I guess the question I am trying (apparently rather obtusely) to raise is - how much does your perceived ethnicity affect your architecture? Should it?

Did Wright, Gropious, Botta, Legorreta, - Ando . . . set themselves apart from and above the fray by fostering in their work a sense of ethnic-racial-cultural (what ever you want to call it) - self awareness? Or is it blasphemous to ponder such things?

you are pointing towards identity....that is a loaded question. also, why do so many nationalities = mexican?

yeah you lost me on cirtical regionalism = northern European (esp since it was barely European and when it was it was southern...but hey..I'm clueless)

it seems from your 1st post that percieved ethnicity affects the perception (reception?) of architecture, but not the architecture itself.

Re: ando, gropius, et al... Am not sure what you mean , that they were designing from an articulated ethnic standpoint?

- not blasphemous, good to ponder.

Critical Regionalism (not that I know much about it) is 'northern euro' in that it is an attempt to reinvent the 'International' style in a way that is site specific. Why? Because Northern Euro Boy moved to the desert and doesn't want to live in Desert Boy's house. He wants his house to say "White Boy Lives Here" but alas can't build a log cabin. What's he to do?

Mexicans (Hispanics: Italians, Indians, Spaniards, etc) laugh their ass off at all that crap. They want a house with arches, tile, and Tuscan columns - screw you and your soul searching - I'm from the desert and proud of it. MY ARCHITECTURE will do just fine, thank you.

- - - something like that - - - hard to find the words, but still I think there is something happening that gets redefined and glossed over at every turn.

My gut tells me that the demographic shifting of America is gonna change that sooner or later.

demographic shift or not, the US is still the US, and won't necessarily change its "taste" or "style" because of historic backgrounds. I don't think we design things to resemble our roots.

For example, my heritage is Dutch. Sure, I admire Dutch architects, but no more so than appreciating those with German, French, Asian, or Mexican roots.

The US is a melting pot, and its architecture taste (in the big-picture sense) is what it is.

whay shows up when you edit your list with consideratoin of childhood environment.

(hideous typing)

i meant, you might consider the ethnic-aesthetic envir of childhood. or the climate of childhood (subtropic, semi-tropical, humid, arctic, etc) I know that's had an effect on me.

I sort of have a problem understanding some things... Yeah sure, Mexico is all over, I´m mexican, went to school in the US, went back to Mexico and now I´m in Spain, that´s just an example.
But, I would say as so many other things, ethnicity, identity, architectura currents or styles are overrated.
Tuscan?? hardly resembling anything actually phisically existing in Mexico, yes, there are similaties, but nothing to do with the attempt to revive a Pueblo, when a real pueblo is full of history and develops through time, that´s how real places get made.
Besides of leaving out the rest of the American continent, just take into account architects such as Barragan, a contemporary mexican, whose background is a highly educated individual not only in Mexico, but also In Europe, who in the end comes and tries to inmortalize and elevate certain architecture that ended up being so appealing to the world, but also think of Ambasz, even Legorreta in their weak strive to follow Barragan... Look at Juan O´Gorman, or even the UNAM campus,, purely and 100% le corb inspiration.
anyways, i don´t know if I went too far off the topic, but just feel like saying something.
we should all take advantage of our roots and where we come from, it will always influence our work somehow, on a larger or smaller scale. we have to think local and global, make a fusion of both, it´s the way to go.
and by the way, some of the things posted above, well not all spanish is mexican, nor the other way around. It´s a fusion, more an interpretation of the Spanish of the architecture they saw when they came to Mexico, so it´s all interpretations, no pure styles can be found, nor in the pueblo revival, moroccan .. etc.

The is no style in architecture.

this conversation is bordering on the intelligible.

if you really want to have a conversation about ethicity you need to look at the diasporic relationship of its practioners and the work they were producing in and out of their places of origin.

its more about an understanding of space and means than it is about style. What is is that deferentiates the architecture of one place with the other usually has more to do with the availability of materials and how people conceive of space

Echnocentric Architects