ABSTRACT

To date, Australia’s architectural histories have been silent on the Cold War politics of post-war modernism. For the most part, historians have documented production without considering the broader geo-political moment in which the nation found itself after World War II. Recent transnational architectural histories focus on relationships that the United States and the former USSR forged between themselves and individually with other countries. In so doing, canonical accounts of post-war modernism have been brought into question and architectural practice implicated in broader global shifts of power, economy, and control. Some historians have concentrated on transatlantic connections, others have drawn peripheral modernisms into relief as a series of successive colonial modernisms. This paper explores aspects of Australia’s post-war architectural production that might be regarded as inconvenient truths and implicated in a larger strategic geo-political and economic project. It suggests that the Cold War drew a net across Australia’s entire landscape – urban and remote, seen and unseen. Australia was a willing collaborator. Under the auspices of post-war recovery and with a new-found purpose in the region, projects of extraction, energy, defence, and diplomacy ‘rebuilt’ the nation with a labour force contingent on migration - and architectural modernism was intrinsic to that project.

摘要

迄今为止，澳大利亚的建筑史一直对战后现代主义的冷战政治保持沉默。在大多数情况下，历史学家记录生产时没有考虑到二战后这个国家所处的更广泛的地缘政治时刻。最近的跨国建筑史集中在美国和前苏联之间以及与其他国家单独建立的关系上。在这样做的过程中，战后现代主义的规范解释受到了质疑，建筑实践也牵涉到更广泛的全球权力、经济和控制转移。一些历史学家专注于跨大西洋的联系，另一些历史学家则将外围现代主义描绘成一系列连续的殖民现代主义。本文探讨了澳大利亚战后建筑生产的各个方面，这些方面可能被视为不便的事实，并涉及更大的战略地缘政治和经济项目。它表明冷战在澳大利亚的整个景观中画了一张网——城市和偏远地区，可见和不可见。澳大利亚是一个自愿的合作者。在战后恢复的支持下，在该地区有了新的目标，开采、能源、国防和外交项目“重建”了国家，并以移民为基础的劳动力队伍——而建筑现代主义是该项目的内在因素. 澳大利亚是一个自愿的合作者。在战后恢复的支持下，在该地区有了新的目标，开采、能源、国防和外交项目“重建”了国家，并以移民为基础的劳动力队伍——而建筑现代主义是该项目的内在因素. 澳大利亚是一个自愿的合作者。在战后复苏的支持下，在该地区有了新的目标，开采、能源、国防和外交项目“重建”了国家，劳动力队伍以移民为基础——而建筑现代主义是该项目的内在因素.