Sunday November 8, 2009

The little hall that could

Architecture Inside Out
By PROF DR MOHAMAD TAJUDDIN RASDI and ONG TEEN NAH

A humble structure down south offers a glimpse of the way forward for Malaysian administrative architecture.

I WOULD like to introduce you to a little known building that might just contribute to the Prime Minister’s 1Malaysia call: the Dewan Jubli Intan in Johor Baru.

While the shape of this country’s administrative architecture might seem to have been set with the advent of Putrajaya’s mono-culture buildings, the results of the last national election and the PM’s recent speeches on unity hint that “democratic architecture” may yet warrant consideration by the powers-that-be.

The dewan just after it had been completed. – from The Architecture of Malaysia by Ken Yeang

Malaysia’s Parliament, built in 1963, certainly makes a statement about democracy; its design speaks of universal aspirations and non-racial references. With its sun shading devices, the architecture is eminently suited to the tropics; the fact that it is not adorned nor lavished with opulent materials speaks of an accountable government. Compare that with the buildings of our administrative capital, Putrajaya. The imperial, palatial language clearly says that the Mahathir administration was looked upon as the new aristocrats of Malay leadership.

What then will be the future of our administrative architecture? Will it follow Putrajaya’s concept of Malay-Muslim supremacy or will it emulate the Parliament building?

I present here an unknown third alternative that is embedded in the architecture of the Dewan Jubli Intan built in 1955 in Johor. The following essay is an extract from the work of my student, Ong Teen Nah, who interviewed the hall’s architect, Raymond Honey.

Mixing elements from all cultures

To mark the diamond jubilee in 1955 of Johor’s ruler, Major-General Sir Ibrahim Almarhum Sultan Abu Bakar, a dewan, or public hall, was to be built. Coincidently, the preparation for the (then) upcoming Merdeka had prompted Sir Gerald Templer’s call for buildings to reflect national identity.

Templer – who had been appointed High Commissioner of Malaya on Feb 7, 1952, with a brief to deal with the ongoing communist insurgency – wanted to create a national consciousness that would support the struggle against the rebels.

He felt that locals who saw public buildings as “Malayan” would themselves begin to feel Malayan, fostering an awareness on the country’s pre-colonial cultures and, subsequently, creating a new cultural synthesis.

The Dewan Jublin Intan was the only public building that responded to the call to assimilate elements of the various cultures and races in Malaya before Merdeka. – ZAZALI MUSA / The Star

The idea of the Dewan Jubli Intan’s edifice having a Saracen-like character was actually mooted by Sultan Ibrahim himself to symbolise Johor’s progress during that time. Built by local craftsmen under the supervision of a Western architect, the building blends cosmopolitan Renaissance architecture with an overlay of Anglo-Malay influence.

Honey’s contributions to the local architectural scene covered a span of 12 years, from 1950 to 1962. He began as an architect at the headquarters of the Public Works Department (now Jabatan Kerja Raya).

He was among the first individuals to write about the issue of national identity and Malaysian architecture in his article, An Architecture for Malaya, in the 1960 edition of the architect association’s magazine, Peta (it has since been renamed Majalah Akitek).

Other than contributions to the local architectural scene, Honey was involved in numerous advisory matters and discussions on Malaysian architecture.

The proposal for a Town Hall in Johor Baru was conceived at a time when aspirations to express a “Malayan” architecture were at their infancy. It was a time when Malaya was still recovering from World War II and in the process of fighting the communists. Very few large buildings went up until after Merdeka in 1957, for it was a time before an independent government could formulate what it wanted to do and express.

In light of the prevailing Western architectural fashions of that period, the formal, symmetrical and decorated elements of the Dewan were very much out of character of the time. In fact, Honey suspected that Dewan Jubli Intan was viewed with embarrassment by his contemporaries.

But the new town hall was the only public building that had boldly responded to General Templer’s call with an attempt to assimilate elements of the various cultures and races in Malaya. It introduced elements of Muslim, Moghul and Chinese architecture.

Honey explains that the roof is injected with elements of Moghul architecture, representing Malaysia’s Indian community. The Moghul influence is also seen in the proportion, formality and symmetrical expression of the main façade.

The roof was originally supposed to have been raised and turned-up, which, of course, would resemble traditional Chinese roofs and represent Malaya’s Chinese community. However, around the time of Malaya’s Independence, this idea was withdrawn. Honey does not regret that; to him, such embellishment was perhaps the sort of eye-catching feature that suited an exhibition or something ephemeral.

The influence of traditional Malay motifs and crafts are clearly seen in the decorative elements throughout the building. The balustrades, wooden doors, window details and openings throughout the interior are, in fact, mostly replicas of 18th century carvings from Johor’s Istana Besar. Some are simple, geometrical motifs designed by the architect.

The little hall could teach a lesson to those who will be creating the public infrastructure of tomorrow. Will we still see the dominance of Malay architecture or will a style appear that’s modernised?

Or perhaps – thanks to this whole 1Malaysia concept even – we might take a bold step in a creative adventure of languages and ornaments from all our various cultures. If the Malay language can be a combination of more than 10 other languages, why should architecture stop at only one?

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia lecturer Prof Dr Mohamad Tajuddin passionately believes that architectural design that respects cultural values, religious sensitivities and the ideals of democracy is vital to nation-building and harmony.