Indonesian Architecture in Traditional and Modernism Epistemes.

To comprehend the position of Indonesian architecture in postmodernism episteme, let us divide Indonesian architecture  into three epistemes, traditional, modernism and postmodernism. Unhappily, informations of civilization history of Indonesian architecture at traditional episteme is hardly less. In historical science of architecture  we studied in various colleges, generally only study the architectures growing in Europe, American, and some other important points in the world like Japan and Chinese, and very few about civilization of Indonesia architecture in the past. In so many explanation of architecture history, civilization of Indonesian  architecture is very rare to be bruited about  as the part of  world civilization arena. However, various knowledges about civilization of Europe classic architecture is found real concept, because the parts of proportion, composition, esthetics and pride can be explained clearly, while Indonesian traditional architecture that is  very limited by normative space, automaticly is assumed as not  having a real concept.  The existence of Indonesian architecture is  often  assumed not more only as result of intuitions, instincts and habits, so that hence, it  is assumed not having  the real concept.

          Certainly, we do not agree to assume that Indonesian architecture, like other East traditional architecture do not  have a basic concept or concrete concept. Practically, Indonesian  traditional architecture is something measurable, having a  design philosophy, and  planned structural  system, and having a stream of regional in design, and any decision of design is always based to consensus. And the most importantly is that it is a part of reguler culture systems  (see Hindarto, 2006).  Thus, clearly Indonesian traditional architecture is not  result of intuitions, instincts or habits. But we may agree to say that Indonesia traditional architecture in the past exists at episteme under a 'power' and 'discourse' differed from episteme  found on classic society of Europe in  renaissance era formerly.

          Indonesian traditional architecture in the past grows in social order of  local communities with various normative spaces. The normative  spaces which is constructed by discourse of traditional local  are formed by mythology, believe system and feodalistic social structure, but religious. And this discourses are formed and defined  by the power operated  in Indonesian traditional society. Traditional action toward  buildings at Indonesian local community in the past is something prescriptively. This is seen at its stringency in taking care of taboo or prohibition in designing of their  traditional buildings. Trust and tradition in taking care of this taboo and prohibition are inherited hereditaryly.

Figure 1. "Uma Mbangu" and "Luluku" ceremony:  A traditional discourse costructed by mythology and believe system (source: http://www.sumbabarat.go. id/rumahadat).

A  good example can be seen at  traditional community of  Sumba,  when they build Uma Mbatangu—a  Sumba traditional architecture building which having individuality with its high tower. In the people build the traditional building, it is usually  performed a custom ceremony of "luluku", where their queen climbs the top of the building’s tower, people who below ask whether  the queen has seen  the peninsula of Malaka, Singapore, Bali, and so on. If the queen had replied "yes",   hence the building is considered has qualified enough,  according to the custom of Sumba ( see Pemda Kab Sumba Barat, 2007).

          When the civilization of Europe supported by the science grows towards modern civilization under the philosophy of rationalization, discourse of modernism starts to be disseminated  by practice of capitalist penetrations to all over the world, including Indonesia. The rationality which is the "backbone" in modernism doctrine is practice of the power to eliminate they whom " irrational". This gives august place for Indonesian architects who study architecture at any college under norm doctrine of modern discourse. On the contrary, it  exactly nerrows the nornative space of  Indonesian traditional architecture.  When capitalist penetration take its rise in Indonesian society, modern architecture is even not immediately assimilated with Indonesian architecture culture. In this  transformation, it is happened an articulation showing a coexistence  between buildings characterized by modern architecture norms, and traditional architecture characterized by its traditional norms, which is still exist in the local communities in Indoensia. In the articulation, discourse idea of modernism in architecture marked by modern esthetics principalities like  unity, balance, simplicity, accentuation or emphasis, proportion and scale,  predominates the prescriptive discourse of the traditional architecture.  Moreover, rationalization principle of modern architecture design which is against mythology principle and believe system of Indonesian traditional architecture, causes  the civilization development of Indonesia architecture faces stagnation. Even though, some architects  have tried  creating assimilations, and it seems  not succeed and also not developed.