ABSTRACT Since the nineteenth century a physically distant Metropolis has been invoked to determine the validity of Australian architectural projects and their ideas, and the assumption is this Metropolis sends out resolved principles to a provincial culture. This view assumes that actual immigration to Australia equals cultural erasure. It assumes Australia’s architectural culture is infantile or child-like and must accept a continual and necessarily painful education- the pedagogical focus-to animate local architecture. It is frequently asserted that architects whose capacities do not seem adequately recognised in Australia would always fare better in this Metropolis. The Metropolis proves, on closer inspection, to be nebulous and varied in location. Its constituent countries and cultures, usually associated with “age” and cultural power, have warred with each other constantly, and have consistently driven architects from its perceived membership. Its principles are frequently changing and often thoroughly inconsistent, and half its ‘member’ cultures are out of cultural action at any given moment. This is papered over by a minatory orthodoxy in criticism and rhetoric, which works well in Australia because it serves local needs and worries at several levels, and because Australian architectural culture projects values and characteristics onto this metropolis from an assumed geographical distance.

中文翻译：

---

澳大利亚建筑：迷雾都市

摘要自 19 世纪以来，一个物理上遥远的大都会被用来确定澳大利亚建筑项目及其想法的有效性，并且假设这个大都会向省级文化发出已解决的原则。这种观点假设实际移民到澳大利亚等于文化擦除。它假设澳大利亚的建筑文化是幼稚的或孩子般的，必须接受持续的、必然是痛苦的教育——教学重点——以激发当地建筑的活力。人们经常断言，在澳大利亚似乎没有得到充分认可的建筑师在这个大都市中的表现总是更好。仔细观察后，大都会证明是模糊的，位置各不相同。它的组成国家和文化，通常与“年龄”和文化力量相关联，不断地相互交战，并始终如一地将建筑师从其公认的成员中驱逐出去。它的原则经常变化并且经常完全不一致，并且它的一半“成员”文化在任何特定时刻都脱离了文化行动。这被批评和修辞中具有威胁性的正统观念所掩盖，这在澳大利亚很有效，因为它在多个层面满足了当地的需求和担忧，并且因为澳大利亚的建筑文化从假定的地理距离将价值观和特征投射到这个大都市。