Asia is unfortunate to suffer from continuous devastating appalling natural disasters and Japan is not the exception. For centuries the country has been experiencing the ruinous consequences of earthquakes and tsunami with thousands of casualties and destroyed buildings. Therefore people tried to minimize the effects of these disasters by building wooden houses specially constructed and aimed at the smallest destruction in case of the earthquake. Certainly it wasn’t the best solution to solve this problem but with no developed technology to find out about the approaching earthquake in advance it was at least a possibility to avoid the death of vulnerable people. Process of reconstruction took years affecting both economical and social sphere of life until XIXth century brought Western teachers to Japan after one of the most crashing earthquake. And so the history of Japan’s technical change began.
As soon as westerners arrived on the islands Japan started to change its face. As some researchers point out wooden-country Japan with its intricately shaped houses and temples seemed fragile and tenuous to Europeans and thus was preserved as having some feminine character as opposed to firm stone western buildings (Clancey, 2006, p. 13). The aim of foreign engineers was to replace Japanese architecture for more solid one with masonry houses, new rail road, iron bridges and other European technological advances. In the process of rebuilding Japanese pupils quickly learned absorbing all industrial and technological knowledge of foreign teachers.
It is hard to deny that this westerners’ altruistic objective may imply some hidden motives. There’s no doubt that architecture is a part of culture and an indispensible means of nation identity and changing it means affecting the whole society and intervening into the centuries-old traditions. Gregory Clancey mentions that in Japanese the word “architecture” and “building” sounds alike that testify to the fact that building is considered to be art (Clancey, 2006, p. 16).
After the Nobi earthquake hit Japan masonry buildings and bridges scattered into pieces while native Japanese wooden houses withstood, which shook the belief in European technological knowledge. On the contrary the Western buildings now epitomize fragility and instability.
However, despite the fact that this very project failed, the collaboration between East and West continued. And nowadays we observe the results of their mutual work the development the rapid grow of Japanese earthquake resistant building technology. The earthquake resistance buildings emerged not long ago on the islands and promised “to holds a building together through a magnitude-seven earthquake, and even pulls it back upright on its foundation when the quaking stops” (Clancey, 2006, p. 145)
As far as the ethical and moral issues of the building are concerned, it’s necessary to highlight that they are chiefly connected with two environmental and cultural factors. It’s should be clearly stressed that the cultural factor determine how buildings are perceived and estimated by people as well as how architects manage to combine design with the recourses available and the needs of people (Pultar, 2000, p. 157). Since industrialization and globalization spreads rapidly the ethics of engineering has become a concern.
Let’s try to look at this problem from the point of view of fast urbanizations of rural regions that may entail housing pressures and force more people to live in accommodations susceptible to earthquakes (Özerdem, Jacoby, 2006, p. 212).
With lots of budget means allocated to the development earthquake resistant building technology some observers predict that these houses may appear to be inaccessible to a large number of citizens due to it high price. So there the dilemma arise – how to decide between cheap and flimsy house or expensive earthquake resistant apartment. Moreover, it’s a well-known fact that not earthquake but buildings kill people. This also leads us to the question – is spending so much on building disaster resistant houses justifiable and can it really help people? This issue, from my perspective, can give rise to controversial debates and arguments.
Constructing a building that is able to sustain against collapse during earthquakes is not an easy task that involves outstanding skills on the part of engineers, their ability to fit into “formal aesthetic characteristics such the unity of the design, the refinement in details, the degree of perfection attained in design and construction” (Pultar, 2000, p. 160).
Naturally, designers tend to achieve the level that is next to ideal. Describing earthquake resistant buildings as an efficient solution to the long-suffering Japan that at the same time meets all the demands may be inaccurate. Some time later these constructions may reveal inequality to the time or even fashion or other values. Thus the fast spreading earthquake building technology may appear to be overrated and lacking reasonable amount of criticism.
On top of that, in the construction of such buildings a lot of professionals and companies are involved, ranging from designers to marketing departments. This means that the sphere of construction presents a highly competitive field that may cause the conflict of interest between architects and engineers, owners and contractors (Pultar, 2000, p. 160).
It should be also emphasized that the group of selected jury make the decision whether the building correspond to standards and needs so the choice may be subjective as “it is governed by the system of values of the jury” (Pultar, 2000, p. 160). It makes it clear to draw a conclusion that different results may be expected if different panels handle the same project.
The previously said allows to make a conclusion that building earthquake constructions that are designed to serve as a space to work and live may not fit into the national image and state moral and the overall Japanese perception of their culture and identity. Thus, the engineers should meet their commitments and study carefully the purpose of the earthquake resistant constructions to prevent the devastating probable results of the catastrophe that may follow looking back at the history of Japan as a earthquake-suffering country.
Works Cited
Gregory K. Clancey, G.K. (2006). Earthquake nation: the cultural politics of Japanese seismicity, 1868-1930. Berkeley. Univ. of California Press.
Özerdem, A., Jacoby, T. (2006). Disaster management and civil society: earthquake relief in Japan, Turkey. New York : I.B. Tauris.
Pultar, M. (2000)Value Systems: The Conceptual Basis of Building Ethics. Ethics and the Built Environment. 155-169.