A new perspective on eclectic attributes in architecture: taking eclectic architecture in Beijing and Hong Kong as an example

ABSTRACT

The development of society enriches the connotation of various professional concepts and leads to ambiguity in their interpretation. With the increasing comprehensiveness of human exchange activities, this uncertainty has become a common phenomenon present in multiple fields. In the field of architecture, the long-standing over-emphasis on imaginative and instinctive creation has led to a tendency to rely on the judgment based on the architect’s personal experience when confronted with ambiguous concepts. Besides, the “black box” in the professional field has made it difficult for other professions and the public to reasonably express their demands. “Eclecticism” is such a divisive architectural concept that has emerged from cultural exchange. This paper aims to develop a modeling tool that could grasp complex concepts in a clear and comprehensive way. The study constructs the “Eclectic Attribute Models” as a visual translation by using the Cartography of Controversies based on Actor-Network-Theory (ANT). Then tested and enriched models by intuition studies. As a result, this research clarifies the contemporary interpretation of eclecticism: a design concept encompassing the essential attributes of Pluralism, Historicity, Elitism, Decoration, Innovation, and Symbolism. Finally, this paper also discusses the advantages, limitations, and prospects of controversy mapping in future interdisciplinary research practice.

GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS:

• Architectural attribute
• Actor-Network-Theory (ANT)
• cartography of controversies
• eclecticism
• intuition

1. Introduction

In the era of globalization, society is changing more rapidly than ever. In addition to the constant emergence of new ideas and terminology, people seem to be less certain about previously agreed-upon concepts. While the abundance of meanings is a manifestation of social diversity of this age, repetitive, cross-disciplinary, and multi-perspective interpretations make it difficult to have a comprehensive and intuitive grasp of complex concepts. Not only does this lead to bias and controversy¹ in the discussion within the profession, but also reduces the efficiency of interdisciplinary cooperation. Such is the case with the concept of “Eclecticism²” in architecture: it is traditionally believed to be simply a classical revivalist architectural style that has died out, yet another view is that eclectic architecture has evolved over time into postmodernist architecture. The study of eclecticism should focus not only on the external stylistic forms, but more importantly, on the internal attributes that allowed it to exist and evolve. Therefore, we introduce the cartography of controversies as a method to excavate and visually translate the concept of “Eclecticism” in architecture and achieves a contemporary interpretation of complex ideas through the construction of architectural attribute model.

1.1. The ambiguity of concepts

The development of society has brought about “variability of explanation”³ (Browning, Halcli, and Webster 2000). In a society with relatively simple relationships, it is easier for people to reach a clear consensus on the meaning of concepts. However, since the Industrial Revolution, life, work, and society itself have gone through unceasing, dramatic change. This development process has caused each generation to base their concepts on vastly different conditions (Hansen 2001), and the originally simple ideas are constantly given new meanings and explanations. Just as “modern” has begun to represent a style or even a period, in many cases, the word “contemporary” means more than “the present moment”; the connotations of these terms have been enriched as society evolves (Danto and Goehr 1997). Nowadays, it is difficult for us to find stable technical terms and secure theoretical frameworks to explain every on-going phenomenon in the midst of such changes (Browning, Halcli, and Webster 2000). More often than not, this variability of explanation leads to ambiguity rather than consensus: in social science, the word “controversy” is usually used as a generic term to describe such uncertainty (Wissink 2013; Venturini 2010). Broadly speaking, anything between “not being able to ignore each other” and “trying to reach consensus” can be called a controversy (Venturini 2010). Unfortunately, people devote only a limited amount of time to controversies (Venturini 2012). Perhaps it is because they are too focused on their own fighting to pay attention to other ambiguous issues. Or maybe they are simply obsessed with familiar theories, bound by tradition, habit, prejudice, or even sheer laziness (Hansen 2001)? In any case, faced with such change and dislocation, the most urgent task is to make the controversy clearly and completely “visible”; that is, to construct an intuitive platform that allows different views in the professional field to be noticed.

1.2. The complexity of interdisciplinary collaboration

Another impact of social development is the “interdisciplinary collaboration”. We are in the midst of a global, interdisciplinary, and transmedia transformation (Canclini 2014). In this context, each product is itself dependent upon other professions. Similarly, the continuous development and subdivision of science and technology has made it difficult for many studies to achieve substantial breakthroughs without help from other disciplines (Hansen 2001). In addition, the widespread application of information technology has also made it easy to express arrogant opinions upon topics in any professional field. However, for issues that are divisive within the profession, suggestions from other fields often make the controversy even murkier. Therefore, it is necessary to develop an open research method to make the controversial issues not only “visible” within the discipline but also “readable” across disciplines. As a result, researchers from various fields will be able to collaborate through this platform. In the future, it could even be developed into a “democratic enterprise” (Venturini 2010), allowing the public to participate effectively in the discussion of professional issues. Since both the ambiguity in the interpretation of concepts and the complexity of interdisciplinary cooperation are mainly caused by social change, we hope to study the controversial phenomenon by a social science method. Because “sociology is always about social change”⁴ (Hansen 2001).

1.3. Cartography of controversies

“Cartography of Controversies” (also known as “Controversy Analysis” or “Controversy Mapping”) is an effective social science research tool to analyze controversies. Broadly speaking, “the cartography of controversies is a set of techniques to explore and visualize issues” (Venturini 2010). This method was introduced by Bruno Latour as a teaching practice of the Actor-Network Theory (ANT). ANT claims that, “modern societies cannot be described without recognizing them as having a fibrous, thread-like, wiry, stringy, ropy, capillary character” (Latour, B 1996). In this regard, Bruno extended the concept of “actor⁵” from human groups to “non-human” and even “non-individual entities”, thus “accounting for the very essence of societies and natures” (Latour, B 1996). With the continuous contribution of large research and teaching groups, it gradually evolved into a full-fledged research method (Venturini 2012). Controversies mapping can be seen as an “educational version” of Actor-Network Theory (Law and Hassard 1999), which retains the core concept of ANT while avoiding the conceptual complexity and is therefore easily understood and used by researchers. Nowadays, the development of technology has enriched the means of controversy analysis. Although there are great differences between various approaches, they are all enabled by digital technologies, and are focused on the capture, analysis, and visualization (often based on the Internet and big data) to render legible context (Marres 2015). As Bruno said, the so-called “network” is “an actor whose definition of the world outlines, traces, delineates, describes, files, lists, records, marks or tags a trajectory … A network is not a thing, but the recorded movement of a thing” (Latour, B 1996). When the network is demonstrated visually, the controversy is manifested accordingly, which is the premise of opening a discussion. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to translate the concept of eclecticism visually through the practice of controversy mapping.

1.4. Eclecticism: an architectural controversy

As in other professional fields, the classical concepts in architecture are constantly being enriched with the development of society, and “Eclecticism” is one of the more representative examples. Interpretations given at different times have rendered the meaning of eclecticism increasingly ambiguous. Therefore, before interpreting the phenomenon and expressing the ideas, we should first clarify the contemporary meaning of eclecticism.

1.4.1. Eclecticism from a traditional perspective

A traditional view is that, as an architectural style, “Eclecticism” refers to the combination of multifarious (mainly Western classical) styles, which was popular in Europe and the United States from the 19th to the early 20th century, and which spread widely in Asia, Africa and Latin America due to the colonial activity of western countries. Cultural exchange is considered to be the main factor in the emergence of eclectic architecture. For a very long time, there was no disagreement about this interpretation. Hence, the task of an architect was relatively simple, which was to “learn the rules and forms of classical architecture” (Carpo 2005), and “search for the style representative of the epoch” (Kazhar 2016). In fact, many architects today still regard “Eclecticism” as a discussion on style or form.

1.4.2. Eclecticism from a post-modern perspective

Proceeding into the 20th century, the development of science and technology brought about modernism and avant-garde movements. Meanwhile, cultural exchange that had become more profound and diverse disrupted the long-standing classical order (Canclini 2014). Classic eclecticists were also criticized for their “willful resignation of originality”, who only “[practiced] architecture as an art” (Kidney 1974). Similarly, eclectic architecture had gradually lost its academic status since the 1930s and was condemned by intellectuals as a “bad habit that needs breaking”. Even so, Kidney claimed that “eclecticism is not dead” (Kidney 1974). During this period, one of the most representative point of view comes from Charles Jenks. In his book “The Language of Post-modern Architecture” (Jencks 1978), he called post-modern architecture “Radical Eclecticism”, regarding it as the transformation and continuation of classic eclectic architecture⁶ (Jencks 1978; Steen 2015). Although these discussions on post-modern eclectic architecture still focused on the abstract, stylistic level due to the constraints of the time, in any case, the controversy about the concept of eclecticism has emerged since then, and the eclectic architecture needs to have “a new look” (Kidney 1974).

1.4.3. Eclecticism from a contemporary perspective

In the contemporary era, the visual nature of architecture and art is gradually disappearing. Eclecticism is accordingly expressed in a recessive way: architects no longer select concrete materials from classical forms (Classic Eclectic Architecture) or abstract them into a collage of cultural symbols (Post-modern Eclectic Architecture). Instead, they attempt to express emotions directly through the language of space. This evolution of architectural expression has led many researchers to believe that eclectic architecture has already “died a natural death”⁷ (Sheppard 2006). However, the shift in the way of expression from explicit to implicit does not mean the end of eclecticism. Today’s more comprehensive cultural exchanges ensure the persistence of various eclectic factors. In this paper, we define the factors which are not affected by temporal and spatial changes as “eclectic attributes”. On the one hand, these attributes exist as a medium between human needs and the expression of architectural space, and on the other hand, the investigation and translation of these attributes through controversy mapping are crucial for interpreting the ambiguous concept of eclecticism. With the visualization of attributes, we shall get a comprehensive and intuitive grasp of the concept of eclecticism.

1.5. Research objects

In this light, the research objective of this paper was to analyze the complex controversy regarding the concept of eclecticism in architecture and develop an innovative methodological tool that allows its redefinition. In order to do so, the following discussion will be divided into three parts: research methodology, visual expression, and intuitive⁸ judgment. In the next chapter, we will first introduce the research methodology. Specifically, it includes the theoretical background and operation steps of controversy mapping. As an open research method, the cartography of controversy is capable of utilizing various precision tools to deconstruct and translate controversies. Here, our study is realized through the combination of bibliometric mapping and table intuition. In the chapter after that, we will explain the process of visual expression, in which we operate with bibliometric mapping to successfully complete the visual translation from the literature data of eclectic architecture. As a result, the previously ambiguous concept of eclecticism is intuitively expressed by the factor & attribute model. In the fourth chapter, we will discuss the intuitive judgment. With the help of tables as observation tools, the result above and the proposed new methodological tool will be tested by the intuitive case studies of eclectic architecture in Beijing and Hong Kong. Through this intuition process, the accuracy and contemporariness of the research shall be guaranteed. In short, it is a research process that moves from methodology discussion to research practice, and then to the verification of the results through intuitive study. In the end of the paper, we conclude the contemporary interpretation of the concept of eclecticism. As a reflection, we also discuss the potential of this newly developed redefinition tool in interdisciplinary integration.

2. Research methodology

2.1. Theoretical background: from ANT to cartography of controversies

The cartography method used in this article is a practical approach to Bruno Latour’s “Actor-Network-Theory” (ANT). It is not only a method⁹ of observing things but also a mindset to systematically understand and deconstruct complex social phenomena. Although Bruno himself summarized ANT simply as “just look at controversies and tell what you see” (Venturini 2010; Wissink, 2013), both “look” (observation) and “tell” (description) have highly profound connotations.

In terms of observation, the method adopts an attitude that is largely phenomenological.¹⁰ Bruno claimed, using a slogan from ANT, that the researcher must abandon preconceived bias and “[suspend] the common-sense hypothesis”. Meanwhile, it also requires the researcher to respect their object of observation (whether human or phenomenon) and “follow the actors themselves” honestly (Latour, B 2007). On this basis, it does not require the use of any specific observation approach. On the contrary, Actor-Network-Theory suggests that researchers should remain open to different ideas as much as possible, and use all search, observation, and mapping tools at hand, separately and combined, so as to truly restore the “highest complexity” (Venturini 2010). This is because in the visualization stage of research, the first priority is to grasp the context of the controversy rather than to end the argument. As Bruno said, “I have often compared it to perspective drawing … ANT does not tell anyone the shape that is to be drawn … but only how to go about systematically recording the world-building abilities of the sites to be documented and registered” (Latour, B 1999).

In terms of description, ANT emphasizes that the complexity of controversies should be reflected and made visible through its division into multiple levels, which manifests the research characteristics of systematology thinking. Tommaso Venturini once divided a complete study process of ANT into the observation and description of “statements”, “actors”, “networks”, “cosmoses”, and “cosmopolitics” on respective levels (Venturini 2010). Each level (phenomenon) is both the deconstructed factor of the higher-level and the result of the lower-level actors’ actions. The “actors” here refer either to humans/human groups, or to non-human factors such as natural elements, artworks, political institutions, technology that are endowed with “actor’s qualification”. Under the guidance of this systematic thought, the method “[allows] an observer to zoom from the global to the local and back” (Latour, B 1999). Finally, the network itself will experience an extension, and the scientific phenomenon as well as the casual relationship will be explained (Latour, B 1996).

Taking the study of this article as an example, if the eclectic architectural phenomenon is regarded as a “cosmos”, then the human groups and social events that contribute to this phenomenon are the “networks” in this “cosmos”, and the internal factors that lead to these behaviors and events, such as human needs, become the individual “actors” on the next level below that need to be observed and described. On the other hand, because the hierarchy within the ANT system is infinitely divided¹¹ (Wei and Zeng 2009; Von Bertalanffy 1987), these eclectic architectural phenomena, together with other architectural phenomena, constitute the “cosmopolitics” of social change on a higher level, and our cartography work can be extended upwards and downwards endlessly. Hence, this research attitude “will not make your life easier” (Venturini 2010). Rather, by opening up to as many factors as possible, which help researchers understand each other’s ideas, it enables one to grasp the whole controversy, and shows that things could be explained in different ways.

2.2. The expression of models

The most intuitive way to visualize controversies is to build a model. Since controversies always first occur within the professional field, academic papers can often be used as the basis and data source for visual translation, and this translation process is known as “bibliometric mapping” (Van Eck and Waltman 2010). This is a research method widely used in the field of literary analysis and is also the beginning of the “from literature to actor” process in an ANT-based study (Venturini 2010). Specifically, through the collection and analysis of keywords and citation data provided by the literature search engine, the definition or explanation of ambiguous concepts in the research field will be counted and quantified. A set of intuitive “bubble-line model” will then be generated through this automatic or semi-automatic process. On the one hand, this type of model provided a complete and clear view of all the descriptive factors about the controversial issue; on the other hand, its unified quantitative proportion reveals the weight relationship, activity degree, and development trend of each factor.

Since the mid-1990s, the rise of information technology has not only digitalized our social life but has also offered significant new opportunities to the practice of controversy analysis (Marres 2015). Today, the digital instruments for the aforementioned collection, analysis, and visualization of data are proliferating. With the help of certain software, we could interpret the “opaque and complex topics” much more effectively (Marres 2015). Examples include “Vosviewer” for literature review, Factiva for data collection, “NVivo” for content analysis, and “Edrawmax” for modeling. All these software technologies have facilitated the visualization of controversies.

2.3. The judgment of tables

Although the establishment of the model has made the controversy clearly visible, the accuracy of the result itself still requires intuitive testing. This testing work should contain three aspects of significance: firstly, as a criticism of indirect experience (models), it shall ensure the accuracy of final results; secondly, because researchers are always intuitively observing the phenomenon in a current temporal and spatial context, the process shall endow the conclusion with contemporaneity; thirdly, the testing should be designed in a form that is more open and easier to understand, so that it allows for the participation of a wider range of professions in the process of criticizing and enriching the model, and giving diversity to the expression of concepts. Eventually, it may develop into an “interdisciplinary undertaking” (Marres 2015).

Based on these considerations, this study chooses to use the tabular form to test the model results. In addition to the consideration of expression, the tabulation process itself also means a kind of critical translation. The process of selecting, judging, and transcribing the observed phenomena and data is conducive not only to its explanation to the audience but also to the establishment of a rational mindset (Vivant 2018). Specifically, the relationship between rows and columns of the table can be fully utilized in the testing process. By taking the model results obtained in the previous stage as the control of the vertical “column”, the results can provide professional guidance while being criticized and enriched by intuitive study; meanwhile, the horizontal “row” of the table can be flexibly adjusted according to the specific research object, which depends on the researcher’s own stratification criterion and accuracy of the research content. In a word, the demonstration of cognition depends on the participation of intuition. Each intersection (blank) in the table is the combination of indirect experience (dogmatic concept) and perceptual knowledge (intuition), which is the “genuine epistemic gains” that could rise to rational knowledge¹² (Howell 2007).

Reviewing the above process, it seems that the cartography method has complicated the discussion of the controversy. But in fact, “if the cartography of controversies is complex, it is because collective life itself is complex” (Venturini 2010). Controversy mapping not only enables us to have a clear grasp of the ambiguous concepts with its results, as a manifestation of systematic thinking, its deconstruction process also makes it possible for each part to yield new discoveries, and ultimately the sum of the parts is bound to be greater than the whole (Venturini 2012), which allows us to obtain a more comprehensive rational understanding. Generally speaking, the method developed in this paper is a cyclical process of “model building – intuitive judgment – critical reflection”. The details of this process will be discussed in the following two chapters.

3. Visual expression

3.1. Automatic modeling test

According to the discussion of the methodology above, and in order to quickly establish an understanding of the concept of “Eclecticism” in architecture, this study first attempts to use the literature analysis software “Vosviewer” to automatically generate a visual model. As a digital instrument for creating visual diagrams based on network data (Van Eck and Waltman 2020), VOSviewer could visually display the most important terms in a literature database and the “co-occurrence relations” between these terms (Van Eck and Waltman 2017). More specifically, this digital tool could help efficiently build a “keyword map” based on the co-citation data between publications. In general, this result enables researchers to have an intuitive overview of the professional fields, development trends, and research priorities that are involved in the controversy.

Unfortunately, we were unable to get a valuable result after we try to draw the network diagram with the retrieval keyword of “Eclectic Architecture” (based on the search data derived from “Web of Science”, Figure 1). On the one hand, it indicates that the number of literatures on “Eclectic Architecture” (165 articles) is not enough to support the software to build a complex network. This can be verified by comparing the result with that generated from the keyword of “Eclecticism” (not limited to architecture, 1028 papers, Figure 2). On the other hand, due to the complexity of factors discussed in the architectural field, many citation data concerning certain eras, place names, architects’ names, and specific case names became distracting factors to the mapping work. Therefore, a semi-automatic bibliometric method is necessary to enrich the results: In the case of a small number of articles, it becomes possible for researchers to read and understand individual texts. After all, the controversy analysis itself is based on the discourse analysis.

Figure 1. Co-occurrence relation model of “eclectic architecture”.

Figure 2. Co-occurrence relation model of “Eclecticism”.

3.2. Modeling process

The specific process started with using the search engine of “Web of Science” to determine the source of literature data with the keywords of “Eclectic + Architecture” (The keyword “Eclectic” will contain the search results of “Eclecticism”). Then we limited the search to the period “1978–2021” (since the controversy first appeared with the publication of “The Language of Postmodern Architecture” in 1978) and found 160 relevant results. After that, we used the “literature proportion” tool provided by the website to exclude the literature unrelated to the architecture field, and 109 results were obtained. After downloading all the available, English literature, we collected an eventual result of 82 academic papers, which are the “literature data” supporting the bibliometric mapping in this study. So far, we have completed the first round of literature retrieval.

In the second round of retrieval work, the keyword search tool was used to search again for the keyword “eclectic” within each article. By making accurate analyses of the context of these keywords in the articles, we could find the author’s interpretation data of the ambiguous concept of eclecticism, namely the keywords used to define it. After this, we could classify and count them according to the two perspectives mentioned above (eclecticism as a classic style and eclecticism transformed into a postmodern style). This process may seem complicated, but in fact, most authors will give an interpretation when they put forward a concept, and thus it is not difficult to find these keywords. In addition, since these authors express their own views while referring to other researchers’ views for theoretical support, the actual data obtained on the definition of “eclecticism” is far larger in amount than the number of literatures itself, which further increases the accuracy of the interpretation of the concept. Finally, in order to make the statistical results more intuitive, all the keywords we got must be “merged” properly according to their similarity before the visualization operation. This is because all these techniques and processes are used to “make complexity readable” (Venturini 2012). In other words, the observation process should be as complex as possible and the description as simply as possible. The final data results are then visually transcribed by the visualization software “Edrawmax” and eventually translated into a set of “Eclectic Factor Models” (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Eclectic factor models.

3.3. Model interpretation

In this set of bubble-line models, the formerly ambiguous definition of “Eclecticism” given by previous literature is clearly deconstructed. Every factor is depicted as a “bubble” to the same scale, which could intuitively reflect their specific weight. To be sure, this digitally mediated representation fills the observation gap between macro-concepts and micro-factors (Venturini 2012), and allows for a dialogue between concepts from different times and places on the same platform. Through a comparison of the two concept models, it is not difficult to draw a set of conclusions for the current stage: (1) The bubbles that appear in both models, as persistent factors, are the “eclectic attributes” derived from the big data; (2) In addition to these invariable factors, those factors with obvious transformation relations demonstrate an evolutionary trend in the expression of eclectic attributes; (3) These transformational factors, together with the remaining unique factors, reflect the time characteristics of eclectic architecture. In short, through the analysis of these literature data, we can understand the idea of “Eclecticism” in architecture as a design concept that includes the basic attributes of Pluralism, Historicity, Elitism, Decoration, Innovation, and Symbolism. It should also be noticed that the focus of this concept is constantly changing with the progress of society. To be sure, unlike the previous one-sided understanding, the conceptual models above based on data translation have a much more comprehensive interpretation value.

However, we should also realize that, although the visual modeling of eclectic factors above could help us improve our understanding of the eclectic architectural phenomenon, it has not established the relationship between space expression and human behavior and needs. As is pointed out in the methodology discussion section, in order to visualize more network systems and individual actors behind the controversy, the work of deconstruction needs to be continued. In this regard, we could still go back to the literature and enlarge the scope of the search. By using the author’s keywords for “the causes of the eclectic phenomenon” as the literature data, we could get the “Eclectic Attributes – Human Needs Model” in the same way of counting and mapping (Figure 4). In this set of deconstruction models, human needs and space expression could be connected by attributes. It provides architects with an “observation checking list” to improve the efficiency and accuracy of thinking in the process of architectural design and makes the creative work more reasonable. Of course, this process of deconstruction may continue to be developed: the more levels are deconstructed, and the more comprehensive the actors’ observation is, the more the final results of spatial expression fit the current and even future space-time relationship.

Figure 4. Eclectic attributes – human needs model.

It must be noted that, this concept analysis’s accuracy needs to be tested before it is further translated and applied to design work. In the following discussion, this study compares and tests the model’s accuracy through the intuition research of specific cases of classic and post-modern eclectic architecture, which shall provide a reliable reference for future architectural practice.

4. Intuitive judgment

Take the eclectic cases of Beijing and Hong Kong as examples

4.1. The purpose of table test

Through the visual translation of the model, our research successfully unearthed and explained the meaning of the concept of “Eclecticism” in both classic and postmodern eclectic architecture. It can be argued that, with the emergence of these models, the “interpretation value” of ambiguous concepts has been established, for the results based on big data must be more objective than any individual point of view. Yet simultaneously, the model itself as a result of indirect experience immediately becomes a “target of criticism”: Is the result based on the literature necessarily correct (accuracy judgment)? Even if the results are generally correct, how much influence do changes in time, place, and society have on the accuracy of the results (contemporariness judgment)? In the next stage of the research, how should we raise awareness more comprehensively (diversity judgment)? These are all issues that need to be reflected upon in the process of testing work. As discussed above, this article will conduct an intuitive study of several specific architectural cases and use tables as a vehicle of intuitive results to make judgments on the results of the model.

4.2. The design of table test

The content of the table consists of indirect experience (the result of the model) and subjective judgment (the result of intuition). Specifically, each column of the table corresponds to one factor in the previous “eclectic factor models”. As in the model, the “eclectic attributes”, “transformation relation factors”, and “unique factors” are also distinguished by different colors. Meanwhile, each row in the table records the intuitive results of the expressed factors’ phenomenon from different perspectives. In this article, the intuitive perspective is deconstructed into aesthetic impression, space, technology, and culture. Among them, “aesthetic impression” refers to the grasp of the integrity of the architectural cases, including the intuitive impression of the architectural appearance in the expression of various factors; “space” refers to the analysis of the plan, elevation, and section of the building, as well as the relationship between the functional spaces; “technology” refers to the analysis of the construction technology, including the observation of the structure, materials, and manufacturing; and “culture” refers to the exploration of the concrete or abstract cultural symbols in architecture. Certainly, this shift in perspective is endless, but more aspects of observation will undoubtedly lead to more objective, unbiased, and comprehensive observation results (Venturini 2010).

4.3. The objects of intuition

Since the models serve as a deconstruction of the concepts of classic and post-modern eclectic architecture, it is natural to choose from these two types of architectural cases as the intuitive objects for verification. Moreover, in order to improve the accuracy of the testing work, this paper adopts the comparative study method. Specifically, we select cases in pairs, each respectively from Beijing and Hong Kong, that are similar in terms of construction time, functional use, or architect, and make analogies and reflections while completing the table to add to the dimensions of thought. The complex social contexts of Beijing and Hong Kong also make the cases highly representative: on the one hand, as the capital of China and the early colonial city opened up to the outside world, both cities have a strong social basis for cultural exchanges, which makes the emergence and expression of eclecticism universal. On the other hand, as cities respectively representative of Northern and Southern cultures, the differences in local traditional thought and ways of foreign exchange endows the comparative study with a higher reference value. Finally, this article selected four groups and a total of eight architecture cases for intuitive verification. The classic cases include the Old Pathological Institute (Hong Kong) & Chang Guan Building (Beijing), the Main Building of Hong Kong University & the Main Building of Land Army Headquarter of the Qing Dynasty (Beijing). The postmodern part includes the Bank of China Tower (Hong Kong) & Beijing Fragrant Hill Hotel, Hong Kong Heritage Museum & the Capital Museum of Beijing. Of course, to have a comprehensive understanding of these cases, the intuitive study includes not only the experience of the buildings themselves but also relevant research papers, publications, government archives, and official publicity materials.

4.4. The standard and significance of judgment

After the intuition results are filled in the table, the accuracy of the model could be judged. In fact, the criterion of judgment is straightforward: if for every column in the table, especially the invariable “eclectic attributes” section, phenomenological counterparts could be found in at least one perspective of intuition, then we may consider the conceptual interpretation of the models as having practical reference value. However, the significance of table work is far greater than that. Through this multi-perspective intuition, even if the result does not overthrow the previous macroscopic dogmatic conceptions, it will still enrich the understanding of the earlier concepts due to the principle of system integrity¹³ (Wei and Zeng 2009). This kind of enrichment is not only a supplement to knowledge on the professional level, but also endows the research with contemporariness. In addition, in the face of complex social changes, more professional participation is required to maximize research benefits. This means that, in the table improvement process, we should always reflect upon the table form so as to develop it into a more easily understood form in future research, in order to obtain cognitive diversity.

4.5. Intuition study of classic eclectic architecture (Tables A1–A4)

The table test starts with a set of small-scale classic eclectic cases. The Chang Guan Building is located northwest of Beijing Zoo – the former site of “Agricultural Experimental Farm” in the Qing Dynasty (Figure 5). The building is a two-story brick-wood building constructed by Chinese craftsmen and in which Baroque decoration features prominently (Beijing Municipal Cultural Heritage Bureau 2011). Completed in early 1908, it was initially used as a temporary residence for Empress Dowager Cixi in her trip to the Summer Palace. Chang Guan Building is by far the most well-preserved western-style building in the late Qing Dynasty in Beijing and also the only royal summer house that has been preserved intact. It is worth noting that, unlike the early eclectic architecture in China, although the main structure of Chang Guan Building is brick wall bearing, the roof structure has begun to adopt the wood truss with iron sheet roof. For a long time, “whether the roof structure is truss structure or not has been regarded as an important indicator of the extent to which a building is influenced by the western architecture” (Zhang, 2008). From this point, it can be seen that Chinese artisans had mastered this design and construction technology at this time. The corresponding case to Chang Guan Building is the Old Pathological Institute in Caine Lane, formerly known as the “Bacteriological Institute” (Figure 6). The building was opened in 1906, which was the first public health and medical laboratory in Hong Kong. The institute is built mainly in the Edwardian Baroque style, containing two upper floors and one basement. Meanwhile, the arcaded verandah and the eclectic double-layer Chinese pan-and-roll tiled roof are important examples of the adaptation of Western architecture to a subtropical climate.

Figure 5. Chang Guan building.

Figure 6. Old pathological institute.

Overall, both cases have been built with similar elevation composition and have both adopted Flemish gable decoration, which gave a deep overall impression. In addition, the two buildings are very similar in terms of construction time, space volume, and dominant style, making them highly comparable. The intuition study of two cases was completed under the control of the table framework, including the sorting of archives and the judgment of field investigation. As a result, all the table’s eclectic factors found their corresponding expressions (Tables A1 and A2), which indicates that the model’s accuracy is verified in this group of tests. At the same time, existing knowledge and views are criticized in the process of intuition study. For example, in some literature about the Hong Kong Old Pathological Institute, the author believes that the bottled decorations on the building gables and roofs are abstract symbols embodying medical metaphors (Choong 1996; Ho 2020). However, with the deepening of comparative study, these ornaments have been recognized as standard practices in Baroque architecture and are found in Western architecture in Beijing. Therefore, in the table improvement process, these phenomena are recorded as the expression of “decorative attribute”. It can be seen that the selection of table information is critical. The indirect experience will also be re-examined from a contemporary perspective. These phenomena also confirm the statement of the eclectic movement historian Walter Kidney:

“Not only were the forms of historic architecture valuable through their beauty, but they came to our times freighted with historic associations that every cultured person was familiar with, and that seemed to suggest, even to demand, that a certain building, in a certain place, be built in some one of a rather restricted range style.” (Kidney 1974)

In any case, it can be seen that the selection of table information is inevitably critical. The indirect experience and the views of other scholars will also be re-examined from a contemporary perspective.

The test then chooses a group of large public buildings as the intuition research objects for the second set of classic eclectic architecture. The Main Building of The Land Army Headquarter of the Qing Dynasty is located at No. 3 Zhang Zi Zhong Road, Beijing (Figure 7). The place was originally the noble school in the late Qing Dynasty, which was rebuilt and re-opened as headquarter for Army Department in 1909. The dominant style of the building is the Western classical style, which adopts wood structure, triangular truss, and iron sheet roof. The facade is decorated with a large number of gray brick carvings with exquisite patterns. Since the building was designed by the early Chinese Architect (Shen Qi) and built by local craftsmen, the case reflects the professional level and technical process of early Chinese architectural design and construction skills, which is of great significance for studying the process of Chinese architectural modernization (Lai 1993). In the meantime, the Main Building of the University of Hong Kong is the oldest building on campus, which was donated by the well-known Parsi businessman and philanthropist Sir Hormusjee Nawrojee Mody (Figure 8). It was completed in 1912, dominated by Western classical style. This well-proportioned red-brick building has three stories, supported by granite columns of the Ionic order. The case is designed symmetrically around the central axis of the clock tower. In general, the main building features the style characteristics of Gothic, Baroque, and Renaissance architecture (Department of Architecture, The Hong Kong University 1999).

Figure 7. The main building of the land army headquarter of the qing dynasty building.

Figure 8. The main building of the university of Hong Kong.

The two cases also have similar symmetrical elevation compositions and construction times. Furthermore, they are both decorated in a baroque style. After a comparative study, the eclectic model’s accuracy is again verified: all the eclectic factors were reflected in the case (Tables A3 and A4). In addition, in the table work, the understanding of eclectic architecture is further enriched. The intuition will no longer focus simply on the external architectural form within the attribute concept framework but will also make judgements according to eclectic factors’ expression relationship. For example, although there is a significant difference between the two cases in terms of the content of façade design, both are expressions of secular pursuit (Lai 1993). Therefore, these decorative phenomena could be together classified as an embodiment of “(Baroque) decorative attribute”. Some scholars even used the term “Chinese Baroque” or “Chinese Renaissance” to describe such western-style buildings with Chinese characteristics (Department of Architecture, The Hong Kong University 1999). For another example, even for the expression of the same attributes, there will be differences in understanding due to different social backgrounds. As the birthplace of eclecticism, architects from Western culture are used to choosing the style with social consensus to express the “elitist attribute”. While for Chinese architects, who are the recipients of foreign culture, the rare Western architecture with royal privilege itself is the embodiment of the elitist attribute, so their designs are not limited to specific styles. To a certain extent, it explains why so much “Fantasy Style” architecture exist in East Asia (Fujimori 2010), and it is also determined by the difference in the social status of architects in different cultures (Su 2017). This group of intuition studies not only confirms the accuracy of the classic “Eclectic Factor Model” but also jumps out of the shackles of the surface-form research, and the understanding of the eclecticism concept is also enriched through deep attribute thinking. To be sure, this intuition framework based on attributes can grasp the essence of architectural expressions more clearly and give architects diverse ways of understanding.

4.6. Intuition study of post-modern eclectic architecture (Table B1-B4)

Post-modern eclectic architecture is faced with a much more complex social environment. In this paper, we first compare the same architect’s different choices made when dealing with various stages of social development. The Beijing Fragrant Hill Hotel (1982), (Figure 9) and the Bank of China Tower in Hong Kong (1990), (Figure 10) are two representative works of architect I.M. Pei.

Figure 9. The fragrant hill hotel.

Figure 10. The bank of China tower (HK).

The former is the first large-scale public building designed by a foreign architect since China’s reform and opening up policy (Li and Jia 2019; Gu 1983), whereas the latter is a symbolic landmark building before Hong Kong’s return to China. Both have received significant attention and extensive discussion since their completion. From the results of this intuition study, both cases respond to the post-modern eclectic factor model’s attributes, which give positive conclusions about the accuracy of the model (Tables B1 and B2). As in the aforementioned intuition studies, existing prejudices are pointed out in the table work process. Pei’s fame and prestige influence many scholars and cause them to believe that Fragrant Hill Hotel is a highly abstract expression. However, with the table work, we find that most of the design details represent concrete historical or decorative attributes rather than abstract ones. For example, the water-maze sight furniture at the center of the courtyard is not a metaphor for Yunnan historic sites (Jiang 2013), but a concrete copy of the “Cup-floating Pavilion” which could be found at Prince Gong’s Mansion in Beijing (Liu and Lu 2016). Moreover, the details of doors and windows are also concrete references to “Suzhou Garden” decorations. These phenomena show that the architect considered the acceptance of modern architecture by Chinese people at the time, and the Hotel could be regarded as a connecting work. In the Bank of China Tower design in Hong Kong, I.M. Pei, considering the historical and cultural background of Hong Kong as an early opened-up city, chose more abstract and radical design methods.

The last group of intuition test concern two cultural buildings: the Hong Kong Heritage Museum (2000) and the Capital Museum of Beijing (2005). The former, located in the center of Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong, is a comprehensive museum managed by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department, covering collections in the field of history, art, and culture (Figure 11). The museum was officially opened in 2000. The building adopts the traditional Chinese “Si He Yuan” layout, with 12 exhibition halls, a 400-person theater, and other multi-functional spaces. With an exhibition area of 7500 square meters, it has become the largest museum in Hong Kong. The Capital Museum of Beijing is located at Fu Xing Men Street, an extended line of Chang An Avenue which traverses the center of the Capital, including the Forbidden City and Tian An Men Square (Figure 12). The project is a comprehensive museum with cash facilities. It includes three main blocks covered by a vast rectangular horizontal roof and retreats a certain distance from the street to vacate a public square facing the city. The most prominent block (used as a permanent exhibition of precious historical relics) is shaped like a bronze-made cultural relic. In 2009, the museum was selected as one of “The Best Ten Modern Architectures in Beijing” (BIAD 2010).

Figure 11. The Hong Kong heritage museum.

Figure 12. The Capital Museum of Beijing.

Both cases have similar functional orientation and exhibition content, and both are inspired by traditional Chinese architecture. However, their expressions are quite different. Perhaps influenced by the sentiment of Hong Kong people in search of their roots (Xue 2005, 2015), the Hong Kong Heritage Museum used a very concrete Chinese style roof, columns, and window patterns. This straightforward expression can only be attributed to one of historical and decorative attributes. Although all the eclectic attributes prove to have corresponding phenomena, this simple style of expression makes it difficult to regard the museum as a mature piece of post-modern eclectic architecture. (Table B3) In contrast, the design of Capital Museum is much more mature. Although the designer also used historical elements such as Chinese style roof and bronze ware for reference, it was presented in a very abstract way. Other concrete historical elements, such as grey bricks and archways, exist as the expression of decorative attribute. With this sense of conflict and heterogeneity, all the post-modern eclectic factors are fully expressed (Table B4). In conclusion, the accuracy of the model is verified again.

In general, all the cases above have proved the accuracy of controversy mapping. With the judgment and reflection made in the table work process, the concept of eclecticism is also given a contemporary interpretation. At the same time, in the process of intuition study, it is found that the larger proportion a factor constitutes in the model, the easier it is to observe a corresponding phenomenon. This suggests that the weight relationship expressed by the model also has a specific reference value. Of course, this judgment needs to be supported by more cases in future studies.

4.7. Reflection

The table’s intuition works has reflected some phenomena that need researchers’ attention, such as the differences in modes of thinking: since the literature data for this controversy mapping are eclectic architecture papers written in English, they inevitably carry a tendency towards Western thinking and understanding. When we use the models and tables based on these data to analyze China’s eclectic architecture, even to the same attribute’s expression, there will present various phenomena due to different cultural contexts and development stages.

This paper holds that this difference in expression is also the inevitable result of the complexity of architectural practice. Therefore, both the East and the West show a similar phenomenon. “The architect depended of course on the help of other artists, and on a host of craftsmen and suppliers who could meet or anticipate his wishes” (Kidney 1974). In the early stage of eclecticism, craftsmen gave full play to their wisdom. In the United States, “A good plasterer could trowel in a half-dozen ways to give the proper textural effects for each style” (Kidney 1974). Meanwhile, in China, a brick carver replaced the religious symbols of Western-style buildings with “Mei Lan Zhu Ju” (plum blossoms, orchid, bamboo, and chrysanthemum), which enabled them to be more readily accepted by local people. This cooperation mechanism has further contributed to the diversity of results. Moreover, from the heyday of eclecticism to the popularity of postmodern architecture, the eclecticists have regarded themselves as “a participant in, or an heir to, a reform movement” (Kidney 1974). They no longer meet the standard decorative patterns and fixed scale and proportion. On the contrary, they “felt free to introduce variations of his own”, replacing “authentic” materials with new materials, and even risking trying “non-historic” architectural styles (Kidney 1974).

In response to these differences and complexities, this study first emphasizes absorbing the views of more disciplines through the cartography of controversies. More importantly, researchers should have a deeper understanding of architecture’s (eclectic) attribute when intuiting cases. The original source of architectural attribute is people’s basic emotions rather than standardized architectural symbols, which means that a consensus beyond each other’s context can be reached at the level of attribute discussion. On the other side, in the phenomenon’s intuition, we should fully integrate the observation and reflection on differences as much as possible. Returning to the cartography method itself, the purpose of controversy mapping is to “offers suggestions rather than imposing itself on the reader” (Latour, B 2007). Its core is to draw “as many consequences as possible” through “a shift in perspective” (Latour, B 2007). Researchers need to reconcile with the differences of expression rather than opposing them, and to intuit the essence (attribute) of phenomena rather than the surface.

5. Conclusion

From concept interpretation to interdisciplinary integration

5.1. Interpretation of the concept of eclecticism

After the discussion in this paper, the architectural concept of “Eclecticism” was finally interpreted and demonstrated clearly: it is a design concept that includes the essential attributes of pluralism, historicity, decoration, innovation, elitism, and symbolism. In addition to these basic attributes, due to time and regional influences, there are often expressions of other various factors, which require more intuitive cases in the future to enrich the understanding of their expression content and tendency. We achieved the above conclusion through the quantitative translation of literature data (model work) and architectural cases’ intuitive study (table work). It can be seen as a practice of controversy mapping in the study of architectural attribute and concept redefinition.

5.2. Reflection on the cartography of controversies

From this practice, we can clearly see the advantages of this ANT based cartography methodology in the interpretation of ambiguous concepts, that is: (1) The accuracy of attribute deconstruction; (2) The contemporariness of intuitive judgments; and (3) The diversity of interpretation routes. These advantages provide architects with a reliable reference in interpreting phenomena and accumulating inspiration, while building a dialogue platform between human needs and spatial expression through the emphasis of attribute intuition. Meanwhile, we have also found the limitations of this controversy analysis through the practice: the result’s accuracy will be significantly affected by the data sources, data quantity, and researchers’ judgment. In response, of course, we could be optimistic about the fast-developing artificial intelligence technology such as semantic analysis and big data algorithms. On the other hand, we may begin to reflect on the necessity for architects to complete all the models and tables. Social progress is reflected in professional specialization. It is not hard to imagine that if artists, historians, scientists, and even the public could participate in the process of concept interpretation through the improvement of models and tables, there is no doubt that more comprehensive, objective, and diverse results will be obtained. As Bruno said, “To have transformed the social from what was a surface, a territory, a province of reality, into a circulation, is what I think has been the most useful contribution of ANT” (Latour, B 1999).

5.3. More possibilities in the future practice

An Actor-Network Theory (ANT) study starts from a controversy, and its original intention is to enrich the explanation of existing phenomena. But it can be predicted that if we apply this method to the decision-making process of creative practice, these intuitive and visual models will play the role of “attribute interpreter”. It means that, not only the architects in the professional field could more clearly and intuitively connect with the actors who affect the environment, but the experts in other fields will also become the actors who participate in the creation process. It is the deconstruction of architects’ task and the integration of disciplines. More importantly, it is a scientific and democratic response to the complexity of contemporary society. The actors will stand ahead of architecture.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Kaiyu Cheng

Kaiyu Cheng received his Master's degree in Architecture from the Oslo School of Architecture and Design (AHO). He has worked on several national-level research & design projects and international competitions. He is currently working toward his Ph.D. degree with the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (UCAS) and the City University of Hong Kong (CityU). His research interests include architectural design and theory, technology in design, and eclectic architecture.

Paulina Neisch

Doctor Paulina Neisch explores architecture and urban design through practice, research, and publication. She is a qualified architect (M.Arch., M.Sc., Professional License, several years of architectural practice) and educator (several years of teaching experience at graduate and postgraduate levels in Asia, Europe, and the Middle East) with the multidisciplinary approach to research, teaching and design. She earned her doctorate with honors at the University of Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense in France and earlier degrees from the National Institute of Applied Science (INSA) and National Higher School of Architecture (ENSA) in Strasbourg, France. She has worked on several research projects realized at an international level and supported by public and private competitive grants. Currently, she is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, City University of Hong Kong. Her research interests include South-eastern Asian architecture and urban design, Human-friendly design, Socially responsible design, User experience & design, Culture & Design, Space production, Technology in design, Design education development, and methodology.

Notes

¹ As a general term of social science study, “controversy” means complicated and uncertain phenomena to be observed in collective life. In Venturini’s documentation, controversies are defined as such: “The word ‘controversy’ refers here to every bit of science and technology which is not yet stabilized, closed or ‘black boxed’ … we use it as a general term to describe shared uncertainty.” (Wissink 2013; Venturini 2010) In this paper, we define the controversy as an “in-progress” definition of phenomena that are under constant reconsideration.

² In Carroll Meeks’ article “Creative Eclecticism”, the author contends that eclecticism is an “almost universal phenomenon generally occurring as a transition between periods of more vigorous activity in the arts and in philosophy”. Meanwhile, it is “not limited to one or two exceptional periods”, and it’s “meaning and the value placed upon it have shifted often” (Carroll, 1953).

³ In Browning, Halcli, and Webster’s publication “Understanding contemporary society: Theories of the present”, they believe “the large-scale migration of peoples, communication of information and images, and the rapid movement of materials around the globe have combined to bring into question relatively fixed notions of culture … Amidst this change and dislocation, it is often difficult nowadays to identify dominant theoretical traditions in fiercely contested intellectual realms”. Moreover, with the social change, “that it seems impossible to fix analysis and explanation in any stable set of terms”.

⁴ In Hansen’s book “The Division of Labour in post-industrial Societies”, the author believes that social science has always been the backbone of social change study: “In one way or the other, sociology has always been preoccupied with social change … During its history sociology has shifted its primary attention between change and stability … I believe, to contend that during this time-span a major interest for sociologists has been to study what is changing in society and why.”

⁵ In Bruno’s article “On actor-network theory: A few clarifications”, the author made a clear definition: “An ‘actor’ in ANT is a semiotic definition – an actant -, that is something that acts or to which activity is granted by others … An actant can literally be anything provided it is granted to be the source of an action” (Latour, B 1996).

⁶ More than that, in Andrew Steen’s work “Radical Eclecticism and Post-Modern Architecture”, it shows that “According to Architectural Design editor Haig Beck, the working title of Charles Jencks’ The Language of Post-Modern Architecture … was ‘Radical Eclecticism’”.

⁷ To this day, still many scholars only regard eclectic architecture as a collage style. In Sheppard’s documentation, “It (eclectic architecture) died a natural death with the advent of Modernism and the shift from conservative architectural thinking of the Beaux Arts to the more socially progressive movement in Europe and America” (Sheppard 2006).

⁸ The “intuition” introduced in this paper is the concept in Edmund Husserl’s phenomenology, it includes not only physical perception (observation) but also imagination and reflection (Zhang 2010; Husserl 2016). To grasp the essence, the intuition needs to be “filled” by the direct apprehension of the object, In Hintikka’s documentation: “First, there first of all are the objects of empirical intuition, prominently including the objects given to me in perception … Secondly, there are in Husserl intuitions provided by reflection on internal observation.” (Hintikka 2003)

⁹ Bruno Latour has repeatedly emphasized the methodological attribute of ANT rather than the theoretical concept: “It was never a theory of what the social is made of” (Latour, B 1999). In “On recalling ANT” he claimed that “It (ANT) tries to refocus the originality of what is more a method to deploy the actor’s own world building activities than an alternative social theory” (Latour, B 1999). In the book “Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory” published later on, the author even said that he had planned to give up “ANT” as a label for it is “so awkward, so confusing, so meaningless”, and to use a more “elaborate one” like “sociology of translation” or “sociology of innovation” (Latour, B 2007).

¹⁰ Although Bruno Latour himself did not explain whether the ANT is affected by phenomenology, the “suspending the common-sense hypothesis” and “[following] the actors themselves” (Latour, B 2007) emphasized by ANT naturally remind one of the phenomenological ideas of “Epoché” (suspension) and the declaration of “Zu Den Sachen Selbst” (“facing the fact itself”, Heidegger 2013).

¹¹ The Actor-Network-Theory can be regarded as an application form of system science. According to the principle of system integrity in SYSTEMATICISM, “As the objective world is inexhaustible, there is no limitation to people’s understanding of the system level, whether in depth or in breadth” (Wei and Zeng 2009).

¹² In Howell Robert’s study, the author argued that “despite the apparent diversity of responses to the knowledge argument, they all boil down to a response according to which genuine epistemic gains are made when an individual has an experience. I call this the acquaintance response … there is some epistemic gain to be achieved by actually undergoing a particular state, and that it is only by undergoing the state that such an epistemic gain can be achieved.”

¹³ According to Wei Hongsen and Zeng Guoping’s SYSTEMATICISM-The Principle of System Integrity, “the sum of the parts will inevitably greater than the whole”.

Appendix

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table