Introduction

Pagan

"The knowledge we have as individuals and as members of a particular society remains very limited, selective, and biased by the passions of living." 

- Yi-Fu Tuan

The Pagan Era lasted from the 9th to the 13th century and is considered the most prolific building period in Burmese History. It was both the government and religious center, since Burmese culture centralized the head role of both their government and religious bodies early on in their history. This theocracy built two types of monuments: gu temples and stupas. The distinction of gu temples on this site, and in Burma in general, is a geometric and style classification of temple structure.

Gu temples, along with most temples in the Hindu – Buddhist tradition of the South and Southeast regions, are temples that are meant to emulate a cave- like experience. The cave and subsequent withdrawal from the everyday life, is a kin to where many famous religious prophets withdrew and found religious clairvoyance. Once entering a gu temple a circumambulation around a central alter area allows the worshipper to be visually educated in the ways on of the Buddhas via frescos along the walls of the barrel vaulted walkways.

Stupas, on the other hand, are meant to emulate the great Mount Meru, house of the Gods. And, like Mount Meru itself, stupas are not enterable and instead are meant to be externally circumambulated. Stupas generally are built to house specific relics deep within their centers.

During the Pagan Era over 10,000 stupas and gu temples were built, with 2,500 remaining today.

Nay Pyi Daw

Nay Pyi Daw became the official capital of Burma on March 27, 2006 and was officially moved to its new location 320 km north of Yangoon (the previous capital) starting on November 6, 2005. The new Nay Pyi Daw District, as well as the Parliament area, is Burma’s third largest city and was designed, built, and conceived to only house government ministries. Built in complete government secrecy, families of government workers and civilians have been banned from entering, and vendors are restricted to a small commercial zone. Not much is known about the new capital as it was only opened to limited outsiders starting in 2011 and only in 2013 did images of Nay Pyi Daw start to appear on the internet and aerials become available through Bing and Google Earth.

 “The ultimate insurance against regime change, a masterpiece of urban planning designed to defeat any putative "colour revolution" – not by tanks and water cannons, but by geometry and cartography”

-  Himal "Naypyitaw – Dictatorship by Cartography" 

Pagan + NPD

Pagan and Nay Pyi Daw are two capitals over 1,000 year apart. How does one become the other? We can intuitively see that Nay Pyi Daw is trying to implicitly and explicitly reference the Pagan Era, but, what are the ways that we as architects can construct and analyze the changes in time and memory that we see and know are being referenced – yet are so ephemeral and difficult to pin down?

How is memory being constructed and deployed? And how do we analyze these changes and properly represent them? How does a more self-aware representational style speak about the past, present, and future in its attempts to sort and translate various interpretations of realities and possibilities for communication with others?

This thesis aims to find better ways to analyze and represent the constructions of memory.  Throughout this thesis two discrete lenses are utilized in order to analyze how memory is being constructed spatially in each: Archaeology and Photography. By using limits as tools an attempt can be made to evoke and highlight both the temporal and timelessness of a design. They become merely a step along the way of communicating the constructed personal and communal memories of the past, present, and future within the discipline.

Greyscape

"Freedom of choice, however, leads not to chaos, but to new and more subtle forms of order."

- Lebbus Woods

We do not merely look we interpret.

Without our brain our eyes do nothing but look from object to object denoting no special meaning; it is only through the dialogue between the eye and the brain that we learn to see and thus create causation and association between objects, ourselves, and time. The combination of the object, ourselves, and time allows for an abstraction in both the way we remember the object and how we represent the object for communication with others.

Greyscapes become the moments when we stand on the threshold between looking at and seeing the object- at that moment there is neither fact nor fiction, nor a linear continuum between the two. Instead, it is a reality that inherently accepts the existence of contradictions and ambiguities. Greyscapes are not the memories themselves, instead are the interpretations we make of our surroundings and events that create the stories we tell ourselves in order to believe in them. Un-beholden to the confines of truth or logic; only later do they then become facts. 

Construct, Deconstruct, Reimagine

"Perhaps all that is left of the world is a wasteland covered with rubbish heaps, and the hanging gardens of the Great Khan's palace. It is our eyelids that separate them, but we cannot know which is inside and which is outside."

- Italio Calvino

The imagined demise of Nay Pyi Daw. The visual breaking-down of the physical leads one along the first steps towards a re-imagining of potential spaces and places.

The way we as architects sort and translate various interpretations of an object and construct them as realities for others are intrinsically linked. The visualization of an object’s abstraction cannot be divorced from modes we use to interpret it. To explore the overlap in greyscapes, and the various ways they are physically represented, it is important to acknowledge that nothing is concrete or immutable; there are no “facts” per say. Instead, both facts and memories are not only constructs, but are constantly being constructed.

Due to the fact that both facts (our representation) and memories (our interpretations) are constructs does not mean that we should not question and thoroughly examine. In fact it is extremely important to examine our interpretations of an object and how we represent it- a process to which the discipline of architecture greatly excels. The discourse behind all great works of architecture actively engage in critiquing and questioning the product of an architect’s interpretations, however it is equally important to hold up the same mirror of scrutiny to our initial modes of representation. Once we do that our modes of representation not only belie our initial interpretations, but also that our means of communicating these greyscapes are based on assumptions and biases. This inward reflection back towards our personal greyscapes acknowledges bias, assumptions, and untruths that are inherent in memory making and keeping.

Looking at various modes of representation and their under lying biases, is not however a negative, but instead acknowledges the way greyscapes exist within ourselves. Unbiased representations of abstractions do not truly exist when there is a need to communicate ideas within an organized discipline. It is when we fail to honor the biases and contradictions within our modes of representation that we lose the ability to freely discuss the root of our interpretations and memories.

Imagined elevations and sections both over grown by time and nature

Through the process of exploring and representing past and present Burmese Architecture a new taxonomy emerged. This new taxonomy was created via the intersection of time and memory. Specifically the intersection that engages the phenomenon of how memories are perpetually being constructed, deconstructed, and reimaged overtime. Nothing is static, let alone our memories.

By actively mutating past and present Burmese architecture the resulting analysis reveals and creates new spaces that allow for a more fertile conversation between eras.