Islamic architecture - its concepts

Abstract

Today, when for a variety of reasons "Islamic" architecture is once again on the agenda, it has become necessary to clarify some of the terms and concepts used in this debate. To distinguish, for instance, between the terms "Islamic" and "Muslim", and to recognise that "architecture", be it Islamic, Muslim, or Pakistani, contemporary or traditional, is a complex of several sub- categories. If "Islamic" pertains to the religion of Islam, and "Muslim" to the people who profess Islam, then the term "Islamic architecture" would apply to buildings inspired by Islamic religious thought and practice, and intended to serve an Islamic religious purpose, whereas, "Muslim architecture" would be the more appropriate term applicable universally to all buildings associated with Muslims as a people or peoples. Terms such as "Saracenic" and "Islamic" were introduced by the Orientalists as catch-all phrases which they applied to the architecture of the Muslim world from "Mogul India" to "Moorish Spain". Western educated Muslim architects, were among those who protested most strongly to the such labels. Fired by the 'scientific' theories of culture current in a post-Darwinian, post-Marxian world, they rejected the notion of architecture defined on the basis of religion. Architecture, as much as religion, they argued, was part of the superstructure of any culture. The base was economic and material. Architecture as much as everything else evolved in progressive stages. But terms like "Islamic" suggested a fossilised view of their national cultures. Their own architecture had to be understood in terms of climate, materials social relations and the economic bases, not in terms of religion. Any attempt to do so was discredited as reactionary, obscurantist, and smacking of imperialism.