Between Criticality and Pastiche: The Putrajaya Boulevard

  • Mansor Ibrahim
  • Shireen Jahn Kassim


The urban-architectural forms of Malaysia and its tropical urban city is perhaps a reflection of the complex realities of the nation and the population which enables constant fusion and to a certain extent, tensions between Western influences and native cultures as part of the resistance to Western hegemony. Architecture and urban form viewed in a more pragmatic light as tools or a means to an end, rather than debated and theorised for their ends. With respect to Malaysia, Jones (2011) elucidates: 

Questions about the political construction of collective identities and the cultural legitimization of power find a clear focus in those objects of state-led architecture that are framed as symbols of national identities … such state-led projexts are active attempts to contribute to the cultural construction and consolidation of communities such as the nation. Hence architecture and urban design either become instruments towards the ultimate goal of social unification or a means towards asserting the nation in a competitive global space and design becomes a means to distinguish oneself from others.


  1. Andaya, B. W., & Andaya, L. Y. (2001). A history of Malaysia. London, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  2. Azizi, N., & Mohd, A. (2007, March 6). Putrajaya and the French connection. Post-graduate seminar semester 2 session 2006/2007. Rumah Alumni, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.Google Scholar
  3. Colquhoun, A. (1981). Sign and substance: Reflections on complexity – Las Vegas, and Oberlin. In A. Colquhoun (Ed.), Essays in architectural criticism: Modern architecture and historical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. Curtis, W. J. R. (1996). Modernity, tradition and identity in the developing world. In W. J. R. Curtis (Ed.), Modern architecture since 1900. London: Phaidon Press.Google Scholar
  5. Frampton, K. (1981). Modern architecture. A critical history. London: Thames and Hudson 1985. (First edition 1980).Google Scholar
  6. Frampton, K. (1999, August). Seven points for the millenium: An untimly manifesto. Architectural Record, Vol 15.Google Scholar
  7. Ghirardo, D. (1996). Architecture after modernism (world of art). New York: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
  8. Goh, B.-L., & Liaw, D. (2009). Post-colonial projects of a national culture. City: Analysis of Urban Trends, Culture, Theory, Policy, Action, 13(1), 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jahn Kassim, P. S., & Nawawi, N. M. (2016). Allusions to Mughal urban forms, in the monumentality of Chandigarh’s capitol complex. Journal of Architecture and Urbanism, 40, 177–190. Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jenkins, D. (2000). Market whys and human wherefores: Thinking again about markets, politics and people paperback (2nd Revised ed.). London, UK: Continuum, 4 January 2004.Google Scholar
  11. Kahn, J. S. (2006). Other Malays – Nationalism and cosmopolitanism in the modern Malay world (p. 2). Singapore: NUS Press, National University Singapore.Google Scholar
  12. King, R. (2008). Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya: Negotiating urban space in Malaysia. Singapore: National University of Singapore Press.Google Scholar
  13. King, R. (2010). Rewriting the city: Putrajaya as representation. Journal of Urban Design, 12(1), 117–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. King, R. (2012). Rewriting the city: Putrajaya as representation. Journal of Urban Design, 12(1), 117–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Morrison, H. (1998). Louis Sullivan prophet of the modern movement (3rd ed.). New York: WW Norton and Company.Google Scholar
  16. Moser, S. (2000). Putrajaya: Malaysia’s new federal administrative capital. Hartford: Centre for Urban and Global Studies, Trinity College.Google Scholar
  17. Moser, S. (2010). Putrajaya: Malaysia’s new federal administrative capital. Cities. The International Journal of Urban Policy and Planning, 27(4), 285–297.Google Scholar
  18. Moser, S. (2012). Circulating visions of ‘High Islam’: The adoption of fantasy middle eastern architecture in constructing Malaysian national identity. Research Gate, Retrived from’High_Islam’_The_Adoption_of_Fantasy_Middle_Eastern_Architecture_in_Constructing_Malaysian_National_Identity on 1/10/2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nichols, S. (2013). Mapping identity the rules & models of Putrajaya. In A. Brown & A. Leach (Eds.), Proceedings of the society of architectural historians, Australia and New Zealand: 30, open (Vol. 1, pp. 207–217). Gold Coast: SAHANZ.Google Scholar
  20. SpringerLink. (2017, October 05). Rock garden in Chandigarh, from
  21. Vale, L. J. (1992). Architecture, power, and national identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mansor Ibrahim
    • 1
  • Shireen Jahn Kassim
    • 1
  1. 1.International Islamic University MalaysiaKuala LumpurMalaysia

Personalised recommendations