Al-Naim...
tions. Individuals may also seek to protect and enhance identification already made.”^4
Rapoport presents two definitions for the concept of identity. The first stresses the
importance of continuity of identity, the “unchanging nature of something under
varying aspects or conditions.” The second definition is concerned with the “condi-
tion of being one thing and not another.”^5 The implicit and explicit resistance to
introduced objects, images, lifestyles, etc., plays an important role in the continu-
ity of certain meanings over an extended period of time. Habraken’s concept of
implicit and explicit constraints as two mechanisms that enable us to evaluate the
form assists us here. He argues that during the production of a new form, there is
an internal mechanism that forces the form to take certain shapes. These shapes are
compatible with peoples’ past experience, belief system, norms, and lifestyles.^6
The tension between conservatism and modernism in urban Saudi Arabia resulted
in a certain social resistance, and it has become necessary to discuss how this social
resistance has been translated into forms. This has encouraged many researchers
and architects to search for an identity in the contemporary Saudi built environment. The following discussion aims to
present a general review of this search over the past two decades, focusing on two main questions. First, has the need for
identity in Saudi Arabia resulted in society responding, “Here we are, despite the drastic changes and foreign influences;
this is our identity”? Or has this need for identity emerged as a result of a superior Western culture that has directly
influenced the social and physical orders in Saudi Arabia? It is important to clarify here that the following discussion
is not intended to answer these two questions; rather, it will use them broadly as a context for a discussion of the built
environment.
Rapid changes in the 1970s resulted in a sense of “not belonging” in the urban environment in Saudi Arabia, since
people suddenly found themselves in a completely different physical environment. Indicating the loss of traditional
identity in the Saudi built environment, Ben Saleh^7 (1980) writes:
Recent buildings have lost their traditional identities and have become hybrids of exotic character in their architectural
form, main concepts, arrangement of spaces, organization of elements, and building techniques employed.^8
- W. Bloom, Personal Identity, National Identity and International Relations (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,
1990), p. 50. - A. Rapoport, ”Identity and environment: A cross-cultural perspective,” in J.S. Duncan, ed., Housing and Identity: Cross-
Cultural Perspectives (London: Croom-Helm, 1981), pp. 6-35. - N.J. Habraken,The Appearance of the Form (Cambridge, MA: Awater Press, 1985), pp. 63-66.
- Saudi academic and former Dean of the College of Architecture and Planning at King Saud University.
- Cited in M. Al-Gabbani, Community Structure, Residential Satisfaction, and Preferences in a Rapidly Changing Urban
Environment: The Case of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Unpublished PhD, Michigan, University of Michigan (1984), p. 275.
Figure 2: Al-Mamalka Tower — Riyadh