The dialectic of indigenous tradition and modern innovation is neither a new phenomenon, nor is it one which can easily be resolved. American democracy depends on the integration o-f the local and individualist with the general and the common. Shared values and tastes fortify the American status quo while the idiosyncratic is modified or gentrified for common consumption. In America where freedom of expression is celebrated, the issue of cultural expression in architecture has been met with ambivalence or has produced kitsch. Regional work is either too individualistic or too homogenized to constitute a genuine contribution to American architecture. A balance must be struck between the cultural richness of the country’s regional architectural expression and that of the perceived ideal. The U.S. has a very real, living indigenous architecture, that of the Native American. A rich opportunity exists for assimilation and reinterpretation to occur as regional work confronts that of a universal or modern nature. Such interaction will result in renewed expression for America’s indigenous people while providing others with a basis for critical exploration. A critical framework would allow all to examine themselves and their relationship to the dominant society. The proposal to design a museum for the American Indian is intended to provide a hypothetical situation where these concerns may be pursued. Washington D.C. as the proposed site provides ample opportunity for such exploration. The city is a study in paradox, scale and ideology. The Mall has become a national symbol, a sacrosanct region where public institutions celebrate America’s achievements and unified diversity. The siting of the Museum of the American Indian on The Mall provides the appropriate context for this investigation. As The Mall’s institutions have additional significance in their celebration of American achievements and shared heritage the museum proposal must participate and contribute to the area’s national and ideological role.