This study aims to develop a multilayered and historically informed interpretation of contextualism in post-Islamic Iranian architecture through a deconstructive reading. Rather than limiting itself to the description of stylistic forms, it investigates the conceptual, semantic, and discursive transformations of the notion of “context” across different architectural styles. Emphasis is placed on extra-architectural correlates in order to critically reinterpret Iranian architectural history and to explore the qualitative and substantive changes in the relationships among elements shaping contextualism. Central to this approach is the recognition of the instability of meaning and the historically constructed nature of architectural concepts.
Within this framework, “context” is no longer understood as a fixed or purely material condition but as a discursive and mutable construct produced through networks of power, language, and culture. Drawing on deconstructive logic, the study challenges essentialist assumptions surrounding concepts such as indigeneity, authenticity, tradition, and the meaning of space. This perspective is particularly relevant because many architectural transformations in Iran have coincided with political, religious, and social discourses that conventional contextualist readings often ignore.
The necessity of the research arises from gaps in contemporary Iranian architectural scholarship, which largely relies on descriptive or reductionist analyses focused on physical characteristics. Such approaches overlook processes of meaning production, the influence of dominant discourses, and the role of institutional power, contributing to imitative architectural practices and theoretical stagnation in education. Deconstruction is therefore employed as an epistemological tool to analyze contextualism as a concept continually redefined across historical periods.
Methodologically, the study adopts a qualitative and deconstructive approach grounded in Derrida’s philosophy. Through reading, coding, thematic extraction, reflection, and synthesis, it identifies naturalized binary oppositions—such as tradition–modernity and indigenous–nonindigenous—and reveals their historical fluidity. Architectural styles from Khorasani to contemporary periods are examined through textual and visual sources.
The findings demonstrate that contextualism in Iranian architecture has been shaped differently in each era by power structures, ideological frameworks, and socio-cultural conditions. Ultimately, the research concludes that contextualism cannot be understood as a singular or authentic model but must be approached as a readable and reinterpretable text. This perspective enables more nuanced historical analysis and supports a critical, context-sensitive approach to architectural theory, practice, and education.
