created under the name ‘Spirituality - Freedom and Creativity, a Fundamental 

in Thai Architecture’ and supported by the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture, 

Ministry Of Culture, Thailand and The Association of Siamese Architects under the 

Royal Patronage of His Majesty the King (ASA). The exhibition marked the third time 

that ASA and others have supported and been in cooperation with the exhibition in 

Venice, Italy. 

This year, the renowned Netherland architect Rem Koolhaas was responsible for 

the planning and curation of the International Contemporary Architecture Venice 

Biennale Exhibition which he named under the theme: Fundamentals. This issue of 

the ASA journal gathers reviews of the event by those who have cooperated with 

ASA throughout the past year. 

10 ASA EDITORIAL

2557 - 2559 

 

. . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. 

 

 

. 

.. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.... 

. 

 

 

 

. 

 

 

The 14 th International Architecture Exhibition, la Biennale di Venezia 

7 23 2557 14 

Art Exhibition Paolo Baratta 

Rem Koolhaas curator theme Fundamentals 

International Pavilions 65 theme 

Absorbing Modernity 1914-2014 - 

 

100 

Elements of Architecture 

2 Harvard Graduate School of Design 

International Pavilion 

Baratta 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- 

 

 

 

Thai Pavilion 

 

 

2557-2559 


Retractable Pergola System 

Chiangmai Grandview Hotel & Convention Center / Size 13 X 10 M. 

Siam Kempinski Hotel Bangkok / Size 22 X 5 M. 

Alpaca @ Ratchaburi / Size 12 X 10 M. Khun Apichart's Residence / Size 13 X 7 M. 

Tailor made to t any Architectural need. 

50 

 

 

Retractable Pergola System - 

power coating 

LED 

info@oceannewline.com 

oceannewline.com 

facebook.com/oceannewline 

SHOWROOM 

MBK Floor 5 (5C01-5C02) 

Tel & Fax : 02 620-9499 

Ocean Newline Co., Ltd. 

OFFICE & SHOWROOM 

4026 Rama IV Road, Prakanong, 

Klong Toey Bangkok 10110 Thailand 

Tel : 02 671-6008-9 fax : 02 671-6006-7

MESSAGE 

FROM 

THE PRESIDENT 

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 

THE ASSOCIATION OF 

SIAMESE ARCHITECTS 

UNDER ROYAL PATRONAGE 

2014—2016 

CONSULTANTS 

PROFESSOR SURAPON VIRULRAK, PH.D. 

SINN PHONGHANYUDH 

SATHIRUT TANDANAND 

PRABHAKORN VADANYAKUL 

PRESIDENT 


VICE PRESIDENT 

POL.LT.COL. BUNDIT PRADUBSOOK, PH.D. 

ANUCHAR YUSANANDA 

PRADITCHYA SINGHARAJ 

VASU POSHYANANDANA, PH.D. 



SECRETARY GENERAL 

PRAKIT PHANANURATANA 

HONORARY REGISTRAR 

CAPT.ON-USAH CHIENGKUL 

HONORARY TREASURER 

KARNCHIT PUNYAKANOK 

SOCIAL EVENT DIRECTOR 

PREECHA NAVAPRAPAKUL 

PUBLIC RELATIONS DIRECTOR 

SURASSADA NIPARIYAI 

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 

CHAVALIT TANGMITJAROEN 

SUNANTAPAT CHALERMPANTH 

GP. CAPT. ADISORN BUNKHACHAI 

VINEETA KALYANAMITRA 



PONN VIRULRAK, PH.D. 

CHAIRMAN OF NORTHERN REGION (LANNA) 

ADUL HERANYA 

CHAIRMAN OF NORTHEASTERN REGION 

(ESAN) 

ASST. PROF. SURASAK LOHWANICHAI 

CHAIRMAN OF SOUTHERN REGION (TAKSIN) 

WIWAT CHITNUAN 

The 14 th International Architecture Exhibition, la Biennale di Venezia took place 

from 7 th June to 23 rd November 2014. The event, which is held every other year in 

turn with the Venice Biennale Art Exhibition, selected Rem Koolhaas as its curator. 

Under the main theme ‘Fundamentals,’ the 65 International Pavilions conveyed their 

interpretations of ‘Absorbing Modernity 1914-2014.’ With an emphasis being placed 

on architectural research and studies, each participating country contemplated 

and expressed its own evolving architectural fundamentals of the past century. The 

results are exhibitions of incredibly divergent architectural individualities. The main 

exhibition, ‘Elements of Architecture,’ is the offspring of a two-year research project 

conducted by the Harvard Graduate School of Design and other reputable academics 

and practitioners where the content is interestingly interwoven with those of the 

international pavilions. One of the main objectives Barratta had hoped to achieve 

was to look back into the past developments of architecture and how they have 

answered to the concept of Modern Architecture. The intention was to stimulate 

and inspire artistic and architectural creations that are being worn down, formularized 

and homogenized by new tools and professional methods. The upside of being a 

part of this type of event is the chance for us to see ourselves in comparison with 

others, knowing what and how to improve. Being able to witness new ideas and 

developments of other nations as well as the global tendencies in regards to 

architecture is an eye-opening experience, highly motivated and aspiring to every 

creative mind. 

Last but definitely not least, I express my gratitude for the Office of Contemporary 

Art and Culture, Ministry of Culture, the sponsors and the staff of both Mr. Mathar 

Bunnag’s team and the association who made the Thai Pavilion to be as successful 

as it was. 


ASA PRESIDENT 2014-2016 


NEWS 

01 

ARCHITECT 

ESAN 

2014 

01 

’57 

 

- 

 

 

 

3-5 2557 

‘’ 

‘B.E.S.T’ (Balance) 

(Equality) (Sustainable) 

(Transfer) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.. 

‘’ 

2556 

. 

‘’ 

16 ASA NEWS

02 

 

 

17 l 80 

l l l 80 - 

 

 

 

 

- 

 

 

 

 

01 

‘’ 

’57 

02 

 

 

 


03 

 


TEXT 

Worarat Patumnakul 

PHOTOS 

Courtesy of Architect 

Esan 2014 

03 

The Architect Esan is an event that highlights the 

technology of architecture utilized in the northeastern 

region of Thailand. In corporation with the Association of 

Siamese Architect (ASA) under Royal Patronage, The 

Association of Siamese Architects Under Royal Patronage 

(Lanna) and TTF International Co.,Ltd. the event will be 

held at MCC Hall The Mall Nakronratchasrima on 2-5 

October 2014 under the theme ‘Esankueng-kak.’ Furthermore, 

the programming of the show focuses on the 

notion of: ‘B.E.S.T’ : Balance, Equality, Sustainable and 

Transfer and will feature a Northeast Thailand or Esan 

architecture exhibition, goods for dwelling exhibition 

and various architectural projects from different universities. 

For the activity centered around the architectural 

occupation, this year’s event will feature a talk with 

renowned architect Duangrit Bunnag who, along with 

Associate Professor Dr. Bundit Chulasai and other 

participants, will share their experiences under the topic 

of New Urbanism. Moreover, an additional interesting 

topic, Vernacular Architecture will be presented by 

Kanjana Tansuwannarat. 

Furthermore, the event will be composed of a variety 

of exhibitions such as the 17 l 80 From Line to Construction 

exhibition, Photography Exhibition of Architecture between 

both sides of the Maekong River and an exhibition of 

sustainable architecture design projects by students in 

Northeastern Thailand. Lastly, there are many products 

for construction that will be showcased in the event 

offering visitors the opportunity to gain access to updates 

on new materials as well as products. 


02 LANNA 

ARCHITECT 

2014 

 

 

2557 ‘ : SAPA 

SPACE’ 12-14 2557 - 

 

‘17|80 

| | | ’ 

 

‘’ 

() 

‘’ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

() 

 

 

 

 

 

Under the organization of the Association of Siamese 

Architects Under Royal Patronage (Lanna), the yearly 

event, ‘SAPA SPACE’ will be held from December 12-14, 

2014 at the Promenada Chiang Mai Resort Mall. The 

event will include the 17l80 From Line to Construction 

exhibition, Reconstruction of Temples Affected by the 

Earthquake in Chiang Rai exhibition, Designs to Develop 

the Area of Kuang-Luang-Wiangkaew Contest exhibition, 

Lanna Architect Council of Thailand Office Contest exhibition, 

Conservation of Lanna Architecture exhibition 

and the design works of the members of the Association 

of Siamese Architects Under Royal Patronage (Lanna). 

Moreover, there will be a variety of activities such 

as an architecture career talk, the presentation of Lanna 

architects members works and the works of students 

from different universities as well (ASA would like to 

thank all members for their participation). The event is 

primarily targeted at architects, engineers, interior designers, 

landscape designers, students and traders who are 

associated with the architectural field, however, the 

aim is to also provide knowledge and updates in terms 

of current architectural knowledge and practices to all 

in attendance. 

01 

2557 

‘ : SAPA SPACE’ 

TEXT 


PHOTO 

Courtesy of Lanna 

Architect 2014 

01 


SATHAPAD 

SAMAI 

03 

01 

‘’ 

 

- 

 

 

- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9 2557 

1 

 

80 

 

- 

 

80 

‘ 

’ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- 

 

‘’ ‘ 

01 

‘’ 

TEXT 


PHOTO 

Courtesy of 

Sathapad Samai 

’ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An architectural academic seminar under the theme 

of ‘Sathapad Samai’ was organized by the Faculty of 

Architecture, Chulalongkorn University with an aim of 

advancing the architectural profession and providing a 

platform for researchers and architects to share their 

academic research and career projects with the public. 

Held on 9 October 2014, the event was initiated in response 

to the Architectural Design Major being offered 

at Chulalongkorn University for its 80 th consecutive 

year and it was decided that the exhibition would be 

held annually from this point on. Furthermore, M.R. 

Nangnoi Saksri, a national researcher and the associate 

founder of the Thai Architectural Design Major, Chulalongkorn 

University, also celebrated his 80 th birthday. 

Thus, ‘Inherit Thai Architecture’ was deemed the topic 

of the seminar. 

Talks were given by both the faculty’s instructors, 

regarding academic research in the area of Thai architectural 

design, and architects who are currently working 

to create contemporary Thai architecture within their 

practices. Information regarding the history of how the 

major in Thai Architectural Design at Chulalongkorn 

Univesity came to be was also incorporated into the 

exhibition and featured student works, from past to 

present, within its presentation. Lastly, the event provided 

a great opportunity to republish worthwhile books such 

as ‘Reun Luang’ and ‘Architecture in Thailand,’ which will 

only be of a great advantage to students and the general 

public alike. 


WORK IN PROGRESS 

HONDA SHOWROOM 

NAKORNCHAISRI 

OFFICE AT 

 

 

 

 

100 2 

3 

 

3 

 

façade 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 

2 

 

01 

02 

01 

02 

24 ASA WORK IN PROGRESS

03 

1 

3 

4 

2 

1 

5 

1 

1 

1 

The site of the Honda showroom Nakornchaisri 

project is located in Nakhon Pathom province. The client 

proposed to construct the showroom in a manner that 

would allow it to stand out from its setting on Petchkasem 

road through its 100 meter elevation length. The architect 

designed the building in two main parts, a three-storey 

showroom at the front of the building and a repair zone 

and car storage area at the back. Furthermore, the façade 

of the building is bent in, allowing for it to respond to 

the outside view. The front of the building is also lifted 

making the entrance space in itself interesting. For the 

middle part of the showroom, an opening in the roof 

allows for the natural light to filter in and, lastly, the 

ramps between the 1 st and 2 nd floors connect together 

creating a flowing circulation within the building’s 

interior. 

03 

5 M 

FIRST FLOOR PLAN 

1 Parking 

2 Showroom 

3 Reception Area 

4 Office 

5 Court 

OWNER 

Nakornchaisri 

Honda automobile 

LOCATION 

Nakornchaisri , 

Nakornpathom, 

Thailand 

ARCHITECT 

OFFICE AT 

INTERIOR DESIGNER 

OFFICE AT 

STRUCTURAL ENGINEER 

Sarawut Yuanteng 

SYSTEM ENGINEER 

COU CO 

BUILDING AREA 

10,000 Sqm. 

CONSTRUCTION COST 

120 Millon Baht 


RAMA II HOUSE 

FATTSTUDIO 

01 

02 

2 

 

 

FATT 

STUDIO 

 

 

 

 

 

2 

 

 

 

 

 

Interior designer 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

01-02 

 

 


ASEAN'S LARGEST 

INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION 

ON LED LIGHTING 

PRODUCTS & TECHNOLOGY 

LED 

 

LIGHTING 

APPLICATION 

LED 

21-24 

2558 

2-4 

 

 

LED SIGNAGE 

NENTS 

O 

P 

COM 

D 

E 

L 

 

LEDs 

LED 

LED 

LED 

LEDLED 

LED 

LED 

 

LED 

LED 

 

Scan with your 

smart phone 

IMPA 

ement Co., Ltd. 

47/569-576, Moo 3, Popular Road, Banmai Sub-district 

Pakkred District, Nonthaburi 11120, Thailand 

Ms. Panvisut Buranakarn 

Tel: +66 (0) 2833 5328, Email: panvisutb@impact.co.th 

MEX 

Pvt. Ltd 

9, LGF, Sant Nagar, East of Kailash, New Delhi-110065, India 

Mobile(India): +91-9810301644, +91-9312285142 

E-mail: himani@mexexhibits.com, gaurav@mexexhibits.com

03 

04 

The owner of Rama II house decided to construct 

a new house at the same location as the old one and, 

although they wanted to change all circulation and 

programs of the house, they also wanted the axis of 

the building to remain the same. Thus, Fatt Studio 

Architect adjusted the entrance of the house, a design 

decision that further allowed for the creation of a larger 

courtyard area. 

For the programs of the house, the architect designed 

the master bedroom as well as the son’s bedroom to 

be situated on the 2 nd floor, thus creating more available 

space on the 1 st floor that could be later adjusted to fit 

the family’s needs in the future. The staircase of the 

house might be the highlight of the design, as it has 

been pulled out and located in a semi-interior and semiexterior 

manner allowing for the client to open up even 

more space within the house design. Furthermore, the 

landscape outside the building is connected to the space 

inside, a feature that can assist with climate change as 

well as utilize light and shadow. 

MASTER PLAN 

05 

PROJECT NAME 

RAMA II HOUSE 

LOCATION 

Bang Kradi Road, 

Bangkhuntien, Bangkok 

DURATION 

2015 

ARCHITECT 

FATTSTUDIO 

INTERIOR DESIGNER 

AP 

LANDSCAPE DESIGNER 

Songpol Sukto 

STRUCTURAL ENGINEER 

Sakkarn Sirisrisak 

SYSTEM ENGINEER 

Site 83 

CONTRACTOR 

On Bipping 

BUILDING AREA 

550 sqm. 

CONSTRUCTION COST 

30 Million Baht 

LIGHTING DESIGNER 

FOS Lighting 

design studio 

03-04 

- 

 

05 


FUNDAMENTALS: 

ABSORBING MODERNITY 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

32 ASA THEME

Monditalia 

 

 

 

82 - 

41 - 

 

Monditalia 

 

 

Rem Koolhaas Elements of Architecture 

 

 

 

 

 

- 

 

 

 

Fundamentals 

- 

 

 

 

THEME ASA 33

Spirituality – freedom and creativity, a fundamental 

in Thai architecture Rem Koolhaas 

 

 

2 

 

 

3 

- 

100 ... 

.. .. 

- 

14 

 

 

 

 

 

Outline of the History of Modern Thai Architecture 

1914-2014 

 

The Politics of Thainess 

 

Thai Fundamental Schools of Thought 

 

 

 

 

Rem 

Koolhaas 

 

 

 

 

 

 


BIM Odyssey 4 

Age of Implementation 

30 April 2015 

 

2558 

BIM (Building Information Modeling) Implementation 

! 

www.facebook.com/vrdigitalcoltd 

VR Digital Company Limited 

154 Soi Suksan Surawong Rd., Bangrak Bangkok 10500 

Tel.02-267-6388-9 www.vr-3d.com 

email : info@vr-3d.com

OUTLINE OF THE HISTORY OF 

MODERN THAI 

01 

ARCHITECTURE, 1914-2014 

TEXT+ PHOTOS 

Asst. Prof. Pirasri 

Povatong, Ph.D. 

. . 

 

 

 

Since the turn of the 21 st century, Thai architects 

have been challenged by the dramatic transformation 

within Thai society as well as without. While the Thai 

society have become extraordinarily complex, with 

unprecedented conflicts and dramatic developments, 

architecture as well as the architectural profession in 

Thailand are in a state of flux, a plurality of voices represented 

in various architectural styles. In order to 

understand how we get to the present situation, this 

essay outlines the genealogy of modern Thai architecture 

and their makers, in parallel with momentous changes 

in Thailand’s society, economy, and culture of the past 

hundred years. Modernity, samai mai in Thai, is defined 

here loosely as the sense of a break from the past, with 

a yearning, a longing for a better future. As it also entails 

a nostalgic desire for the past, the experience of 

modernity is always ambiguous, and far from being 

‘complete,’ as negotiations between various social groups 

worked in conjunction with resistance from vernacular, 

‘traditional’ factors, always made the modernization 

process incomplete and perpetually in flux. 

In outlining this ambiguous history, this essay argues 

against the assumption of a linear, homogenous, and 

Eurocentric history of Modern Architecture. It is written 

upon the assumption that modernity is a worldwide 

phenomenon that is at once global and local, as a series 

of new awakenings and consciousness of entering a 

new age that have been shared by cities and civilizations 

not only in the West, but everywhere. Modern experiences, 

histories, and cultural transformation were one 

mutual project that is shared by every country in the 

past hundred years. 

Throughout this long century, as they did in centuries 

past, architecture and urbanism played a crucial role in 

the creation and representation of modernity. In Thailand, 

like everywhere else in the world, architecture has always 

been strategically implemented as both a powerful 

symbol, and an actual instrument of social and environmental 

change. Architecture and its creators remain at 

the center of this inquiry, as an evidence of the longwinding 

and convoluted process of modernization. 


1 THE THRESHOLD OF MODERN ARCHITECTURE 

IN SIAM / THAILAND 

Modernization in Thailand was a long and slow 

progress in the making, constantly and perpetually in 

flux. For the centuries prior to the contact with the West, 

Thai culture had been remarkably open to foreign influences. 

Indian, Chinese, Middle Eastern, and various 

Southeast Asian cultures had had their shares in the 

shaping of Thai culture. Accordingly, Thai architecture 

had always been responsive to both indigenous as 

well as external influences. 

During the mid-19 th century, however, colonialism 

began to exert a strong impact on Southeast Asia. With 

luck and diplomacy, Siam maintained her independence, 

but the impact of Western modernization was as strong 

as that of any colonial state in Southeast Asia. Initiated 

by the Siamese elites, modernization was largely based 

on the Eurocentric colonial model of the late 19 th century. 

As a result, Thai society and culture gradually changed, 

and modernization was, to a large extent, Westernization. 

During the 1880s, Italian and British architects came 

to the Siamese court, using their skills in Neoclassical 

and other eclectic architectural styles in the creation of 

the ‘civilized’ façade for the modernizing non-Western 

kingdom. Bangkok began to look like a modern city, but 

without any large-scale industrialization and rationalization 

of the West. In architecture, modernity remained 

façade-deep, with no real invention in both style and 

technique. Neoclassical-style buildings, adapted to cope 

with tropical climate, gave the Siamese elite a sense of 

the new, ‘civilized’ time. Inevitably, the dilemma of 

choosing between the desire to be “modern” and the 

need to preserve “traditional” Siamese identity arose. 

An example of that predicament was the Chakri Throne 

Hall (1882), with the Neoclassical-style body designed 

by John Clunis, the Government Architect, topped with 

wooden spires in traditional Siamese style, designed 

by Phraya Ratchasongkhram (Kon Hongsakul), the royal 

master builder 

02 

01 Wat Benchamabophit, 

Bangkok. H.R.H. Prince 

Naris, 1900. 

02 Temporary crematorium 

for King Rama V. Phraya 

Ratchasongkhram (Kon 

Hongsakul), 1910. 

03 Chakri Throne Hall, 

Grand Palace, Bangkok. 

John Clunis and Phraya 

Ratchasongkhram 

(Kon Hongsakul), 1882. 

04 Mrigadayavan Villa, 

Phetchaburi. Mario Tamagno, 

1923. 

05 Chaloemkrung Theatre, 

Bangkok. MC Samaichaloem 

Kridakara, 1932. 

06 Central Post Office, 

Bangkok. Phra Sarotrattana 

nimman (Sarot Sukkhayang), 

1941. 

In a way, Chakri Throne Hall represented the decline 

of traditional building crafts, which were confined to 

certain building types for the sake of ‘tradition,’ such as 

temples and phra meru, temporary crematoria for royals 

During the last decade of the 19 th century, King 

Rama V increased his attempt to modernize the country. 

Italian architects and German engineers came in droves 

to work for the Siamese Government, thus began the 

transfer of architectural skills, styles, and techniques to 

the Siamese counterpart. H.R.H. Prince Naris (1863- 

1947) played a crucial role as a design advisor for King 

Rama V, combining his aristocratic aestheticism with 

Western architectural representation and techniques. 

Working in conjunction with Italian architects, Prince 

Naris essentially established a modern Siamese style 

in architecture. At the royal monastery of Wat Benchamabophit 

(1900), the ancient hall-and-cloister typology 

was updated, the design greatly enhanced by innovative 

use of Italian marble cladding and stained-glass windows. 

The syncretic design was also represented in the 

construction of Ananta Samakhom Throne Hall (1906- 

1917). Mario Tamagno, the chief architect of the Public 

Works Department, combined the cruciform plan of 

traditional Thai throne halls with Italianate façade, and 

modern ferro-concrete technology imported from France. 

The scale of construction led to the introduction of local 

manufacture of construction materials, especially cement. 

Established in 1913, Siam Cement Company has since 

been instrumental as the kingdom’s supplier of construction 

materials. 

By 1914, the elite-led reforms had produced some 

sense of modernity, without industrialization or largescale 

infrastructural changes. Nonetheless, the society 

gradually changed, with the emergence of educated, 

urban middle class who would later overthrow the absolutist 

monarchy in 1932. The practice of architecture 

in the modern sense remained in the hands of the 

Italians, Prince Naris, and a few other Siamese elites. 

Eurocentric historicist styles reigned supreme, as the 

emergence of modernist movements in Europe had 

yet to make its presence known to the Siamese. 

03 

 


07 Ratchadamnoen Klang 

Avenue. Chitrasen 

Abhaiwongs, 1940. 

08 Rattanakosin Hotel, 

Ratchadamnoen Klang Avenue. 

Chitrasen Abhaiwongs, 1940. 

09 Back façade, Ratchadamnoen 

Klang Avenue 

buildings. Chitrasen 

Abhaiwongs, 1940. 

10 Wat Phra Sri Mahathat, 

Bangkok. Phra Phromphichit 

(Ou Laphanon), 1942. 

11 Chulalongkorn University 

Auditorium, Bangkok. Phra 

Sarotrattananimman (Sarot 

Sukkhayang) and Phra Phromphichit 

(Ou Laphanon), 1939. 

12 Ministry of Culture, 

Bangkok. Public Works 

2 MODERNITY IN TRANSIT : FROM THE END OF 

ABSOLUTISM TO THE GREAT WARS (1914-1945) 

During the first half of the 20 th century, the country 

was dramatically transformed in various aspects. In the 

years leading to the Great Depression, the absolutist 

monarchy was already in slow decline. During the First 

World War, King Rama VI tried to foster the spirit of 

monarchy-centered nationalism. Nonetheless, after the 

Great Depression, absolutism was overthrown in 1932. 

A brief period of democratic rule followed by years of 

military dictatorships; in 1939 Siam was renamed 

Thailand, and two years later it became an ally of Japan 

in the Second World War. 

During these tumultuous decades, the modern 

profession of architecture was established in Siam. In 

1913 Rama VI established the Arts and Crafts School, 

with the intention of reviving traditional artistic endeavors 

to enhance the kingdom’s economic revenues. The king 

and the government began to send Siamese students 

to study architecture and design in Europe; with their 

returns, the service of the Italian architects would eventually 

end by the 1920s. The first formally-trained architect 

was MC Iddhidhebsan Kridakara (1889-1929), an École 

des Beaux-Arts graduate who returned to Siam in 1916 

and became the new Fine Arts Department’s director. 

It was for MC Iddhidhebsan that Rama VI coined the 

terms sathapanik [architect], and sathapattayakam [archi 

tecture], in anticipation of the emergence of the new 

profession. Another modern pioneer was Nart Bhodhip 

rasat (1901-1954), who graduated from University of 

Liverpool’s School of Architecture in 1929. After his return 

from England, he established an experimental course 

in architecture at the Arts and Crafts School. Subsequently, 

in 1933 Nart established the Faculty of Architecture 

at Chulalongkorn University, the country’s first 

higher education institution in the field of architecture. 

The curriculum was thus a mix of Beaux-Arts historicism 

and modern British system. Also in 1933, the Association 

of Siamese Architects was established by the Britishand 

French-educated pioneers, so that the architectural 

profession was formally institutionalized. 

Notable buildings with a clearly modern aspiration 

of the twilight years of absolutist rule include Mrigada 

yavan Villa (Mario Tamagno, 1923), a seaside residence 

04 

05 

08 

09 


Department, 1952. 

13 Bangkok City Hall, 

Bangkok. MC Samaichaloem 

Kridakara, 1955. 

14 Thammasat University 

Auditorium, Bangkok. Public 

Works Department, 1961. 

15 National Theatre, Bangkok. 

MC Samaichaloem Kridakara 

et al, 1966. 

16 Khurusammanakhan, 

Korat Institute of Technology, 

Nakhon Ratchasima. 

Watanyu na Thalang, 1960 

17 Sala Phrakiew, 

Chulalongkorn University, 

Bangkok. MC Vodhyakarn 

Varavarn and Lert Urasayananda,1966. 

for Rama VI. Prefabrication system was ingeniously 

used, in conjunction with a modern interpretation of 

traditional Thai houses on stilts, in the design of teakwood 

pavilions on graceful reinforced concrete columns. 

Another example was Chaloemkrung Theatre (MC Samaichaloem 

Kridakara, 1932), a Moderne-style movie 

palace that King Rama VII built as a gift to the people to 

commemorate the 150 th anniversary of the foundation 

of the House of Chakri. The first air-conditioned movie 

theatre in Asia, the building’s simplified form with Art 

Deco details could be read as the absolute monarchy’s 

futile attempt to modernize itself. 

After the end of absolutist rule in 1932, architecture 

became instrumental as representations of the new 

ideologies, especially during the Phibunsongkhram 

regime (1938-1941) when the nascent democracy slowly 

gave way to autocracy. The sense of the new era was 

created by the government in its extensive building programs 

that represented state power and chauvinism, 

best represented in the monumental public buildings 

with simplified Neoclassical details such as the Central 

Post Office (1941), designed by Phra Sarotrattananimman 

(1895-1950), another University of Liverpool alumni. 

A major building program was the development of 

Ratchadamnoen Klang Avenue, with blocks of 4-storey 

buildings designed mostly by Chitrasen Abhaiwongs, 

who had received some training at the École des Beaux- 

Arts in Paris. Some of the buildings were monumental 

with stripped-down details and stark façades, while 

others began to play with dynamic arrangement of 

volumes and planes. For their part, Prince Naris’ disciples 

also had their share in the building programs as well. 

Phra Phromphichit (1890-1965), for example, tried to 

invent a neo-traditional style that combined Prince Naris’ 

traditionalism with reinforced concrete construction, 

an example of which was the stupa/mausoleum at 

Wat Phra Sri Mahathat (1942). Chulalongkorn University 

Auditorium (1939), a collaboration between Phra Sarotrattananimman 

and Phra Phromphichit, clearly showed 

the ongoing dilemma between the desire to be modern, 

and the need to preserve national identity. 


07 

11 

10 

 


13 

12 

14 

18 19 20 

25 26 27 28 

3 THE COLD WAR MODERNITY (1945-1982) 

18 Cadet Academy, Bangkok. 

Somphop Bhiromya, 1961. 

19 Department of Public 

Relations, Bangkok. Phichai 

Wasanasong and Anand 

Krukaeo, 1963. 

20 Samila Hotel, Songkhla. 

Public Works Department, 

1964. 

21 Faculty of Science, 

MahidolUniversity, Bangkok. 

Kritsada Arunwong na 

Ayutthaya and Amorn 

Sriwong, 1965. 

22 Maneeya Building, Bangkok. 

Phol Chulasewok, 1963. 

23 Siam Intercontinental 

Hotel, Bangkok. Joseph 

Salerno, 1966. 

24 Mandarin Hotel, Bangkok. 

Jain Sakolthanarak, 1966. 

25 Scala Theatre, Bangkok. 

Chira Silpakanok, 1969. 

26 Chokechai International 

Building, Bangkok. Rangsan 

Torsuwan, 1969.. 

After the end of the Second World War, Thailand 

underwent a new phase of modernization, with the 

United States as the benchmark of Post-war modernity. 

During the Vietnam War, the country’s infrastructures 

were extensively modernized, driven by the U.S.’s attempt 

to make Thailand the bastion of anti-communism in 

Southeast Asia. Industries, education and tourism were 

promoted, while the infrastructural basis for national 

development was rapidly laid down. Post-war Bangkok 

became a tropical metropolis, rapidly growing in all 

directions. 

During this period, the architectural profession was 

also modernized. Increasingly acknowledged by the 

public as a profession, locally-trained architects began 

to offer their services for both the public and the private 

sectors. Through legal means, institutionalization of the 

profession was gradually strengthened, with the promulgation 

of the Building Construction Control Act (1940), 

the Architectural Profession Act (1960), and the 

Association of Siamese Architects (ASA)’s Standards of 

Practice (1963). After Chulalongkorn University, other 

institution began to offer degree programs in architecture. 

Unlike their predecessor, the majority of Post-War Thai 

architects went to the U.S., instead of Britain or France, 

to further their education and training. The first generation 

of locally-trained architects started their design firms; 

some began to experiment with modern architecture 

in the International Style, while others were inspired by 

Le Corbusier’s principles and forms, Brazilian modernism, 

or the Japanese modern architecture. 

Under military regimes, political and economic 

stability of the 1960s led to a period of construction 

boom. The Public Works Department (PWD), now with 

all-Thai staff, produced standardized designs for the 

much-needed public buildings : ministries, provincial halls, 

courts, and museums. There was no invention in design, 

yet they represented the ongoing struggle between the 

need to be Thai and the desire to be modern, in the 

overt use of Thai-style gable roof, together with some 

architectural details. Examples include the Ministry of 

Culture (PWD, 1952), Bangkok City Hall (MC Samaicha 

loem Kridakara, 1955), Thammasat University Auditorium 

(PWD, 1961), and the National Theatre (MC Samaichaloem 

Kridakara et al, 1966). 

At the same time, other pioneers of modern Thai 

architecture began to make their bold experiments in 

the design of public buildings. Notable buildings include 

Khurusammanakhan, an open-air auditorium for a new 

technical college in the northeastern city of Nakhon 

Ratchasima. Designed in 1960 by Watanyu na Thalang, 

a Cornell graduate, the building’s bold use of hyperbolic 

paraboloid concrete roof resonates well with the prominent 

presence of roof form and well-shaded space 

in vernacular Thai architecture. Another great example 


15 16 17 

21 22 23 24 

30 

29 

31 

27 Indra Hotel, Bangkok. 

Chira Silpakanok, 1970. 

28 Thai Patthana Bank 

Head quarters, Bangkok. 

Amorn Sriwong, 1970. 

29 Esso Building, Bangkok. 

Intaren Architects, 1971. 

30 Samsen Railway Station, 

Bangkok. Abhai Phadoemchit, 

1970. 

31 New Suan Amporn 

Pavilion, Dusit Palace, 

Bangkok. Kritsada Arunwong 

na Ayutthaya and Amorn 

Sriwong, 1972. 

32 Thai Farmers Bank Head 

Office, Bangkok. Rangsan 

Torsuwan, 1981. 

33 Bangkok Bank Head 

Office, Bangkok. Kritsada 

Arunwong na Ayutthaya, 

1982. 

34 Siam Cement Company 

Headquarters, Bangkok. 

Design 103, 1983. 

35 Bank of Asia Headquarter, 

was Sala Phrakiew (MC Vodhyakarn Varavarn and Lert 

Urasayananda, 1966), a student union building with 

dramatic gable roof and locally-produced building 

materials. 

Bold forms with passive solar building design were 

other notable characteristics of the 1960s modern public 

buildings. Best examples include the Cadet Academy 

(Somphop Bhiromya, 1961), Department of Public Relations 

(Phichai Wasanasong and Anand Krukaeo, 1963), the 

Samila Hotel, Songkhla (PWD, 1964), and the Faculty 

of Science, Mahidol University (Kritsada Arunwong na 

Ayutthaya and Amorn Sriwong, 1965). 

Prominent roof structure, dramatic forms, and passive 

solar building design were also characteristic of commercial 

buildings built by the private sector as well. Remarkable 

buildings include Maneeya Building (Phol Chulasewok, 

1963), the Siam Intercontinental Hotel(Joseph Salerno, 

1966), the Mandarin Hotel (Jain Sakolthanarak, 1966), 

and Scala Theatre (Chira Silpakanok,1969). 

The 1970s was a tumultuous period in terms of 

politics, with popular uprisings against military regimes. 

Nonetheless, the rapid pace of modernization continued 

unabated. In terms of design, architects enjoyed a chance 

to experiment with a wider palette of structures, materials 

and techniques, in response to new needs and requirements 

of the modern, urbanized and commercialized 

lifestyle. Bangkok’s skyline began to be transformed 

by high-rise hotels and office buildings : Chokechai 

International Building (Rangsan Torsuwan, 1969), Indra 

Hotel (Chira Silpakanok, 1970), Dusit Thani Hotel (Yozo 

Shibata, 1970), Thai Patthana Bank Headquarters (Amorn 

Sriwong, 1970), and the Esso Building (Intaren Architects, 

1971. Reinforced concrete, prefabrication and passive 

solar design were central to the design of most of these 

buildings, in the perpetual quest to strike a balance 

between modernity and national identity. Similar strive 

was prominent in the design of public buildings as well. 

For the Samsen Railway Station (1970), Abhai Phadoemchit 

designed concrete umbrellas that provided not only 

shading and ventilation, but also formal unity and drama 

in the mundane daily commute. In his School for the Blind 

(1971), Sumet Jumsai used prefabricated elements and 

bold colors to create an expansive educational space 

that resonates well with the spatial and tectonic ideas 

of traditional Thai houseon stilts. Another fine example 

was the New Suan Amporn Pavilion (1972), a collaboration 

between Kritsada Arunwong na Ayutthaya and Amorn 

Sriwong. A concrete folded plate roof hovers above a 

simple rectangular hall, with lightness and flair. 

 


or the ‘Robot Building,’ 

Bangkok. Sumet Jumsai, 1986. 

36 Baiyoke Tower, Bangkok. 

Plan Architects, 1987. 

37 The Nation Headquarters, 

Bangkok. Sumet Jumsai, 1990. 

38 Foundation of Islamic 

Centre of Thailand, Bangkok. 

Phaichit Phongphanluk, 1983. 

39 Ratchamangkhala Pavilion 

at Suan Luang Rama IX, 

Bangkok. Moblex, 1987. 

40 Sukhothai Hotel, Bangkok. 

Kerry Hill, 1991. 

41 Peninsula Hotel, Bangkok. 

Dan Wongprasat, 1993. 

42 Suvarnabhumi International 

Airport, Samut Prakarn. 

Murphy/Jahn Architects, 2006. 

43 Workpoint Studio and 

Head Office, Bangkok. 

Ton Silp Studio, 2006. 

44 Bangkok University 

4 CONTEMPORARY THAI ARCHITECTURE 

(1982-2014) 

During the 1980s, Thai society moved on to another 

phase in its history, driven by the end of the Cold War 

in Southeast Asia, rapid industrialization and commercialization. 

Stipulated by unprecedented foreign invest 

ment, Thailand became one of the newly industrialized 

countries. For the first time, modernity was matched by 

industrialization, but with considerable costs in terms of 

the environment and culture. Tourism continued to develop 

rapidly and became the kingdom’s major economic 

factor. The year 1982 also marked the Bicentennial of 

the Chakri dynasty and the foundation of Bangkok. The 

celebrations and festivities demonstrated a new interest 

in history, tradition, and architectural heritage. The decade 

also saw the remarkable influence of Postmodernism 

and ad-hoc historicism, unfortunately driven by reckless 

commercialization and the need for corporate identity. 

The result was an architectural anarchy, with a pluralistic 

profusion of styles in the context of globalization. The 

situation is best captured in the development of high-rise 

buildings. In the early 1980s, large corporations began 

to build high-rise towers for their headquarters, often in 

the sensible, simple design with climatic and economic 

factors in mind. Examples include the Thai Farmers Bank 

Head Office (Rangsan Torsuwan, 1981), the Bangkok 

Bank Head Office (Kritsada Arunwong na Ayutthaya, 1982), 

and the Siam Cement Company Headquarters (Design 

103, 1983). Subsequently, Postmodernism and the need 

for corporate identity led to the designs of buildings like 

the Bank of Asia Headquarter, or the ‘Robot Building’ 

(Sumet Jumsai, 1986), Baiyoke Tower (Plan Architects, 

1987), and The Nation Headquarters (Sumet Jumsai, 

1990). After going through a period of ad-hoc historicism, 

in the late 1980s Thai architects began to show a more 

refined re-interpretation of Thailand’s rich architectural 

heritage, and a responsive approach to contemporary 

conditions. A particularly interesting example was the 

Foundation of Islamic Centre of Thailand (Phaichit Phongphanluk, 

1983), a set of reinforced concrete umbrellas 

that successfully integrates modern architectonics, 

Islam-inspire geometry, and passive solar design for 

tropical climate. Other examples are Ratchamangkhala 

Pavilion at Suan Luang Rama IX (Moblex, 1987), the 

Sukhothai Hotel (Kerry Hill, 1991), and the Peninsula 

Hotel (Dan Wongprasat, 1993). The 1990s was another 

turbulent decade, beginning with rapid economic growth 

in spite of political power struggles, and ending unceremoniously 

with the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, the 

aftermath of which still lingers on in the present. Thai- 

34 

32 33 

35 36 

40 41 42 

46 47 48 


Landmark Complex, Pathum 

Thani. Architects 49, 2010. 

45 Parliament of Thailand, 

Bangkok. Theeraphon Niyom, 

2012. 

46 Wat Phra Dhammakaya, 

Pathum Thani. 1982-present. 

47 Wat Sothon Wararam, 

Chachoengsao. Prawet 

Limparangsi, 1987-2006. 

48 Temporary crematorium 

for H.R.H. Princess Galyani 

Vadhana, Bangkok. Arvuth 

Ngoenchuklin, 2008. 

49 Sukhothai Airport, 

Sukhothai. Habita Architects, 

1999. 

50 Wat Khao Phutthakhodom 

monastic buildings, Chonburi. 

Suriya Umpansiriratana, 

1999-present. 

land’s economy moved upscale into the more sophisticated 

manufacturing and service sector for both local 

and foreign consumption. Economic prosperity and the 

constant drive towards international acceptance is 

reflected in buildings like Suvarnabhumi International 

Airport (Murphy/Jahn Architects, 2006), Workpoint 

Studio and Head Office (Form Architects, 2006), Bangkok 

University Landmark Complex (Architects 49, 2010), 

and the design for the new Parliament (Theeraphon 

Niyom, 2012). 

In parallel with the strive towards modernity, there 

have also been attempts to re-interpret Thai architectural 

traditions. Efforts to modernize Buddhist architecture 

with modern construction technology resulted in buildings 

like the temple complex of Wat Phra Dhammakaya (1982- 

present), Wat Sothon Wararam (Prawet Limparangsi, 

1987-2006), and the crematorium for H.R.H. Princess 

Galyani Vadhana (Arvuth Ngoenchuklin, 2008). Sensitivity 

to the environment and careful re-interpretation of vernacular 

tectonics are also present in various recent projects, 

including Sukhothai Airport (Habita Architects, 1999), 

and Wat Khao Phutthakhodom monastic buildings 

(Suriya Umpansiriratana, 1999-present). 

EPILOGUE 

Since the turn of the 21 st century, Thai architects 

have been challenged by the dramatic transformation 

within Thai society as well as without. As the society 

has become incredibly complex with conflicting issues, 

architecture is, once again, in a state of flux. While the 

centuries-old struggles with beauty, identity and construction 

are far from over, Thai architects have to contend 

with other contemporary issues like green design, 

universal design, and the transnational flow of trade, 

amidst the uncertainty of the present socio-political 

climate. 

As represented in this outline, the development of 

modern Thai architecture is not a linear, teleological 

process. Rather, it is a constantly ongoing development. 

The struggle with tropicality, identity, and the balance 

between tradition and modernity has always been 

present as the driving force behind spaces and forms 

of modern Thai architecture. As a transnational project, 

modernity emerged out of the contact and transculturation 

between cultures, providing the stimulus 

necessary to keep modernity a perpetually ongoing 

quest for a better future. 

38 

37 

39 

43 44 45 

49 50 

 


THE POLITICS OF 

THAINESS 


TEXT 

M.L. Piyalada 

Thaveeprungsriporn 

PHOTOS 

Pussadee Tiptus 

M.L. Piyalada 


01 The Ordinary Hall, Wat 

Phra Srimahathat, Bangkok 

(1942), by Phra Prompijitr 

ABSTRACT 

Architecture has long been recognized as an embodiment 

of the very identity and spirit of its dwellers. 

As we undergo the extreme flow in the age of 

globalization however, the notion of ‘who we are’ as 

a direct correlation to ‘where we are’ becomes less 

and less distinct. In short, the notion of architecture 

as an expression of self and its cultural identity has 

never been more in question. Yet, when we look more 

closely, we begin to realize the nuances and details 

of our daily lives that are still very much culturally 

situated. The ‘Thainess’ in us is still at work in various 

ways, the very sense which does indeed manifest in 

many cultural and artistic outputs. The essay will look 

into these various manners in which the poetic of 

Thainess unveils. 

KEYWORDS 

cultural identity, Thainess, symbolic form, spatial 

experience, contemporary architecture 

The notion of cultural identity in architecture is 

nothing new. It has been frequently examined and debated 

in architectural discourses over the last 40 years. 

Presumably, calls for an architecture with a sense of 

identity originally surfaced as a postmodern critique of 

the Modern monotonous cityscape. Christian Norberg- 

Schulz’s Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of 

Architecture (1979) and Kenneth Frampton’s Towards 

a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of 

Resistance (1983) are but a few leading works that 

reflect such a concern over a sense of placelessness 

and the uninspiring built environment of the time. And 

the notion of place and its cultural specificity have remained 

of great value in architectural discourse well 

into the new millennium as evident in numerous publications 

and symposia during that time. In the Thai 

context, cultural identity in art and architecture has always 

been a topic of interests, at times more so than others. 

Over the last decade, however, such interest seems 

to have subsided as local architects became increasingly 

inspired by latest works from around the world. Whether 

that has anything to do with the sudden proliferation of 

design info through web-based architectural publications 

requires further investigation. It is clear, nevertheless, 

that the relevance of cultural identity in Thai contemporary 

architectural design is once again called into 

question. In the day and age when, ostensibly, urban 

dwellers lead similar lives, eat at similar chain restaurants, 

relying on similar global brands, and consuming similar 

household products, does cultural identity still mean 

anything for contemporary architectural design? Does 

it become virtually irrelevant—“We don’t live in the old 

days anymore. So Thainess can be anything?” Or do we 

dismiss it simply because we are too ignorant to dig 

deep into what Thai identity entails? Still, in recent 

years, a few exhibitions have rekindled artistic interests 

in Thainess—the most relevant being Plod Lock Ekaluck 

Thai [Unlocking Thai Identity] in ASA’s annual exposition 

Architect’11 (2011). Another exhibition, Thai Tay [Cool 

Thai], at Bangkok Art and Cultural Center (2012) explored 

broader realms of art and culture in contemporary Thai 

society. Pracha Suweeranon’s book Attaluck Thai: Chak 

Thai Soo Thai Thai [Thai Identity: From Thai to Thai Thai] 

(2011) is also a testament to a resurgence of the interest 

in Thai identity in advertising and mass media. 

With such a renewed interest in mind, this essay 

explores the manners in which the poetics of Thainess 

is manifest in architecture. Given the broad timeframe 

and variety of works to be considered, this is admittedly 

an extremely challenging task, one quite risky of oversimplification. 

As such, this review should be considered 

a mere synopsis of a complex phenomenon. With that 

in mind, the first part of the essay will briefly examine 

the various expressions of Thai cultural identity in modern 

architectural practice (1933-1982), providing an overview 

or a historical survey of sort. The second part will then 

focus on Thainess as design inspiration for contemporary 

Thai architecture. 


 

01 


TRACES OF THAINESS | A BRIEF SURVEY 

(1933 – 1982) 

As in many other non-western countries, Modern 

architecture in Thailand is hardly a socially inherent 

phenomenon, but rather something ‘imported.’ The first 

generation of European-trained Thai architects started 

their modern professional practice and formed the 

Association of Siamese Architects under Royal Patronage 

in 1933 and was active in the founding of the first architecture 

school in Thailand at Chulalongkorn University 

in the same year. At such a time when Modern architecture 

was at its peak in Europe and the United States, 

it was only natural that Modern thinking and stylistic 

influences would disseminate through both these 

architects’ practice and involvement in architectural 

curriculum at Chulalongkorn. As such, a glaring discontinuity 

between tradition and the modern was 

inevitable. Studies of the evolution of Thai architecture 

from 1933 onward reveal virtually isolated paths between 

modern and traditional Thai architectural designs and 

practices. 

On a closer look, traces of ‘Thainess’—inclusively 

defined here as geographical, climatic, socio-cultural 

and aesthetic particularities—in architecture emerge. 

On the one hand, Classical/ Traditional Thai architecture 

practice carried on, continuing its reliance on traditional 

formal language, spatial order, symbolism and tectonic 

details. Modern materials and construction technology 

were well adopted yet still more or less subservient to 

traditional forms (figure 1). It is noteworthy that these 

traditional buildings mostly served traditional functions 

—namely, religious and ceremonial structures. 

Presence of Thainess in ‘modern’ buildings was 

relatively diverse. Generally speaking, they may be 

arranged into 3 categories: 1. Conventional Thai, 2. 

Tropical Thai and 3. Contemporary Thai. Closest in 

appearance to Traditional Thai architecture, yet not to be 

mistaken as one, is Conventional Thai, the most distinguishing 

features of which are dominating pitched 

roofs, symmetrical building organization and traditional 

decorative elements. These features were employed 

in a modern structure so as to ‘appear Thai’ as a response 

to the then prime minister Field Marshal P. Pibulsongkram’s 

‘Thai National Identity’ policies which began in 

1938. Essentially, these buildings differ from their 

Traditional counterparts in that their ‘Thai’ characters 

lie only in the outward appearances—roofs and façades. 

The architectonic elements, the spatial order, the tectonic 

language and functions are mostly non-traditional— 

e.g., schools, governmental offices, to name a few. 

Put simply, they are modern buildings with traditional 

looking roofs and decorations applied as signification 

of Thainess (figures 2-4). 

02 

03 


Pussadee Tiptus Pussadee Tiptus 

04 



06-a 

M.L.Piyalada Thaveeprungsriporn M.L.Piyalada Thaveeprungsriporn 

05 

06-b 

If the Conventional buildings are so purposefully 

Thai, those classified as Tropical Thai would therefore 

be ‘just’ so. The formal languages of these works are 

decidedly modern, yet with characteristic features that 

are responsive to the geographical and climatic particularities 

of the area. Pitched roofs with broad eaves, 

roofs with extra-long overhangs and sun-shading devices 

such as louvers, brise soleil, and masonry screens are 

featured prominently in these buildings, which belong 

mostly to the period between 1958-1972. In contrast 

to the deliberate symbolism of the Conventional, the 

Tropical’s sense of identity seemed perhaps more 

inherent and natural, although the screen designs in 

certain cases undoubtedly remind one of traditional 

Thai motifs (figures 5-7). 

02 Chakkrabongs Building, 

Bangkok (1932), by 

M.C.Iddhidepsan Kridakara 

03 Department of Customs 

by Department of Public 

Works 

04 Main Building, Thailand 

Tobacco Monopoly, 

Bangkok (1957), by Bhol 

Chulasewok 

05 Montien Hotel, Bangkok 

(1966), by Pol.Col.Kasem 

Busayasiri 

06-a - 06-b Indra Regent 

Hotel, Bangkok (1970), by Jira 

Silpakanok 

 


According to Vimolsiddhi et al, Conventional Thai 

style began sometime around 1938, while works in the 

Tropical Thai category appeared mostly during 1958- 

1972. The third category, Contemporary Thai, was only 

introduced around 1972 onward as a critical reaction 

against the allegedly superficial symbolism of the Conventional 

Thai style. Its primary goal was to capture the 

essential characteristics of traditional Thai architecture 

and reinterpret them through the language of modern 

design, materials and technology. Contemporary Thai 

designs, accordingly, should bear the spirit of Thainess 

without simply ‘copying’ from tradition. A few works 

in this category from 1970s which were deemed highly 

successful—e.g., Xavier Complex by Krisda Arunvongse 

(figure 8, 9), Wat Salaloy by Wirote Srisuro (figure 10) 

and Baan Parichat by Plan Architects—thus set a strong 

new direction for Thai architects today. 

M.L.Piyalada Thaveeprungsriporn 


08-a 


07 

08-b 




10 

09 

THE CONTEMPORARY SITUATION 

But what exactly is this ‘spirit of Thainess’ or the 

equally elusive Thai ‘essential characteristics’ that could 

be incorporated in Contemporary Thai architecture? 

Is there only one correct answer to such a ‘spirit’ or 

does it possess certain multiplicity due to the diverse 

and complex nature of Thai culture(s) itself? And this 

is yet to mention the intricacy involved in successfully 

and poetically reintroducing such qualities in modern 

design. How does one do it? Through forms, spatial 

orders, architectonic details, symbolism, materials and 

tectonic or what? The possibilities are endless as it 

seems. So it is only reasonable to look into the variety 

of contemporary designs to understand how Thai cultural 

identity may be manifest. Here the works are grouped 

into 2 main categories based on the way Thainess is 

achieved—namely, 1. through symbolic forms and 2. 

through spatial experiences—each of which contains 

sub-categories which will be explained accordingly. 

1. Thainess through Symbolic Forms 

Among all the Contemporary Thai works, ones which 

express cultural identity through symbolic forms seem 

most readily recognizable. These may be classified into 

two subcategories—those with ‘descriptive’ and ‘interpretive’ 

references respectively. Descriptive forms belong 

to architecture with relatively more ‘direct’ analogy to 

those of the past, typically with various degrees of 

simplification; they are ‘iconic’ signs of sorts. This may 

range from referencing one’s overall design to a traditional 

or vernacular architecture—i.e., designing the whole 

building or project to ‘look’ or ‘feel’ like the old—to introducing 

traditional or vernacular architecture as a part of 

whole project—i.e., creating a mixture between the old 

and new. Examples of the former are such as Tamarind 

Village and Rachamankha Hotel in Chiang Mai (figure 

11) by Ongard Satrabhandu, The Four Seasons, Chiang- 

Mai by Mathar Bunnag, and Arsom Silp Institute of the 

Arts by Arsom Silp, which would be readily recognized 

07 Bank of Thailand, Bangkok 

(1975), by Chuchawal De 

Weger International 

08-a - 08-b Xavier Church, 

Bangkok (1971), by Krisda 

Arunvongse Na Ayudhya 

09 Xavier Hall, Bangkok 

(1971), by Krisda Arunvongse 

Na Ayudhya 

10 Salaloy Temple, Nakon 

Ratchasima (1977), by Wirote 

Srisuro 

as ‘vernacular Thai’ yet with discerning eyes one can see 

the adeptly integrated modern details and spatial 

modification. As for the latter, examples of a mixture of 

traditional-looking and modern buildings include Sappaya 

Sapa Sthaan, the new parliament building project, by 

Arsom Silp and Tonsilp (figure 12) in which the architects 

employ tradition both in terms of conceptual symbolism 

and formal analogy, and Phuket Gateway by Idin 

Architects. Occasionally, traditional parts or patterns are 

adopted as thematic decorative elements in highly sleek 

modern designs. Noted works in this group include Sala 

Phuket by Department of Architecture and Nanda Heritage 

by Chat Architects. 

On the other hand, interpretive reference entails a 

less ‘direct’ and more ‘selective’ or ‘critical’ integration 

of tradition in modern design. It may involve both iconic 

and symbolic references. In certain cases, it involves 

adopting one or a variety of traditional motifs to be 

poetically interpreted in modern designs, a fine example 

of which is Mathar Bunnag’s The Barai in Hua Hin. Another 

example of this appropriation of a single motif, and in 

this case single materials, to be applied skillfully to an 

intriguing and dramatic effect is Kantana Film and 

Animation Institute by Boonserm Premthada. Although 

the expression of cultural identity through formal analogy 

may seem overtly direct and simple, it is relatively 

powerful and hence more readily communicable to the 

general public—i.e., those with no prior background in 

art and architecture. Simple as it may seem, to successfully 

re-create or re-interpret traditional forms in contemporary 

language requires in-depth knowledge and understanding 

of the traditional contexts and various factors 

influencing the aesthetic and architectonic forms, not 

to mention the proportion, order, and tectonic details. 

In fact, it is quite demanding in terms of aesthetic sensibility, 

an aesthetic taste. A slightly ‘off’ proportion or 

curve and one can immediately sense something is not 

right about the work. 

 


2. Thainess through Spatial Experiences 

Beside formal analogy, the sense of Thainess in 

contemporary design may also be expressed through 

its spatial experiences. Such experiences include the 

overall ambiences of the work, or its spatial qualities or 

characteristics, which are generated by the orchestration 

of the work’s spatial boundaries in particular ways. The 

cultural flavor in such cases may be more subtle and 

open to interpretation. Examples of works in this 

category are loosely divided into 2 groups—namely, 

those responding to ‘climatic’ and ‘tectonic’ aspects of 

Thai architecture respectively. At the outset, works in 

this category may seem to have little to do with anything 

cultural, particularly those climate-responsive ones. 

Indeed, not all climate-responsive works would project 

ambiences that one perceives as ‘Thai.’ Yet the ones 

which are successfully so seem to share certain architectonic 

features, the most expressive of which is 

perhaps the double skin. Notable works in this group 

are such as Buddhadasa Indapanno Archives (BIA) by 

Arsom Silp (figure 13), Boonlert Residence by BoonDesign 

and Patana Gallery by Studiomake. BIA, in particular, not 

only features the masonry screens on its façade, but 

also makes use of the open space on the building’s 

ground level reminiscent of the multipurpose tai toon 

space in the traditional Thai house. The screens of Boonlert 

Residence and Patana Gallery, although without an overt 

reference to tradition, generate lighting qualities that 

imbue the interior spaces with a poetic sensibility not 

too different from what one may find in a Thai house. 

On the other hand, Sun One by Department of Architecture 

and I-Canteen by Normal Studio, despite being 

unique works with poetic plays of light and shadows 

as well as captivating spatial configurations, are with 

somewhat less readily perceptible Thai flavor. 

The poetics of the making of architecture, the 

architec-tural tectonic, has been well celebrated in contemporary 

architectural thinking and practice. Yet works 

that focus on the tectonic of Thai architecture are 

perhaps the trickiest. Few examples are to be found. 

Among these are works by Suriya Umpansirirat and 

Ten House by CASE (Community Architects for Shelter 

and Environment). The latter is quite an interesting 

example whose financial constraints strip the work of any 

frivolous excess, resulting in a new ‘urban vernacular’— 

an architecture which reflects the urban Thai way of 

living at its barest, and perhaps purest, form. Meanwhile, 

Suriya’s works at Wat Wachirabanphot (Ubasika 

Residence, figure 14) and Wat Buddhakodom (Walled 

Monk’s Cell) play with the modes of making of spatial 

boundaries such as the floors, the walls and the roofs 

to a great effect, resulting in unique ‘vernaculars’ with 

local flavors. 

As mentioned earlier, the notion of cultural identity 

or spirit is rather complex. It is no surprise, therefore, 

that in many works, more than one ‘techniques’ were 

used to establish a sense of identity. Tiptus House by 

Pussadee and Bunyawat Tiptus and Pirast Patcharasawate’s 

House by East Architects (figure 15) are 

outstanding examples of those inspired by traditional 

form and spatial organization, while also exploring 

tropical design and contemporary tectonic. 

11 Rachamankha, Chiang Mai 

(2001), by Ongard Satrabhandu 

12 Sappaya Sapa Sthaan, 

Bangkok (competition 2009), 

by Arsom Silp and Tonsilp 

13 Buddhadasa Indapanno 

Archives (BIA), Bangkok 

(2009) by Arsom Silp 

14 Ubasika Residence, Chonburi, 

by Suriya Amphansirirat 

15 Pirast Patcharasawate’s 

House, Bangkok (2001), by 

East Architects 

 

 

 

 

 

11 

12 

13 

courtesy the architect courtesy the architect 




courtesy the architect 

15 

14 

EPILOGUE 

Architecture has long been recognized as an embodiment 

of the very identity and spirit of its dwellers. 

As we undergo the extreme flow in the age of globalization, 

however, the notion of ‘who we are’ as a direct 

correlation to ‘where we are’ becomes less and less 

distinct. As such, the notion of architecture as an expression 

of self and its cultural identity has never been 

more in question. At a closer look, however, we begin 

to realize the nuances and details of our daily lives that 

are still very much culturally situated. Like it or not, the 

‘Thainess’ in us is still at work in various ways, the very 

sense which manifests itself in many cultural and artistic 

outputs. In architecture, the works outlined here are 

by no means inclusive. Nevertheless, they help provide 

a big picture of how ‘Thainess’ is articulated in contemporary 

architectural practice. In general, symbolic forms 

still play a significant role as they are most readily efficient. 

As such, in projects where cultural identity ‘sells’ or is 

particularly valued—resort hotels, government buildings, 

for example—symbolic forms are often involved. What is 

encouraging is the large variety of cultural references 

in use; they are not only limited to classical Thai architecture, 

but inclusive of the vernaculars from different 

parts of Thailand as well, thus enriching the contemporary 

architecture scene with the abundance of design 

resources. Also, with various degrees of analysis 

and interpretation at work, the outcomes look rather 

promising. As for works that focus on the overall spatial 

experiences brought about by tropical design and 

tectonic considerations, the ‘Thainess’ achieved may 

be less ‘guaranteed.’ Yet, they provide alternatives that 

are perhaps more spontaneous and contextual. Either 

way, what these works seem to share is the architects’ 

passion to make their works stand out from the rest. 

After all, what ‘Thainess’ is may not matter as much as 

the way it lends itself as design inspiration. 

 


During the first half of the twentieth century, architecture 

in Thailand, although largely productive, partly 

suffered from the lack of theoretical inquiry. Architecture 

was championed as a practical and political art. While 

this approach has made architecture open, democratic 

and socially concerned, it has also created an attitude 

in which making and doing architecture become more 

important than inquiring and understanding what it is 

that is being done. Such approach implies a triumph 

of pragmatic doctrine over theoretical inquiry. In other 

words, Thai architectural discourse during the first half 

of the twentieth century simply de-emphasized the 

thinking while underscored the making process. 

However, during the second half of the twentieth 

century, architectural practice in Thailand has shifted its 

emphasis and given priority to questioning again what 

architecture is, how it may be defined, how it is created, 

and what are its aspirations. As these questions are 

set as the basic premises of architectural practice, it 

enables architects to understand buildings in relation to 

socio-cultural specificities of their places. This explains 

why the last twenty years have seen tremendous 

changes in the discipline of architectural theory and 

practice. As graduate programs in architecture have 

multiplied, publishing houses specializing in architecture 

and related disciplines have also rapidly blossomed. 

Number of architectural publications went from scant 

to overwhelming. 

THREE MODES OF PRACTICE: FROM AUTONOMY 

TO ENGAGEMENT 

Throughout the twentieth century, Thai architectural 

discourse had been a matter of questioning about basic 

premises in architectural thought and practice, whether 

cultural, social, political, aesthetic or symbolic. In response 

to modern globalization, the practice of ‘making’ 

and ‘understanding’ buildings in Thailand have been 

approached from various points of view. For example, 

one can assume and argue for architecture’s autonomy; 

that its form and geometry can be understood in their 

own right, as testimony of a designer’s intelligence or 

invention. Architecture is, then, approached as the subject 

matter of aesthetic delight not unlike the way we view 

paintings or appreciate music. On the other hand, one 

can disavow the supposed autonomy of form and discover 

behind a building’s dimensions, geometry and 

overall appearance the influence of broader cultural 

conditions, whether technological, social, or economic, 

not unlike the way we view political arguments and 

choices. On this second account, architecture is not an 

autonomous discipline but one that is fully engaged in 

many aspects of culture. Between these two approaches, 

architecture can also be considered as communicative, 

conveying various meaning inherent in its spatial and 

formal configuration as well as its interaction with human. 

In our own process of absorbing modernity, these 

three ‘schools of thought’ have influenced Thai architectural 

discourse over the past hundred years and 

have shaped ways architects and theorists see buildings. 

Although there have also been other variations, perhaps 

these three schools of thought are among the most 

prevalent ways of practicing architecture, showing us 

how our built environments can be variously interpreted, 

either within the process of the erasure of national 

characteristics or the survival of unique national 

mentalities. 

AESTHETICS OF SPACE AND FORM 

This mode of architectural practice simply concerns 

with the way things are formed and appear. The pivotal 

architectural debate of the nineteenth century concerned 

the interplay of artistic symbolism with the new materials 

and constructional technology of industrial culture.But in 

the twentieth century began, similar questions reemerged 

as new materials and scientific analyses of 

living habits revolutionized building construction and 

appearance. While this had encouraged architectural 

production based on the characteristics of a public 

technological society, artistic theories also cultivated 

an aesthetic of private subjectivity. The result was the 

attempt to understand and order modern built culture 

through both technological rulings and the individual 

imagination. Central to the investigation of modern 

identity was the creation of spaces, forms, and surfaces 

of the buildings. 

THAI FUNDAMENTAL 

‘SCHOOL OF 

THOUGHT’ 


In general, modes of experience by which one 

comes to terms with reality can be distinguished as 

perceptual and conceptual cognition; the former is based 

mainly on visual experience, while the latter is arrived 

at through a process of abstraction, the conceptual 

ordering of perceptual data. If the intellect operates 

through the faculty of concepts, perception take place 

in the realm of visual imagination or ideas. But unlike 

the nineteenth century approach that sometimes 

regarded the perceptual world as inferior to conceptual 

or abstract cognition, this mode of practice saw that 

bias toward conceptual thought could lead to the difficulty 

for anyone to develop the perceptual faculty. Thus this 

mode of practice sought to coordinate the objective 

rules and the subjective imagination. 

While this mode of practice appeared at the 

beginning of the 20 th century through the ‘strokes of 

geniuses’ of design masters, it reappeared again towards 

the end of the century in a completely different form. 

Objective rules were used to replace subjective imagination. 

The methods of diagrammatic analysis and 

mapping that lead to the generation of architectural 

spaces and forms can be seen as a result of this effort. 

Analytical diagrams or maps, which can be originated 

from multidisciplinary issues, act as a pretext to conceptual 

framework that creates architectural forms. In 

other words, before any spaces and forms take shape, 

designers need to analyze existing sets of information 

before they transform them into their own set of concepts 

and tools. Among many design methods, one example 

of this approach can be found in an adoption of biological 

theories to generate rule-based aggregated forms which 

can be manipulated and transformed by the designer’s 

conceptual framework. Through such process the link 

between objective data and subjective imagination is 

formed. This represents an argument in which architecture 

is described on a continuum between physicality 

and conceptuality, appearance and inner structure. Yet, 

this mode of thinking aims mainly at the generation of 

architectural spaces and forms. When architecture is 

addressed primarily through its perceptual and conceptual 

quality, it is seen an autonomous discipline revolving 

within its own internal affairs of designing, making and 

building. 

SEMANTIC MEANING OF BUILDINGS 

As the first mode of architectural practice focuses on 

how the building is formed and appears, the second 

mode turns to its semantic quality. 

Among its many facets, this mode of thinking can 

be characterized by its search for meaning. In other words 

the emphasis on the appearances was replaced by the 

search for the inner meaning of things. We may recognize 

what lies before our eyes as an object, but such object 

may suggest something beyond its appearance. In other 

words, an architectural or art form may carry within its 

externality an internal symbolic meaning that a trained 

eye can decipher. In order to discuss its meanings, art 

and architecture was inevitably related to other cultural 

discourses such as literature, anthropology or sociology. 

More often than not, this approach partakes not only in 

TEXT 

Assoc. Prof. Tonkao 

Panin, Ph.D. 

the meaning of forms but also of actions. The meaning 

of drawings, models or buildings, for example, lies in 

their subject matters as much as in ways which they 

are represented. While figurative objects in architectural 

drawings convey stories, various methods that the 

drawings are made also convey the mentality in which 

the stories are portrayed. Both the objects and the 

methods can be seen as two interrelated systems of 

symbolism in architectural and artistic production. 

With this mode of thinking, everything means 

something and nothing means nothing. Unlike the 

conventional semantic research that focused on the 

scholastic reading of meaning that usually requires 

knowledgeable interpretation, this mode of practice 

also leads to the semantic approach of environmental 

study. If artistic creation can be read through its figurative 

and methodic aspects, architecture and our environment 

are also communicative that only through a semantic 

study of environment we can discover the means of 

discoursing in our building. In other words, people are 

only aware most obscurely of the forces working in 

them, forces which are fed on memory and association. 

Not similar to ways figurative paintings are read, but 

people feel rightly that those forces can only propitiated 

and purged through objects which carry some reference 

to which they may respond in the very moment of 

perception. In other words, every moment of perception 

contains a whole personal and collective past, our body 

is the incarnation of that past; and with every moment 

of perception this past is reordered and revalued. 

This search for meaning is thus translated into two 

interrelated levels of analysis, the first aiming at an 

understanding of inherent meaning each and every object 

convey, while the second sets goal to understand 

the larger structure of a place or built environment. 

Such thinking, when employed in architectural design, 

is often translated into the process of syntactic analysis 

of both the design object and the context. In order for 

any design objects to be developed, the kernel of their 

forms needs to go through analogical transformation 

based on the meaning they are to convey. Moreover, 

every object has to be read and re-read in relation to 

the structure of the place in which it is belonged. Architecture 

and built environment in this sense, is seen as 

a language with inherent syntax that may vary according 

to specific circumstances and goals. Examples of 

this mode of production lies not only in memorial designs, 

but also in other architectural constructs that see themselves 

as a part of a larger social and cultural context, 

including works of contemporary urban analysis. Instead 

of asking how things appear like in the first mode of 

critical theory, it asks why things appear the way they do, 

and what may result if things are organized differently. 

If for the first mode of practice, human perception 

is the center of architectural experience, it is only located 

in the here-and-now moment that prevent such perception 

to be related to any meaning beyond its physical 

present. But for this second approach, human perception 

does not begin and end in itself. Perception always 

contains a past in the present depth, allowing us to 

understand the meaning of all things. 

 


.. 

 

 

 

 

IDEOLOGIES, CULTURE AND POLITICS 

During the second half of the twentieth century in 

Thailand, political stances as well as economic situations 

became the major issues that penetrated most educational 

discourses. Questions are; in a society that 

fundamentally changed, can architecture continue to 

derive its meaning from the same strategies as elaborated 

during the first half of the century, or should a 

new definition of architectural practice be developed? 

As social and cultural preoccupations shifted and different 

questions were being asked, it became irrelevant to 

seek for meanings within the closed discipline of art 

and architecture. Thus architects and theorist were 

obliged to disavow the supposed autonomy of form 

and discover behind a building’s dimensions, geometry 

and overall appearance the influence of broader cultural 

conditions, whether technological, social, or economic, 

not unlike the way we view political arguments and 

choices. Architecture was no longer an autonomous 

discipline but became one that was fully engaged in 

many aspects of culture. Architecture thus responds to 

broader cultural issues outside its own aesthetic and 

semantic preoccupations. 

While the semantic mode of architectural practice 

tries to read the meaning of architectural production, 

this ideological mode is concerned with social, political, 

economic as well as intellectual contexts that would 

provide a broad understanding of the type of representation 

that shaped the entire era. In other words, it is 

ot the representation itself that this mode of thinking 

is preoccupied with, but the context which produced 

such representation. Among the arts, architecture has 

a special position. Painting and sculptures, for example, 

are autonomous works of art that can be enjoyed in 

the isolated atmosphere of the museum.But such is 

not the case for architecture for it is only partially related 

to the world of artisans. Primarily it produces a technical 

and social product, as buildings perform a function 

within any given society. Thus for this mode of critical 

theory, architecture will always contain a tension between 

ethics and aesthetics. Architects may have to let go 

parts of their artistic and formal ambitions and focus 

on the possibilities offered by society. 

This mode of thinking is often characterized by 

projects that press great emphasis on the subject 

matters and their transformation into built products. 

Such subject matters are often framed by broader social 

and cultural issues rather than architectural functions, 

aesthetics or symbolic meanings. Architectural programs 

are vital as a vehicle where it is most possible to work 

between theory and practice, allowing students to 

develop conceptual thinking to critique or to reinvent 

the brief itself. Writings of various fields are often set 

as pretext to each project in order to create architecture 

that not only ‘appears’ and ‘means’ but also ‘fits.’ In 

other words, the production of architecture is not only 

to generate forms and meanings but has to be considered 

in relation to social and cultural framework of the 

place and time. As for theoretical research, approaching 

it from this mode of thinking differs from conventional 

history/theory method in a way that sites or subjects 

of study are not only investigated and researched, but 

they are often critiqued and intervened in order to find 

relevant implications in current architectural design issues. 

ARCHITECTURAL PRACTICE AND INTER- 

DISCIPLINARITY 

Dividing Thai architectural practice during the 20 th 

century into three different modes does not mean that 

they were being practiced and taught separately. The 

three modes of aesthetic, semantic and ideological 

approaches may also work together to create a new set 

of questions. Yet, despite their differences, these modes 

of practice were transformed at the beginning of the 

21 st century into something common which lies in their 

interdisciplinarity. In most academic context, the terms 

mutidisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity are often interchangeable. 

Yet at the core of their methods, the two 

notions are different. Mutidisciplinarity refers to a way 

of working where a number of disciplines are present 

but maintain their own distinct identities and ways of 

doing things. Interdisciplinairy, on the other hand, allows 

individuals to move between disciplines and in so doing 

question the ways in which they work. In other words, 

it is more of a collaboration that the emphasis is less 

on disciplinary distinctions and more on how different 

disciplines work together towards end points through 

mutual consent. 

While contemporary Thai architecture still rests 

within aesthetic, semantic and ideological modes of 

practice, multiple disciplines are much more engaged, 

whether artistic, scientific, anthropological, social, cultural, 

political or economic. This means current architectural 

practice in Thailand requires a mode of thinking that is 

not restricted to only one professional field. It occupies 

a place in-between where movement or methodology 

between theory and practice cannot be linear. Thus, 

practice can be seen a three dimensional web of relationship 

between disciplines that call into questions 

what we normally take for granted. At times, this web 

of interdisciplinarity may require that we question our 

methodologies, the way we do things, our terminologies. 

Each historical moment offers a particular set of 

conditions, depending on their own circumstances, 

and each person takes a different point of view. In many 

ways, the emerging practice of critical theory may unite 

theory and practice as a transformative, although 

difficult, way of working which is rigorous, reflective, 

creative, productive as well as critical. 

Understanding these different architectural 

approaches may help us understand the forces that 

have helped shape the history of Thai architectural 

discipline. Both theory and practice characterize the way 

others performed architectural thinking in the past, which 

is indispensable in shaping our future. They are at a 

distance to us in that their historical context becomes 

essential to understand them. Yet, they are present in 

that they stand in front of us as partial answers to the 

questions we ask ourselves today. 



THEME ASA 57







FUNDAMENTALS 

ARCHITECTURE NOT ARCHITECTS 

14 INTERNATIONAL 

ARCHITECTURE EXHIBITION 

VENICE, ITALY 2014 

EXHIBITION DESIGNER 

LEK MATHAR BUNNAG 

DESIGN PRODUCTION AND INSTALLATION 

BUNNAG ARCHITECTS INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANTS BANGKOK, THAILAND 

TEAM MEMBERS 

LEK MATHAR BUNNAG, LOUISA KA FUNG BUNNAG, NOOK THAWEE KHAMKITI, 

AON PANDARI PHUTHARARAK, KORN NARAKORN THANAKHUN, THAT SUTHAT PHONPUAK, 

SRI BOONSRI KAMCHAN, AIKE AIYARIN JANTANKAEW, PUN PUNIKA CHAIYAWAT, 

ARM YOTSARET BANCHAKORN, SAWIT PHANNARANGSRI, BOM PHAKAPHOL CHINBURI, 

JAI SEMONE BUNNAG, SOMMAI TUBTHONG, THONGDANG MEEPO, PORNPIMON PIUMPONGSUK 

COMMISSIONERS 

ASSOCIATION OF SIAMESE ARCHITECTS UNDER ROYAL PATRONAGE (SMITH OBAYAWAT) 

OFFICE OF CONTEMPORARY ART AND CULTURE, MINISTRY OF CULTURE (KHEMCHAT THEPCHAI) 

CURATOR 

LEK MATHAR BUNNAG 

DEPUTY CURATORS 

TONKAO PANIN, M.L. PIYALADA THAVEEPRUNGSRIPORN, PIRASRI POVATONG 

COLLABORATORS 

PRAWEEN CHUSILP, STRUCTURAL ENGINEER 

ASSISTANTS OF THE COMMISSIONERS 

VIMOLLUCK CHUCHAT, SOMPORN PHANTHONG, 

PORNPAS SIRICURURATANA, THRERAYUT SWITASHART, SALILA TRAKULVECH 

WITH THE SUPPORT OF 

TCC CAPITAL LAND LIMITED 

SCG BUILDING MATERIALS CO., LTD 

SIAM PIWAT CO., LTD 

SIAM SINDHORN CO., LTD 

WEBSITE 

WWW.THAIARCHVENICE.ORG 

CONTACT 

FORIEGNAFFAIRS@ASA.OR.TH 

THAIARCHVENICE@GMAIL.COM 

WWW.ASA.OR.TH 

WWW.OCAC.GO.TH 


01 

POLICIES AND PRESENTATION 

FOR THE VENICE BIENNALE 

THE EVOLUTION OF 

THAILAND’S PARTICIPATION 

TEXT 

Asst. Prof. Apiradee 

Kasemsuk, Ph.D. 

PHOTOS 

01, 03, 05 

Chanida Lumtaweepaisal 

02, 04 

Nuttinee Karnchanaporn 


Asst. Prof. Apiradee 

Kasemsuk, Ph.D. 

 

- 

 

‘’ 

12, 13 14 

( ) 

 

 

 

 

 

- 

 

 

The Association of Siamese Architects under Royal 

Patronage in partnership with the Office of Contemporary 

Art and Culture, Ministry of Culture, has selected works 

representing Thailand to be shown at the International 

Architecture Exhibition over several years i.e. 12 th , 13 th 

and 14 th in Venice, Italy which is hereafter called the 

Venice Biennale. In these three exhibitions, each participating 

work and presentation was totally different. 

This was probably the result of implementation policies 

and the way each work was developed to fit with the 

situation at each time. Therefore, the interrelationships 

between the policies and the presentations of the exhibitions, 

including the history of the exhibition implementations, 

should be recorded here for the benefit of the 

future organizer of this exhibition. 


12 .. 2010 : 

Director Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa 

12 

 

 

( 

) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

() () 2 

 

8 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

80 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1, 2 3 

5 

 

 

( 

 

) ( 

) 

 

01 12 

.. 2010 

 

8 

 

- 

( 

) 

- 

2-3 

 

8 8 

 

 

 

- 

 

- 

 

 

 

 

1, 2 3 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30 

 

THE 12 TH EXHIBITION IN 2010 

PRESIDENT OF THE ASSOCIATION OF SIAMESE ARCHITECTS I 

 

THAWEEJIT CHANDRASAKH I 

VICE PRESIDENT I 

CHALAY KUNAWONG I 

DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF CONTEMPORARY ART AND CULTURE I 

 

PRISSANA PONG-TADSIRIKUL I 

CURATORS I 

APIRADEE KASEMSOOK AND NATTHINEE KACHANAPORN I 

 

CURATING TEAM I 

CHARTCHALERM KLEOPATTINONT, KOMKRIT THANAPET AND SOMPIT FUSAKUL 

I 

 


THE 12 TH EXHIBITION IN 2010 : 

DIRECTOR KAZUYO SEJIMA & RYUE NISHIZAWA 

The 12 th Venice Biennale International Architecture 

Exhibition was the first time that the Association of 

Siamese Architects (ASA) had been involved in its organization. 

The exhibition was not well-known among 

architects (which was different from the Venice Biennale 

International Art exhibition which was well-known among 

artists). Therefore, in organizing this exhibition, the ASA 

encouraged various Association members to participate 

and to use this event as a stage to provide opportunities 

and to introduce young architects to international architecture 

standards. 

As a means of organizing the event, the ASA chose 

a competition, organized into two rounds. In the first 

round, competitors designed a concept. Eight concepts 

were selected from the competition entries and each 

of these received funding to develop their concept for 

the second and final round. In this final round, competitors 

presented a scale model that could actually be used. 

This was the basis for the final judging at the ASA event. 

Each of the two rounds had the same judging panels 

with the final round including an additional expert who 

joined the panel. This expert had prior experience in 

organizing the Venice Biennale Art exhibition and was 

therefore invited to be the president of the judging panel. 

The Association appointed a subcommittee to be responsible 

for the organization of the exhibition. 

On this occasion, the competition attracted around 

80 participants, but the final judging committee considered 

that only a limited number of quality entries were received 

in terms of concept and the possibility in realizing these 

into models. This was partly explained by most of the 

entries being works from young architects, many of 

whom rarely had working experience, and also the fact 

that the participants did not fully understand the rationales 

of the Venice Biennale Architecture Exhibition. Additionally, 

the quality of materials used in making the models for 

the final contest were not of a high enough standard, 

which could be a result of the entrants having received 

limited funding from the ASA. However, the judging 

panels selected the winners for 1 st , 2 nd and 3 rd prizes as 

well as five other entrants who were awarded merit prizes. 

Freighting costs were a key issue, as was the tight 

time frame for dispatching the works to the exhibition 

in Italy. Airfreight costs were very high and sea freight 

would require more than three months time. The large 

size of the works would command even higher costs 

if they were to be dispatched by airfreight. After discussion, 

the exhibition subcommittee agreed that they needed 

to revise the plan for sending all eight pieces of physical 

works to be displayed at the exhibition. Instead, it was 

decided to substitute exhibiting the works with a short 

film. Each of the eight pieces of the final works were 

set up in a venue in Bangkok which the owners of the 

works believed would express their concept at its best. 

For the convenience of shooting, each work was mixed 

with computer graphics showing the relationships and 

the changes between the locations. Each short film was 

about 2-3 minutes in length. 

02 13 

.. 2012 

03 12 

.. 2010 

These eight short films were presented at the 

actual exhibition through eight monitors with a map of 

Bangkok functioning as a base to connect the eight films 

together. There was also a map of Bangkok and the title 

of the exhibition which functioned as a background. 

The entrance for the exhibition was located at the front, 

so that the films could be viewed continuously or each 

film could also be viewed individually. Overall, the display 

was rather modest as befitting for a small country that 

was participating in the exhibition for the first time. 

However, the exhibition looked bare because of its nature 

which displayed the works with monitors. Also, the 

organizer decided to situate the main walkway directly 

in the middle of the exhibition layout and this divided 

the exhibition into two sections. 

The winners of the 1 st , 2 nd and 3 rd awards received 

funding to visit the Venice Biennale and participate in the 

opening of the exhibition; thus, about ten architects could 

experience the Venice Biennale International Architecture 

exhibition. At the exhibition opening, the number of 

press and media representatives and audience members 

exceeded expectations. This may have been in response 

to the occasion being the first time that some countries 

had participated in the event, or could also have been 

partially due to the fact that Thai food was also served. 

An estimated 30 Thais and Thai architects visited the 

exhibition during the show. 




 

SMITH OBAYAWAT I 


TONKAO PANIN I 


 

CHAI NAKORNCHAI I 

CURATORS I 

APIRADEE KASEMSOOK AND NATTHINEE KANCHANAPORN I 

 


KHAISRI PAKSOOKCHAROEN, TONKAO PANIN, WIRAT PANTHAPANKUL AND 

NARONGWIT AREEMIT I 

 

13 .. 2012 : 

Director David Chipperfield 

02 

 

 

 

 

 

4 

 

- 

9 

 

 

 

5 

 

 

 

- 

 

8 - 

 

 

- 

 

 

 

 

03 

 


13 TH EXHIBITION IN 2012: 

DIRECTOR DAVID CHIPPERFIELD 

 

 

 

 

- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

200 

 

 

 

 

04 13 

.. 2012 

05 12 

.. 2010 

The rationales of the Association of Siamese Architects 

(ASA) in organizing this exhibition was to encourage 

various groups to participate, to show the variety of 

architecture work in Thailand and to establish a partnership 

to financially support the organization of this exhibition. 

Four groups of architects participated in this exhibition 

to show their works. The first group was a well-established 

architectural firm whose group of partners fully 

supported the financial expenditure of dispatching their 

works. This group consisted of nine firms, each of which 

submitted one piece of work. The second group was 

a group of five young architectural firms who were 

finalists in the Design competition ‘Plaza’ in honor of 

His Majesty the King. This second group of partners 

contributed one third of the costs for dispatching their 

work to the exhibition and exhibited their works in a 

set, each set having three pieces relating to the design 

contest. The third group was from the Faculties of 

Architecture from eight state and private universities 

both in Bangkok and outlying provinces. This group of 

partners also financially supported the costs for dispatching 

their works to the exhibition. Each faculty 

submitted one piece of work. The fourth group was 

comprised of a selection from the entries of the design 

concept competition. The Architectural Association 

underwrote the dispatch costs for the selected works, 

but the group had to cover their own costs for making 

their works. 

The subcommittee set a limit on the size and weight 

of each work using the standard dimensions of international 

airfreight packaging. This became necessary, 

as there were many works and limited funding for 

the freighting, installation, exhibition and electricity 

costs as well as the fees for security and flood safety 

insurance. 

The exhibition format involved the displaying of 

works on plinths with overhead lighting and the subcommittee 

discussed various styles of exhibition layout. 

Eventually, it was agreed that setting a standard size 

and display format might limit creativity but could help 

to control the quality of the work. Although the quality 

still varied, it was superior to that of the previous 

exhibition. 

For viewing, the exhibition frontage was opened 

up to a width of over ten meters with the wall of the 

building serving as a background for the exhibition. 

This made it easier for spectators to view and access 

the exhibition. The content of the exhibition was varied 

and clearly reflected the set policies. As many works 

were displayed, some audience members chose to view 

only some of the works. The organizer had improved 

the layout of the space and instead of dividing the 

exhibition space into two sections by the walkway as 

in the previous year, the exhibition space was set in a 

singular space. This allowed for every work to be shown 

together, and made the overall exhibition space seem 

bigger. 


Apart from this, the number of participants increased. 

This was the direct result of the increased number of 

Thai architects participating in the event. This made the 

exhibition from Thailand more exciting and lively. Having 

many partners involved in the project also brought a 

large audience to the exhibition stemming from both 

the participants themselves and their friends. It was 

estimated that up to 200 attendees came to the exhibition. 

This showed that the exhibition met the policy aims of 

publicizing the Venice Biennale International Architecture 

Exhibition to Thai architects and to the members of the 

Association of Siamese Architects. However, the impact 

of the exhibition still did not reach expectations. 

04 

05 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


14 TH EXHIBITION IN 2014 : 

DIRECTOR REM KOOLHAAS 



 

SMITH OBAYAWAT I 


TONKAO PANIN I 


 

KHEMCHART THEPCHAI I 

CURATOR I 

MATHAR BUNNAG I 


TONKAO PANIN, M.L.PIYALADA DEVAKUL THAVEEPRUNGSRIPORN AND PIRASRI 

POVATONG I 

This year’s policy was to show works of National 

Artists in Architecture. The Association of Siamese 

Architects invited Mr. Mathar Bunnag to manage the 

exhibition, who served as both the curator and an artist 

as well. The subcommittee helped in coordinating the 

project and the exhibition was unified and consistent. 

The composition and lighting control was well done 

(but for this writer was rather dim). Moreover, with content 

focused on the abstract, some of the audience who 

had not read the catalogue beforehand may not have 

been able to understand the exhibition. Furthermore, 

as the exhibition was rather confined, some people 

might reluctant to enter. However, the features of the 

exhibition were much different from other exhibitions 

making it ‘easier on the eye’ than the heavy content 

of other exhibitions. 

There were many invited guests from Europe 

and a group of students and alumni from the Faculty 

of Architecture, Silpakorn University and from the Faculty 

of Architecture and Design of King Mongkut’s University 

of Technology, Thonburi in attendance. This made for a 

lively opening similar to the opening of the 13 th exhibition, 

but it is uncertain whether a greater number of Thai 

architects attended the exhibition than the previous 

year during its display period. (This year the exhibition 

was extended up to six months, which was double the 

usual duration). 

The details of these three exhibitions reflect the 

relationships between the policies and presentations 

of the exhibitions organized by the Association of Siamese 

Architects and their success through the numbers of 

Thai audience members who participated and attended. 

The question is, what direction should the policy direction 

of the Architectural Association take for the organization 

of the 15 th exhibition? The aim would be to create more 

impact in publicizing the importance of the Venice 

Biennale International Architecture exhibition to both 

the association’s members as well as the overall society, 

and also to encourage more participants and audience 

members to participate in the exhibition. 

06 

 

 

 

 



964 4 

30000 

T. +66 44327061 / +66 861465089 

F. +66 44327239 

E. buafoam@gmail.com 

www.e-d.co.th / www.buabau.com 

ELITE DECOR 

 

EPS 

 

EPS 

 

 

 

 

 

EPS 

 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

 

• 

• 

• 

 

• 

 

• 

• 

• 2,4 

• 

()

FUNDAMENTALS 

01 

TEXT 

Asst. Prof. Pirasri 

Povatong, Ph.D. 

PHOTOS 

Giorgio Zucchiatti 

Francesco Galli 

Italo Rondinella 

Courtesy la Biennale 

di Venezia 

8 .. 2013 

.. 2014 

Rem Koolhaas 

OMA 

.. 2014 

 

.. 1914 

Rem Koolhaas (theme) 

Fundamentals 

() 

 

 

 

 

Rem Koolhaas 

.. 2014 

 

2 

Absorbing Modernity: 1914-2014 Elements of 

Architecture 

On the 8 th January 2013, the committee of la Biennale 

di Venezia 2014 chose Rem Koolhaas, thesuperstar 

architect, contemporary architecture academician and 

the founder of architectural firm OMA (Office for Metropolitan 

Architecture) to serve as the curator of this 2014 

International Architecture Exhibition. This celebrated 

exhibition has been held continuously in Venice, Italy 

since 1914, making this year the centennial occurrence 

of the celebrated event. That being so, Koolhaas decided 

that the main theme for this latest Venice Biennale 

exhibition should be ‘Fundamentals’ under the hypothesis 

that, in the last 100 years of globalization, architectures 

that were once specific and local have become 

interchangeable and global due to the clashing of cultures 

along with the fast growth of technological advancements, 

resulting in a new architectural language for 

modern and contemporary architecture that is exhausted 

and unimaginative. Koolhaas therefore wanted the 

Venice Biennale 2014 to function as a form of research 

and present information on said phenomenon that 

have occurred over the past 100 years in two aspects 

defined as ‘Absorbing Modernity: 1914-2014’ and 

‘Elements of Architecture.’ 


01 Central Pavilion 

02 Giardini 

ABSORBING MODERNITY: 1914-2014 

Koolhaas 

 

 

 

- 

(universal, 

modern language of architecture) - 

 

 

Koolhaas 

 

‘’ (pavilion) 

 

 

 

Koolhaas 

 

Elements of 

Architecture Koolhaas 

 

Koolhaas 

 

 

 

 

 

( 

) 

Koolhaas 

 

 

 

‘’ 

 

(modernization) 

 

 

 

 

Koolhaas 

02 

 


ABSORBING MODERNITY: 1914-2014 

For the first aspect of the exhibition, Koolhaas has 

specified that each country should study and present 

information regarding the transformation of architecture 

throughout the past century under the hypothesis 

that, during the last 100 years, it once made sense to 

talk about how a specific characteristic of any nation’s 

architecture has developed into a universal, modern 

language of architecture with similar terms and glossary 

as well as an interchangeable universal aesthetic. 

The globalization process is also the cause of significant 

encounters resulting in the clashing of cultures 

across the world. Koolhaas intended to point out this 

keystone under the context of the Biennale exhibition 

that will be exhibiting pavilions from multi-nations 

under said hypothesis that the architectural identity of 

every nation has been blurred and fused into a new, 

modern architectural language. Koolhaas is interested 

in the formation of this modern architectural language 

that has been analyzed and explained through his 

study and curation of the most significant aspect of 

this year’s Biennale, the ‘Elements of Architecture’ 

exhibition. In other words, Koolhaas is not primarily 

concerned with how each country will present the 

story of their development in architecture, because he 

has already concluded that, in the end, architects from 

all around the world are using the same architectural 

language, the same set of forms, structures, systems, 

and the same architectural elements (such as the floor, 

the wall the roof, the door, windows, toilet, stairs, 

elevators, ramp, etc.). 

Furthermore, Koolhaas is very aware of the complexity 

within the evolution of the modern architectural 

language and has emphasized that each country 

should focus on this intricacy. The battle between national 

identity and the “desire for modernity,” cultural 

exchange, technological developments and modernization 

in the architectural field is a phenomenon that 

began worldwide simultaneously. Each country has 

its own historical context, politics and different rates 

of development; however, they all end with the same 

outcome which has, according to Koolhass, later 

become known as contemporary architecture. 

03 Balcony 

04 Introduction 

05 From book for 

architects 

06 FaÇade 

03 


05 

04 

ELEMENTS OF ARCHITECTURE 

Koolhaas - 

(elements) 

15 

(façade) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Koolhaas 

(micro histories) 

 

‘’ 

Koolhaas 

‘’ 

 

 

 

Koolhaas 

‘’ 

‘’ 

‘’ 

 

Elements of 

Architecture Koolhaas 

- 

- 

 

 

 

 

Koolhaas 

- 

 

 

 

 

(linear progression 

of history) 

- 

Elements of Architecture 

 

‘’ 

 

(infographic) 

Koolhaas 


 


ELEMENTS OF ARCHITECTURE 

For this aspect of the exhibition, Koolhaas 

proposed that architectures of the present day are 

composed of a total of around 15 elements including 

the floor, wall, ceiling, roof, door, windows, facade, 

terrace, path, furnace, toilet, stairs, escalator, elevator, 

and ramp. Throughout the past millennia, humans have 

invented an immense amount of these architectural 

elements even though the cultural context, economy, 

or the technical sciences may differ between different 

regions. According to Koohaas, all architecture is 

essentially composed of these basic elements. Therefore, 

he focused the first aspect of the exhibition on 

the study and analysis of the micro histories of each of 

these elements, hence returning to ‘fundamentals’ of 

architecture at a radical scale. The approach satisfies 

another wish of Koolhaas for the exhibition to take a 

more holistic approach toward architecture rather than 

focusing on specific architects’ works, especially internationally 

renowned architects who are often given 

the opportunity to design buildings and participate in 

these kinds of exhibitions. Koolhaas saw that these 

elements are the ‘fundamentals’ of architecture from 

each era and are comparable to ‘words’ in languages 

that architects must learn in order to understand. By 

bringing these ‘words’ together, they can be arranged 

in the format of the story that they wish to tell. 

Keeping that objective in mind, the ‘Elements of 

Architecture’ exhibition Koolhaas has curated is more 

about gathering an enormous amount of information 

regarding these fundamental architectural elements 

and focusing on the diverse, complex and long, recurring 

evolutionary process of architecture. Additionally, 

the approach taken also points out the important 

function that these elements will play in further 

contributing to the advancement of architecture in the 

new age. The information about all the elements has 

been presented in a disorderly fashion, as intended 

by Koolhaas, in order to reflect the complexity of 

the evolution of architecture throughout history. The 

spread of this influence in modern architecture was 

reminiscent of a wave, resulting in different responses 

being made and the subsequent history of architecture’s 

fundamental repertoire becoming confusing and 

chaotic. Unlike early writings regarding the history of 

architecture that seem to describe the content in a 

solely linear progression moving from era to era and 

presenting information in a format that while easy to 

comprehended is incapable of describing the highly 

complex development of modern architecture, the 

‘Elements of Architecture’ exhibition is reminiscent of 

a giant construction materials store or an exhibition 

about construction materials from around the world 

with no specific content or ‘message’ but rich with an 

abundance of information and attractive infographics 

signature to that which Koolhaas is known for. 

08 


07 Window 

08 Floor 

09 Toilet 

07 

09 

 


Elements of Architecture 

‘’ Koolhaas 

 

- 

 

 

 

 

‘’ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(uniqueness) 

 

 

 

Koolhaas 

 

 

 

Koolhaas 

2 (material side) 

(mechanical side) 

 

 

12 


10 Ramp 

11 Stair 

12 Roof 

13 Wall 

. . 

 

 

 

11 

10 

In conclusion, the ‘Elements of Architecture’ 

exhibition accomplishes in passing on the ‘message’ 

that Koolhaas intended to deliver, one aspect being 

about the direction in which construction materials 

and new building components, all of which seem to 

get more and more advanced each day, is moving 

toward, as well as considering how the combination 

of digital and technological developments are rapidly 

becoming an important component in an intelligent 

building. The second aspect focuses on the ways in 

which modern technology has had a significant impact 

on the movement of creativity and design in contemporary 

architecture and is much more than simply a 

‘tool’ for designing forms and space. While design 

theory is circling around the same ideas in regards 

to form and space, advanced technology, and digital 

technology especially, have aided tremendously in 

the development of structural and systematic works 

to a point where the architects’ abilities can no longer 

be reached. While architects are so concerned about 

creating a ‘unique’ design, they seem to be unaware 

that the architectural elements created by someone 

else are integrated into their own designs and fail to 

question or rethink the theory of arranging architectural 

elements in a new or better way. In other words, 

Koolhaas saw that architecture has a tendency to grow 

rapidly in terms of technical and systematic works in 

order to fulfill today’s needs for convenience, safety 

and sustainable development. However, in Koolhaas’ 

opinion, there are two sides to architecture of the 

present day - the ‘material side’ and the ‘mechanical 

side,’ both of which seem to be advancing at an astonishing 

rate even though very few architects pay much 

interest to or acknowledge the study of these aspects 

within the field’s advancement. 

13 

 


LA BIENNALE DI VENEZIA | 

BIENNALE ARCHITETTURA 2014 

HISTORY, KNOWLEDGE, 

AND BACK TO THE 

‘FUNDAMENTALS’ 

01 


Unlike any other year, this year’s Architecture 

Biennale is exceptionally informative as the event falls 

under the supervision of Rem Koolhaas as its curator. 

The direction of the exhibition has shifted from giving 

magnitude to renowned architects and looking forward 

into contemporary architecture of the future to looking 

back at how far we’ve come in terms of architectural 

advancement over the past 100 years. This shifted 

direction was reflected clearly across the exhibitions 

where Fundamentals and Monditalia are located 

as well as the National Pavilions (exhibitions from 

different nationalities) under the theme ‘Absorbing 

Modernity: 1914-2014. In short, Fundamentals, which 

was situated in the Central Pavilion area at Giardini, 

delved into the fundamental elements of architecture 

ranging from the floors, walls, ceiling, roof, doors, 

and windows to other elements. At the center of the 

exhibition at Arsenale is Monditalia, a projection that 

displays different dimensions of architecture through 

minor exhibits stemming from more than 41 research 

projects. These dimensions of architecture are 

fascinatingly presented and offer insight into many sub 

topics such as urbanization, social science, economy, 

geology and cultures of different regions both in Italy 

and Europe. 

TEXT + PHOTOS 

M.L. Piyalada 


01 Brazil | Modernity 

as Tradition 

02 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

02 

 


US pavilion OfceUS 

‘’ - 

 

‘’ 

 

 

 

 

In the Real World 

100 

 

‘’ 

- 

 

 

‘’ 

/ Swiss Pavilion 

Hans Ulrich Obrist Herzog & de Meuron 

‘’ 

 

100 

 

(interior) 

 

03 ‘There is Modernism 

in Latvia’ 

04 Belgium | Interiors, 

Notes and Figures 

05 Indonesia | 

Craftsmanship 

04 


03 

The ‘National Pavilions’ exhibition that was made 

under the same theme called ‘Absorbing Modernity: 

1914-2014’ is exceptionally captivating, especially for 

those interested in the evolution of contemporary 

architecture due to the fact that, as said earlier, Rem 

Koolhaas would like the audience to gaze into the past 

100 years of architectural history and understand the 

slow process of development into the new architectural 

language. A hundred years ago, architecture was 

once full of unique character and identity but it came 

down to the same modern architectural language of 

indistinguishable buildings that we see at present. It is 

hypothesized that the First World War was the beginning 

of this complex modern globalization process. 

This process is the clash between cultures, traditions, 

innovation, technology and the imperceptible ways of 

remaining “national” or, to conclude shortly, it is the 

process each country undergoes to brace itself into 

modernity. 

The given theme has made the national pavilions 

in this year’s exhibition particularly ‘informative’ as 

they are not limited to contemporary architecture only, 

such as previous years, but also include aspects of 

actual historical knowledge regarding the architecture 

of the past as well. Actually, Rem Koolhaas’ aim was 

for this year’s pavilions to function as a knowledge 

center, educating people about architecture across 

the world and offering a holistic view of the past 100 

years. One could say that the Architecture Biennale 

came back to its roots and gives weight to research 

and archiving like it used to for many years time. 

Furthermore, even though designed under the 

same theme, the pavilions appeared to be quite 

diverse making the exhibition even more interesting. 

A certain amount of these pavilions seemed to design 

strictly under the given subject and express the story 

quite clearly, although with a little design, of course. 

The countries that stood out in this style of presentation 

were The United States, Japan, Nordic countries, 

and Croatia to name a few. The US pavilion, or 

OfficeUS takes on the role of an ‘exporter’ of modern 

architecture for a renowned architect’s office as a 

prominent point and made an exhibition in the form of 

an ‘office’ exhibiting a database of architect’s offices 

and other buildings into a file that is displayed on the 

surrounding wall while the area in the middle emerged 

as an operating office, researching and collecting data 

simultaneously. The Japanese pavilion, ‘In The Real 

World’ was designed in the form of a warehouse storing 

information regarding architecture of the past 100 

years and focusing especially on the manners in which 

many architects embarked on solving issues that were 

affecting the ‘city’ of Japan. 

Another group of pavilions chose to present the 

modernization process by interpreting the message 

they want to pass through the ‘design’ of the pavilion 

itself, and not presenting the ‘information’ directly. 

Some of the exhibitions in this type of presentation 

include the works of superstar architects and artists 

such as the Swiss Pavilion by Hans Ulrich Obrist and 

Herzog & de Meuron. Other exhibitions chose to 

‘summarize’ modernity through a captivating display 

such as the pavilion from Belgium that captured the 

shared traits of the spaces inside homes over the 

last 100 years in a powerful presentation or the Spain 

Pavilion that chose to present the interior space as a 

medium that holds and integrates modernity and 

tradition together. 

The most commonly seen types of pavilions were 

those that drew upon both the use of information and 

design equally to tackle the topic. They came in many 

different styles, however, and some chose to 

disintegrate the information components from the 

symbolic structure and display them side-by-side clearly, 

such as the pavilion from Kosovo where one side of 

the wall is pasted with postcards sharing information 

about local architecture of Kosovo while the other 

side is a space formed by a 3-legged wooden horse 

representing the sense of simplicity that exists among 

a chaotic change. Is it possible that new creations will 

be created from old and simple objects such as those 

of wooden horses. 

The French, German, Serbian, Brazilian, and Indonesian 

pavilions were other great examples, for these 

pavilions fused content and design together very well. 

This group captured the core information of their own 

individual modernization processes and brought forth 

the information through design. The various ways of 

exhibit made these pavilions quite interesting and 

exciting. Other pavilions also used new technology to 

present their information in many new dimensions, 

creating a new experience under an unfamiliar space 

like a pavilion from Estonia called ‘Interactive Interface.’ 

Information-wise, each country interpreted the 

perspective of ‘modernity’ in very unique and distinct 

ways. Some countries chose to present the appearance 

of modernity as something that tried to sneak 

into the sacred territory of traditional culture while 

countries in Western Europe, the United States and 

Japan didn’t criticize the modern condition to harshly, 

but presented it as an ordinary phenomenon that just 

happens. For example, the viewpoints of a stylistic 

leader such as the United States or that of Bahren that 

impressively chose to unfold the process that Islamic 

modern architecture has undergone. At last, the 

pavilion from Mexico seems to have taken a notable 

standpoint which views modernism as an inevitable 

process that is a part of a change that occurs due to 

both internal and external forces, not something that 

happens from a will nor something that tries to sneak 

in either. 

For the Thai pavilion, the designer chose to present 

the sense of Thai ‘spiritual’ through empty space 

and shapes that were delicately created as if softly 

criticizing the modern condition. However, as an architect, 

it is hard to deny that the past 100 years of Thai 

architectural history is a wealth of essential knowledge 

much needed in order to understand our own identity. 

Whether or not we are against or embrace that which 

comes with international architecture, at the end of it 

all, The Biennale Architettura 2014 under the curation 

of Rem Koolhaas causes one to notice those roles that 

were almost forgotten. 

05 

 


- 

interactive interface 

 

‘’ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘’ 

 

 

 

100 

 

 

Biennale Architettura 2014 

Rem Koolhaas 

 

 

06 Finland | Re-creation 

.... 

 

 

 

 



INTERVIEW: 

ASA & VENICE BIENNALE 2014 


TEXT 

ASA Team 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHAT ARE THE MEANS OF CONSIDERATION AND 

MAIN OBJECTIVE OF ASA’S PARTICIPATION IN 

THE VENICE ARCHITECTURE BIENNALE 2014? 

NITIS STHAPITANONDA : As the association’s Vice 

President of International Affairs, the first thing I looked 

into was the nature of the event. The second thing was 

the exhibition we would curate and how it could be 

designed to suit the event, what would be the advantages 

and disadvantages. If we are able to understand 

all those, we will be able to prepare ourselves for our 

best participation in the event, and consequentially 

improve the exhibition to be even better. It will also 

allow for the association to carefully consider whether 

the budget is appropriately managed and speculate 

future expenses. The third issue involves the suitability 

of the participation, thinking about how it benefits the 

country and the members of the association, including 

the tendency for us to join the event the next time. 

Venice is a spectacular place in itself. The beauty of its 

intriguing architecture and urban context earn Venice 

over 20 million visitors a year. Holding an exhibition about 

architecture here has the potential to be effortlessly 

successful not to mention the fact that the event is considered 

to be the most prestigious international exhibition 

of architecture. The Venice Architecture Biennale was 

first organized 39 years ago and it has been held every 

other year in turn with the contemporary art exhibition, 

the Venice Biennale. Each time it is held, the Venice Architecture 

Biennale invites a globally renowned architect 

to serve as the curator of the event. 

WHAT WAS THE 2014 VENICE ARCHITECTURE 

BIENNALE LIKE? 

NS : With Rem Koolhaas invited as the curator, the Venice 

Architecture Biennale was given the theme ‘Fundamentals.’ 

The main exhibition is, to me, better than last year’s. 

In the past, it tended to focus specifically on the development 

of architecture in the present time and in the future, 

but this is probably the first time that the highlight has 

been placed on the past and essences of architecture. 

Understanding the past makes the next steps you’re 

going to take in the future glorious and successful. But 

it’s not easy to profess such an idea for the world to 

acknowledge and understand. Koolhaas presented 15 

architectural elements such as the door, window, bathroom, 

stairs, etc. and offered in depth studies about 

each of them with the hope that the research would 

bring about further discussions and the ramification of 

architectural developments. 


Venice Biennale ? 

: Venice Biennale Rem 

Koolhaas ‘Fundamentals’ 

 

Venice Biennale 

 

 

 

 

 

Koolhaas 

15 

 

 

 

 

(pavilion) 

? 

: 

‘Fundamentals’ 

 

 

 

 

 

Venice Biennale 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HOW ARE THE PAVILIONS OF THE COUNTRIES 

PARTICIPATING IN THIS YEAR’S BIENNALE? 

NS : They were interesting for their different interpretations 

of the notion ‘Fundamentals’ when it came to 

each country’s architecture. If you think the main exhibition 

is challenging to comprehend, the exhibitions of 

the individual countries demand even more from spectators. 

Curators and designers must have a full understanding 

of the theme, choosing the most distinctive 

architectural element that would be able to best represent 

the architecture of their countries. There are also several 

limitations in terms of transportation, installation and 

demolition of the exhibition to think about. What has 

to be contemplated significantly are the main ideas, in 

which each country must creatively elaborate categorically 

through its architectural history, architectural elements, 

materials and architectural creations, in the past, present 

and future. Other mediums that are completely irrelevant 

to architecture were also presented. I think only a few 

countries managed to deliver successful end results, 

but I would have to give every country full points for 

their efforts and endeavors. 

 


(pavilion) 

? 

: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

() 

 

2 

 

 

 

 

 

World Expo 

 

Venice Biennale 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 


? 

: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HOW WAS THAILAND’S PAVILION? 

NS : The association picked Mr. Mathar Bunnag as the 

curator. I think what Mathar was trying to convey is 

different from others. He aspired to explain the spirit of 

Thai architecture through light and shadow. If spectators 

spent enough time with our exhibition, they should be 

able to understand what the message he was trying to 

send out really was. After seeing almost every part of 

the Biennale myself, I remember feeling like I was at a 

European or American architectural event. It seemed 

like everyone there knew each other. People would 

show up at the opening of each pavilion, one after another, 

mingling after 2 years of not seeing each other. For Asia 

and Africa, we did have openings but those who came 

were the people organizing the exhibitions and there 

were some passersby who joined but I think they just 

happened to walk past while there was an opening. 

The vibe was not as enthusiastic as the European 

pavilions. However, the scale of the event was so grand. 

It’s the World Expo of architecture and every architect 

should come and experience it if they have a chance. 

I was here about 10 years ago and not that many Thai 

people knew about the Venice Biennale back then. As I 

was roaming the event from one exhibition to another, 

I remember thinking to myself ‘Why didn’t Thailand join 

and how proud I would be for Thai architects to be a part 

of something like this, representing our own country.’ 

If others could come, Thailand could come. It’s the manifestation 

of the existence and ability of our country and 

our architects to the world. The participation in the Venice 

Biennale is the association’s contribution for the country 

and society we live in; a chance for our art and culture 

to be presented as a part of the global dialogue. What 

Thai architects can gain from this is how the participation 

has created a place for them to stand in the international 

arena with great pride and integrity. 

WHAT IS THE ASSOCIATION’S FUTURE PLAN FOR 

THE VENICE BIENNALE? 

NS : At the end, the association’s participation in the 

event has to be further discussed, but I have to say that, 

as a member of the committee, I fully advocate this 

activity. As for problems and obstacles taking place 

along the way, the team and the committee will have 

to confer about how to achieve new improvements in 

the future. 


PROFESSIONAL 

TEXT 

Prof. Vimolsiddhi 

Horayangkura, Ph.D. 

 

. 

 

() 

 

 

 

THE CHALLENGES OF 

URBAN DESIGN AND 

DEVELOPMENT IN 

THE 21 ST CENTURY 

21 : 

 

 

 

 

 

(rapid urbanization) 

(development) 

(urban design) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7,000 

 

 

 

(urban sprawl) 

 

21 

‘Urban Century’ (Brown, Dixon and Gillham, 2009: 

102-112) 

(urbanization) 

 

1 

 

(megacity) 

 

92 ASA PROFESSIONAL

(livability) 

 

 

 

 

(amenities) 

 

(walkable sidewalk) 

 

 

 

( , 2547) 2 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Urban Planning 

Authority) 

(zoning) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.. 2556 ( , 2557: 41-88) 

 

 

(FAR bonus) 

The notion of an urban community is a matter that 

one must pay great interest to. As cities continue to 

expand, innumerable problems emerge and these 

urban phenomena affect the lives of us all. For many 

developing cities in the Eastern world that are going 

through rapid urbanization, developments must be 

initiated and implemented alongside urban design, for 

a multidisciplinary approach can result in holistic and 

sustainable solutions. It is necessary that we overcome 

conventions and traditions we have familiarized 

ourselves with in order to enter the new realm where 

innovations are conceived from the collaborative 

integration of physical, social and economic factors. 

This is how we can lead ourselves into the era of a 

sustainable urban community. 

This article does not only bring out the essence of 

what an urban community is, but also points to the 

factors that are behind that essence, looking at causes 

and structures in the hopes of creating a rightful understanding. 

INTRODUCTION 

The term ‘Urban Community’ refers to a human environment. 

The number of people living in cities continues to increase, and more 

than half of the total of seven billion are recorded to be living in urban 

areas. Cities are becoming highly populated and show no signs of 

stopping their expansion, the results of which are often instances of 

unorganized urban sprawl. Such phenomena and problems concerning 

rapid urban growth are the true challenges of the 21 st century or 

the ‘Urban Century’ (Brown, Dixon and Gillham, 2009: 102-112). 

Within the process of urbanization, urban characteristics are 

determined by the numbers of a population living in a certain area, 

not structural construction or architecture. People come together 

and form a community, from small to large-scale urban societies to 

cities and megacities, as the expansion continues boundlessly. The 

urban sprawl brings complexity, and ultimately dilemmas, to the city, 

consequentially resulting in a difference in the level of livability. This is 

because ‘livability’ of an urban community is conceived in accordance 

with the environment and people’s living and commuting behaviors, 

for instance demands for public parks, city squares, infrastructures 

and other amenities, such as bicycle lanes, walkable sidewalks, etc. 

Living behavior involves people’s access to and consumption of 

information, their understanding of the value of creative initiatives 

as well as environmental management for the sake of sustainable 

developments (Vimolsiddhi Horayangkura, 2547). 

 

PROFESSIONAL ASA 93

BTS ‘skytrain’ 

 

(subway) 

 

 

‘’ 3 

 

 

 

‘urban design’ 

‘urban designer’ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘Urban Design’ 

 

‘urban design’ 

‘discipline’ 

 

‘Urban Design’ 

‘Urban design’ ‘traditional 

urban design’ ‘place making’ 

 

 

(Horayangkura, 2012: 

3-7; Freedman, 2012: 27-66) 

 

- 

 

 

(scale) 

( 

) 

() // 

/ () 

 

(urban 

FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS OF 

URBAN COMMUNITY OPERA- 

TIONAL PROCESSES 

A city, despite its history or background, needs to be concretely 

planned, designed and developed under a proper development 

plan. However, in terms of the holistic view, the city does not have 

an official host who has the sole and direct responsibility over its 

operations. In the meantime, urban planning authorities still busy 

themselves with zoning in an aim to control land use and density that 

consequentially leads to legal reinforcement. Bureaucratic obstacles 

result in the slowndown of the process, making operations ineffective 

and insufficient to the scale and speed of urban expansion and 

often conflicting with the initiatives of real estate developers, for 

instance, the obligations fostered by ministerial regulations for 

the city of Bangkok to use the Comprehensive Plan 2013 (Sopon 

Pornchokchai, 2014, 41-88), etc. The works of governmental urban 

planners, such as the increase of the FAR bonus, are perceived as 

controlling measures rather than creative initiatives. 

In the past, the general development of the city has been driven 

more so by necessities rather than a good urban planning approach, 

as can be seen in the case of the BTS skytrain construction in Bangkok’s 

inner city area - a plan which manifests a great deal of peculiarity 

compared to other big cities around the world where the railway 

system is integrated by locating a subway system in inner city areas 

with the use of ground level trains for outer city areas. 

The responsibilities of urban designers and developers within 

the ‘urban design’ profession under the control and regulations of 

the Architect Council of Thailand are somewhat confusing, both in 

terms of terminology and related roles, while the notion of such 

professions are still fairly new to Thai society. In this article, the term 

‘urban design’ is used in a sense that refers to the design of an urban 

community while an ‘urban designer’ is cited as the universal notion 

of the profession. It is the duty of a professional association and 

involved educational institutes to try to clarify to the society the roles 

and boundaries of the profession and what benefits can be accounted 

for due to their contributions. This article takes the opportunity to 

execute such tasks by stating its position and viewpoints regarding the 

problems of modern-day urban communities, as well as the tendency 

and direction for future developments. 

THE PERIMETER OF ‘URBAN 

DESIGN’ TO TANGIBLE 

DEVELOPMENTS 

For over half a century, ‘urban design’ has prominently grown into 

an actual ‘discipline’ with academic courses and curriculums in higher 

education studies using the term to refer to titles of the degrees they 

award. 

‘Urban design’ has surpassed its convention as ‘traditional urban 

design,’ which is focused primarily on ‘place making,’ into a discipline 

which encompasses every scale of the urban environment resulting 

in comprehensive solutions to complex urban dilemmas (Vimolsiddhi 

Horayangkura, 2012: 3-7; Freedman, 2012: 27-66). 

Theoretically speaking, a city has to be planned and designed 

right from the beginning in order to suitably maximize the benefits of 

urban community areas. The notion of urban design involves choosing 

the right location, specification of infrastructure and other factors, 

whereas consideration has to be taken into account at all scales 

from national scales (for example, the emergence of communities 


management) 

 

 

 

(Urban Development Authority / 

Corporation) 

 

 

‘’ 

3,192 

() (.) 

 

 

 

 

 

(commuters’ transit) 

 

 

 

 

(. 4.73 

4 

39 ) 

(social inequality) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘urban regeneration’ 

(revitalization) 

 

 

 

 

 

 


along the high speed train route) to regional and metropolitan scales 

(the vicinity areas included) as well as localities, districts, neighborhoods, 

villages, streets, roads, alleyways, etc. Everything has to be 

designed and developed under proper urban design and development 

where resources, budget and investment are integrated systematically. 

Such contributions will result in the city’s livability and culturally vibrant 

charm, embellishing its potential as a tourism and investment destination 

allowing for consequentially sustainable economic and social 

development. It is, therefore, essential for the city to have its own 

Urban Development Authority / Corporation that initiates and implements 

both development plans and budget as well as coordinates with 

other involved parties to turn project plans into realities. The ‘Airport 

City’ project located on the vast 3,192 Rai piece of land is going to 

be a challenging task for the Thailand Airport Authority that will prove 

whether or not having a development authority can result in the 

substantial success of the project. 

THE COMPLEXITY OF 

PROBLEMS, THEIR ORIGINS 

AND WHAT NEEDS TO BE 

AMENDED. 

The enormous number of people living in urban areas is the 

cause of many issues to follow. Among the prominent ones is the 

mass commuters’ transit system that transports people between 

CBD areas and the suburbs. The system often follows western 

conventions of urban planning, which prioritize the categorization 

of land use. There are also matters concerning the people’s quality 

of life and the lack of green public space (Bangkok’s average green 

space is 4.73 square meters per person, which is considerably far 

from the international standard of 39 sqm. / person), population 

health and social inequality caused by drastic wealth gaps with very 

few accumulate most of the wealth while the majority are considerably 

poor, especially in the northeastern and northern regions of the 

country. Furthermore, people with low incomes have less access to 

education, career and housing opportunities, etc. The urban poor face 

problems that need to be resolved. 

 


(climate change) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(sustainable state) 

 

 

 

 

(bottom-up) 

 

 

 

 

 

3 

 

 

 

3 

 

 

 

 

(Community 

Organization Development Institute) 

 

 

 

“ 

” 

 

‘’ GPS 

GIS ( , 2556) 

The urban community naturally grows and changes over time and 

through cycles of development and the improvement of some of the 

deteriorating areas must be done following the ‘urban regeneration’ 

approach that contributes to the revitalization of local communities 

through economic and social activities under the development of a 

suitable environment. The old city areas with historical value are 

particularly vulnerable to economic development, especially when 

the land prices are continually on the rise, such as is the case with 

Hanoi and Shanghai. Urban design also includes natural disaster 

mitigation due to the increasing severity of climate change. 

To achieve the solutions of the aforementioned problems requires 

a collaborative approach between every sector of the society. This 

naturally counts urban design and development as a key player in the 

fabrication of the city’s physical, social and economic environment. 

If successful, the solutions will potentially bring about a truly livable 

urban community. Physical, economic and social factors are the 

essential elements of future development and if balanced rightly, the 

city will be able to provide a good quality of life, economic efficiency, 

security and social equality, all of which will ultimately lead to a 

sustainable state. 

PROJECT PARTICIPATION 

Urban design and development, including urban regeneration 

projects, require a great deal of participation from community members. If 

it is not the locals themselves who take on a bottoms-up approach 

and initiate a project, they should participate by being a part of the 

public hearing and decision-making process, for instance, the elevated 

road project which is a part of the Asoke Montri inner belt, Dindaeng 

Public Housing renovation project, etc. In the meantime, the involved 

authorities are also obligated to listen to what the locals have to say. 

A project should consist of at least three sectors: the governmental 

sector as the official owner of the land, the private sector as the project’s 

owner/investor/entrepreneur and the public sector or the locals who 

live in the area and are affected by the project, both positively and 

negatively. The massive urban development projects such as the 

Makkasan Complex exemplifies, however, how the excessive number 

of participants can become an obstacle for the progress and operation 

of the project. 

In another dimension, the Community Organization Development 

Institute, a public organization under the Ministry of Social Development 

and Human Security, upholds a significant role in encouraging 

the locals’ participation, particularly in terms of land management and 

ownership issues. The founding of the national network of local 

communities and land management aims for its operations to take 

place along with those of human resource development initiated by 

local communities and involved authorities with an emphasis being 

placed on the making of a ‘community life plan,’ offering comprehensive 

information and tools such as GPS and GIS (Mek Sayasevi, 2013). 


(multidisciplinary) 

 

 

 

‘urban design and 

development’ 

‘multidisciplinary approach’ 

 

 

‘traditional urban design’ 

 

21 

(sustainable development) 

‘Rio Earth Summit’ 

1992 

21 21 (Agenda 21) 

 

 

(viable urban model) 

 

 

(Gauzin-Muller, 2002: 13) 

 

(planning) 

(design) 

(compact city) (Jenks & Burgess, 2000; 

, 2545: 318-320) 

 

 

 

 

MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH 

IN URBAN DESIGN AND 

DEVELOPMENT 

Since complications in the problems of urban community must 

be considered a part of the urban design and development process, 

different sciences and disciplines should be integrated in order to 

comprehensively encompass the involved physical, social, cultural, 

economic and technological factors, etc. This does not only include 

the planning and design processes, which are done in three dimensions, 

but also the development process that relies on efficient management 

skills and knowledge. It explains why a multidisciplinary approach is 

essential for successful urban design and development. 

Educational institutes, despite their different educational focuses 

(architecture, urban planning, environmental management, etc.) cannot 

deny the multidisciplinary approach of ‘urban design and development’ 

studies. Such academic nature allows learners to obtain comprehensive 

fundamental knowledge and grasp the potential for both design and 

practical implementation consequentially resulting in their ability to 

overcome ‘traditional urban design,’ which only revolves around 

conceptual presentation, whereas the mechanism that leads to the 

actual execution is absent. 

URBAN COMMUNITY OF 

THE 21 ST CENTURY 

The sustainable development notion is a result of the continual 

impact of 1992’s Rio Earth Summit. The event drew up a development plan 

for the 21 st Century according to Agenda 21, which is ‘a comprehensive 

plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations 

of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in 

every area in which humans impact the environment.’ The plan also 

came up with a ‘viable urban model’ for developing countries as 

sustainable development has become the key notion that places great 

emphasis on the merging of ecological, social and economic factors 

with an aim to reduce environmental risks (Gauzin-Muller, 2002: 13). 

The sustainable development concept also significantly considers 

the importance of urban planning and design, especially in compact cities 

(Jenks & Burgess, 2000: Duangchan Apawatcharut Charoenmuang, 

2545: 318-320) where effective land use results in efficient daily 

commutes and the development of the environmental dimension of 

urban community through the management of green space, both 

horizontal and vertical (on buildings and roofs). The attempt aims to 

reduce the Urban Heat Island effect, which does not only cause the 

city’s temperatures to rise but also brings about other succeeding 

impacts of global warming (Ritchie and Thomas, 2009: 17). The future 

urban community, therefore, looks towards green, low-energy, and 

low-carbon cities as its models. 

In addition, there is a great possibility that the future city is going 

to be a slow one. The phenomenon is already happening in Italy (following 

the Cittaslow Movement) and South Korea with an aim to reduce the 

hasty way of life of the present society (Tanapon Panthasen, 

2013: 4-5). 

 


(Urban 

Heat Island) 

 

(global warming) (Ritchie and Thomas, 2009: 

17) (green 

city) (low-energy city) 

(low-carbon city) 

(slow city) 

( Cittaslow Movement) 

( , 

2013:4-5) 

 

 

 

(smart city) 

‘smart city’ 

 

 

(cultural tourism) 

(creative city) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(primate 

city) 

- 

 

 

 

 

- 

 

 

 

 

 

3 ‘ 

’ 

( , 2518: 

115-120) 

In the digital era, where the potentials for communication and 

information technology management are as exceptional as ever, the 

world now has the ability to come up with a genius energy saving 

system for urban communities that will eventually lead to the initiation of 

smarter cites. Boulder, Colorado, in the United States is one example 

of a city that uses a smart grid system to enable and optimize 

efficient use of distributed energy resources for households. 

The future city also encompasses aspects of cultural tourism that 

follow the creative city’s initiatives. Local authorities must take on a 

leading role in the planning, design and creation of public spaces that 

answer to the nature of the city’s local identity. As for the case of 

Bangkok, seeking collaborations and support from educational institutions 

such as local universities or Urban Design and Development Programs 

of the Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Thammasat 

University, etc. can be an effective alternative. 

With Bangkok as the country’s primate city, Thailand needs to expand 

its development to other cities in different regions. According to the 

Urban Planning Act, the Department of Public Works and Town & 

Country, as the central authority and other local authorities, are to 

serve as the policy implementation units. It is also important for every 

involved party to have a correct and comprehensive understanding 

of urban design and development in order to improve the overall 

quality of life and economic condition. As urban growth is effectively 

decentralized, the local communities will gain sufficient income for 

future developments. In the meantime, the central urban planning 

authority has to come up with a proper public transportation and 

utility system to facilitate decentralization to other areas of the 

country. The notion was proposed three decades ago in the article, 

‘The Coordination Plan for Urban and Regional Solutions’ published 

in Social Studies Review Journal (Vimolsiddhi Horayangkura, 2518: 

115-120B). 

CONCLUSION: 

MOVING TOWARDS SUSTAIN- 

ABLE URBAN DESIGN AND 

DEVELOPMENT THROUGH 

A MULTIDISCIPLINARY 

APPROACH 

The traditional notion of ‘urban design’ encompasses the discipline 

as a 3 dimensional model that exists as a part of a local community 

and the city’s fabric. As a result, it is unable to help improve the city’s 

livability and people’s quality of life because the solution is spatially 

conceived and specific. We need to overcome the conventional definition 

of ‘urban design’ and ‘place making’ and collectively integrate physical, 

social and economic factors for the sustainable future of livable cities. 

Urban designers and developers have to be visionary, perceptive 

with understandings and participative in working out the genesis 

of the problems as well as the complications behind the growth or 

deterioration of cities and regions. Identifying the true causes of the 

problems can lead to effective and sustainable solutions. 

The urban design and development education must take on a 

multidisciplinary approach, integrating design and urban development 

studies as a part of its multidimensional creations and solutions, 

which ultimately result in holistic outcomes and true sustainability. 

Following the aforementioned observations, various courses in 

urban planning education will become a foundation that can significantly 

contribute to the production of qualified urban designers and developers 

in the future. 


: 

 

 

 

‘Urban Design’ 

3 

 

 

 


‘place making’ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘urban design and development’ 

(multidisciplinary) 

 

 

 

(sustainability) 

 

(urban planning) 

 

 

 

1 Brown, L. J., Dixon, D., & Gillham, O. (2009).Urban Design for an 

Urban Century. Hoboken, NewJersey: John Wiley & Sons. 

Chapter 5: Principles for an urban century, 102-112. 

2 Demographic Year Book.(2005). Definition of ‘Urban’. 

HYPERLINK ‘http://unstat.un.org/unsd/demographic/sconcerns/ 

densurb/definition_%20urban.pdf’ ( 14 2555). 

3 Freedman, M. (2012). What is Urban Design and Why Do We Need 

It Now?. In Horayangkura, V., Jamieson, W., and Mallikamarl, P., The 

Design and Development of Sustainable Cities. Bangkok: Faculty of 

Architecture and Planning, Thammasat University, pp.27-66. 

4 Gauzin-Méller, D. (2002).Sustainable Architecture and Urbanism: 

Concepts, Technologies, Examples. Boston: HYPERLINK ‘http://www. 

springer.com/birkhauser/mathematics?SGWID=0-40292-0-0- 

0’Birkhà-user, 2002. 

5 Horayangkura, V. (2012). Urban Design: The Development and 

Challenges of Sustainable Cities. In Horayangkura, V., Jamieson, W., 

and Mallikamarl, P., The Design and Development of Sustainable 

Cities. Bangkok: Faculty of Architecture and Planning, Thammasat 

University, pp.1-24. 

6 Jenks, M. and Burgess, R. (Editors). (2000). Compact Cities: Sustainable 

Urban Forms for Developing Countries. London: Spon Press. 

7 Ritchie, A. and Thomas, R. (2009). Sustainable Urban Design: 

An Environmental Approach. London: Taylor & Francis. 

8 ‘Urban’ Oxford Dictionaries. April 2010. Oxford University Press. 

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/unban. 

( 14 2555). 

9 . (2545). 

(Sustainable Cities: Concepts and Experiences of the 

West). : . 

10 . (2555). ‘’ 4 ‘’ . 

, 31 2555, 25. 

11 . (2013). (Slow City). Thai Appraisal Foundation, 

Vol.12, No.1, January – February, pp.4-5. 

12 . (2556). : ‘ 

’. : 

(). 

13 . (2518). . 

13 1 -, 115-120 . 

14 . (2547). +: 

(The Creation of Architecture and 

Urban Environment: Behavioral Perspectives under Globalization). 

(). … 

… , 3-12. 

15 . (2555). . : 

. 

 

1. ‘urban’ ‘urbs’ 1) 

(a minimum of population size) 2) 

(density) ‘urban’ ( Oxford Dictionaries 

(April 2010) Demographic Year Book (2005)). 

2. (2547: 11) 

3 

(sensory dimension) (symbolic dimension) 

(sustainability dimension). 

3. ‘’ ‘urban design’ ‘urban 

architecture’ ‘’ 

‘urban designer’ ‘urban architect’ 

 

4. . (2555). ‘’ 4 ‘’ . 

, 31 2555, 25. 

 


DETAILS 

KENKOON 

FURNITURE GALLERY 

CHAT ARCHITECTS 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

1 4x4 

2 4x4 

3 

4 2x4 

5 2x4 

6 kenkoon 

7 2x4 

8 

9 2x4 

Kenkoon 

 

 

 

- 

 

 

 

Kenkoon - 

 

 

Kenkoon 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15x20 

38 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

01 

100 ASA DETAILS

1 6 

2 2x4 

3 kenkoon 

4 5 

5 Swage external thread end 

6 2x4 

7 Hexagon nut 

3 

1 

4 

5 

6 

2 

7 

BUILDING TYPE 

Furniture showroom 

LAND AREA 

Indoor showroom 300 sq.m. 

Garden showroom 570 sq.m. 

DURATION 

2012-2013 

CLIENT 

KENKOON outdoor 

furniture 

LOCATION 

Bangkok, Thailand 

ARCHITECT 

CHAT architects 

CONTRACTOR 

KENKOON craftsmen 

02 

01-02 

 

 

 

 

Kenkoon is known for their renowned manufacturing 

of teakwood furniture that is outstanding for outdoor 

usage. This factor contributed to the company’s location, 

an old house in the Thonglor area surrounded with plenty 

of trees that takes on a semi-outdoor, semi-indoor 

approach. The most distinctive characteristic of the 

Kenkoon furniture showroom housing is the texture of 

the new building enfolded within the old, a characteristic 

reminiscent of the furniture designs themselves. 

The trait that connects all of the designs together 

is the line structure of the teakwood. As it is used in 

the design of the Kenkoon chair, the architect thought 

that this line structure of teakwood could be referenced 

as an element within the architecture as well. Teakwood 

was used as the material on the facade of the building 

bringing a new aspect to the architecture. At the same 

time, this overlapping structure assists in filtering the 

sun that penetrates through the building. For the detail 

of this structure, the architect designed each piece of 

teakwood to overlap and weave together with one 

another creating a neat, continuity of texture over the 

huge folded sheet of architecture. Furthermore, this 

design corresponds to late modern architecture that 

emphasized funnel staircases. The design of this lath 

facade slowly embraces the funnel staircase creating 

a vertical opening for light while also establishing a 

connection between the exterior and interior. 

102 ASA DETAILS

MATERIALS 

3M FASARA 

 

 

 

50 

99% 

 

 

 

2 Transparent 

Silver 

2 

Silver Illumina 

Transparent Silver Illumina 

Gradient 

wassaduapp.com 

METILES 

Metiles 

 

 

100x100 10 

 

 

100% 

 

 

osisu.com / innocomposite.com 

HONEYCOMB SHADES 

 

(Honeycomb) 

 

 

 

 

‘’ (air-gap) 

 

 

 

inhabitat.com / decorview.com 

104 ASA UPDATE MATERIALS

REVIEW 

HANDMADE 

URBANISM 

FROM COMMUNITY 

INITIATIVES TO PARTI- 

CIPATORY MODELS 

Alfred Herrhausen Society 

(AHS) (CSR) 

 

Urban 

Age Conference 2006 Urban Age 

Program AHS London 

School of Economics (LSE) AHS Wolfgang 

Nowak 

 

 

- 

 

 

 

 

Urban 

Age Award 2007 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100,000 

 

2014 

 

Handmade Urbanism 

Urban Age Award 

 

Marcos L.Rosa 

& Ute E. Weiland 

5 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

01 

TITLE 

Handmade Urbanism 

From Community 

Initiatives to Participatory 

Models 

WRITER 

Marcos L.Rosa & Ute E. 

Weiland, Ana Alvarez, 

Lindsay Bush, Demer 

Mutman, Priya Shankar 

PAGE 

224 pp. 

LANGUAGES 

English 

ISBN 

978-3-86859-225-2 

01 Handmade Urbanism 

 

Urban Age Award 

Alfred Herrhausen Society 

(AHS) 

5 

 

106 ASA REVIEW

3 

Urban Age Program Wolfgang 

Nowak 

‘The Community’ Richard Sennett 

LSE 

New York University 

Sennett 

Together: the Rituals, Pleasures, and Politics of 

Cooperation 2012 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Timeline 

3 

 

 

 

 

5 

02 

. 

- 

 

 

 

 

02 

 

4 - 

 

 

 

 

03 

 

 

 

 

1) 2) 3) 

 

4) 

5) 

 

 

 

 

Urban Age 

 

 

 

 

 

DVD Urban Future 

Olaf Jacobs 

5 Deutsche Bank Urban Age 

Award 

 

 

 

 

Handmade Urbanism 

- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

03 

 

REVIEW ASA 107

MEMBERSHIP 

 

• 

2 

• 

 

1 

• 

( 

asa center 5) 

• 

 

 

 

WEBSITE 

• asa web 

www.asa.or.th 

• asa webboard 

 

 

• - 

2 

• 

 

 

10 

• 

asa cup ( 

8 ), golf asa, 

badmintion asa, asa night 

• 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• asa club asa club 

 

• asa shop 

 

 

 

 

 

( vat 7%) 

100 

- 400 535 

- 5 1,800 

2,033 

[]- 900 

1,070 

[]- 200 

321 

 

500 

2 8,000 8,500 

 

 

02 3196555 109 

E-mail : memberasa@gmail.com 

 

() 

: 

() : 

: : e-mail : 

‘’ 

(3 ) 225 (6 ) 500 

(3 ) 225 (6 ) 440 

() 

: : 

 

() 9 

713-2-02232-6 

 

- - 

02-3196419 0-2319-6555 109 

- 

90

PRODUCT 

NEWS 

01 

PRAI 

 

 

 

 

 

(Prai) 

 

 

 

 

4 

 

02 

 

 

 

 

 

 

03 

DURAGRES 

SUPER FULL HD 

() 

UMI 

PolishedGlazedPorcelain 

SuperFullHDTiles‘TECTONAGOLDENBROWN’ 

60x60 

 

 

 

 

BLUESOUND 

 

BlueSound 

 

Wi-FiHomeNetwork 

Application 

SmartphoneAndroidiPhoneBlueSound 

Digital 

Audio 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

110 ASA PRODUCT NEWS

2 nd edition 

out now

CARTOON 

SRV 

112 ASA ASA CARTOON

ASA Journal 06/57

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?