I was writing letters to invite practising architects to come for our Final Presentation, when I remembered Mr Lok Wooi. A very personable and forward thinking individual, always ready to be involved with our school, it is refreshing to see his approach in architecture, as mentioned in this article.
We will visit the building designed by Lok Wooi in the next semester. I shall assist any studio master interested to bring their students to visit his house. Lok was telling me that everyone is welcome.
If you read the MTC article (link above) he was involved in research and development of the use of timber in buildings. Anyone interested in this can contact him. Go ahead, he is very friendly.
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Why do we use domes in our mosques?
Why do we use domes in our mosques?
Have you ever wondered why we use domes for our mosques? What is the significance of the dome?
My assertion is that domes are not practical and not suitable for Malaysian mosques and are also symbolically questionable.
The dome is a form adopted from Turkey, and with regards to Malaysian’s mosques designed from the 1980s, specifically referring to the great Ottoman mosques like the Suleymaniye Mosque or the Sultan Ahmed Mosque from Istanbul. In fact the architect who designed the Shah Alam Mosque said that he was influenced by the Turkish mosques.
But why do we use domes in our mosques? By right we should not have domes on our mosques, based on two facts. That domes are cultural and regional rather than a form that was being prescribed in the Quran. And that domes are not a climatically correct solution for our roof coverings.
Those in favour of the dome would cite the symbolic significance of the dome or half a sphere on a square base denoting some symbolic and mystical essence combined to represent a space that is sacred. And that is their only argument, whereas there are many arguments against the use of domes on mosques.
Mosques are supposed to be functional, comfortable and accessible. The roof of the Malay mosques in history had always been the pitch roof, either pyramidical or hipped roof with a ridge, with deep overhangs to give enough shade and to channel the tropical rainfall away from the inside of the mosques. The roof must be good enough to allow a comfortable atmosphere with high ceilings and proper ventilation, and the prime example of workable and comfortable mosques are the Kampung Laut Mosque in Kelantan, the Trengkera and Kampung Keling Mosques in Melaka.
In fact the form of these mosques had assimilated the cultures and influence of our region for centuries, starting with the Demak Mosque in the 1500s. The Melakan mosques had used the fundamental principles of form-making in Islam and that is the gradual transfiguration of the local form, assimilating the Chinese pagoda and yet proved to be very comfortable and functional.
In fact the current crop of mosques design aping the Turkish mosques had its roots in Roman and Byzantine architecture, as the Sinan, architect who designed the Suleymaniye and the Sultan Ahmed Mosques took the design of the dome of the Hagia Sophia, which was formally a church during the time of the Roman Emperor Consatantine. The Byzantines were experimenting with the sphere on the square form and tried to create a style that is suitable to their region and climatic conditions using the materials that are suitable to construct for a dome.
The British introduced the Moorish style that we find in our Masjid Jamek and our Bangunan Sultan Abdul Samad and many buildings done in the early 1900s, but before that there were no history of the dome ever built in the Malay Peninsula.
So why are we still with the dome and used it on top of our mosques design? I conclude that domes are not required to be in the design of a mosque in Malaysia and that we need to go back to the principles of comfort, functionality and accessibility and use our resources to find a more sustainable and meaningful form to create our own identity.
The answer lies in the form of the pyramidal and hipped pitched roofs of Kampung Laut, Trengkera and Kampung Keling mosques or a mosque design with the latest contemporary ideas, just like the National Mosque when it was designed to reflect the architecture of the 1960s.
Have you ever wondered why we use domes for our mosques? What is the significance of the dome?
My assertion is that domes are not practical and not suitable for Malaysian mosques and are also symbolically questionable.
The dome is a form adopted from Turkey, and with regards to Malaysian’s mosques designed from the 1980s, specifically referring to the great Ottoman mosques like the Suleymaniye Mosque or the Sultan Ahmed Mosque from Istanbul. In fact the architect who designed the Shah Alam Mosque said that he was influenced by the Turkish mosques.
But why do we use domes in our mosques? By right we should not have domes on our mosques, based on two facts. That domes are cultural and regional rather than a form that was being prescribed in the Quran. And that domes are not a climatically correct solution for our roof coverings.
Those in favour of the dome would cite the symbolic significance of the dome or half a sphere on a square base denoting some symbolic and mystical essence combined to represent a space that is sacred. And that is their only argument, whereas there are many arguments against the use of domes on mosques.
Mosques are supposed to be functional, comfortable and accessible. The roof of the Malay mosques in history had always been the pitch roof, either pyramidical or hipped roof with a ridge, with deep overhangs to give enough shade and to channel the tropical rainfall away from the inside of the mosques. The roof must be good enough to allow a comfortable atmosphere with high ceilings and proper ventilation, and the prime example of workable and comfortable mosques are the Kampung Laut Mosque in Kelantan, the Trengkera and Kampung Keling Mosques in Melaka.
In fact the form of these mosques had assimilated the cultures and influence of our region for centuries, starting with the Demak Mosque in the 1500s. The Melakan mosques had used the fundamental principles of form-making in Islam and that is the gradual transfiguration of the local form, assimilating the Chinese pagoda and yet proved to be very comfortable and functional.
In fact the current crop of mosques design aping the Turkish mosques had its roots in Roman and Byzantine architecture, as the Sinan, architect who designed the Suleymaniye and the Sultan Ahmed Mosques took the design of the dome of the Hagia Sophia, which was formally a church during the time of the Roman Emperor Consatantine. The Byzantines were experimenting with the sphere on the square form and tried to create a style that is suitable to their region and climatic conditions using the materials that are suitable to construct for a dome.
The British introduced the Moorish style that we find in our Masjid Jamek and our Bangunan Sultan Abdul Samad and many buildings done in the early 1900s, but before that there were no history of the dome ever built in the Malay Peninsula.
So why are we still with the dome and used it on top of our mosques design? I conclude that domes are not required to be in the design of a mosque in Malaysia and that we need to go back to the principles of comfort, functionality and accessibility and use our resources to find a more sustainable and meaningful form to create our own identity.
The answer lies in the form of the pyramidal and hipped pitched roofs of Kampung Laut, Trengkera and Kampung Keling mosques or a mosque design with the latest contemporary ideas, just like the National Mosque when it was designed to reflect the architecture of the 1960s.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)