Aeroplanes

My nephew obsessed with aeroplanes, as I have also mentioned earlier...here are more of his drawings, although on paintbrush!
I like how he's maturing with his sense of space...

Quote Unquote

Charles Correa's references and anecdotes:

"Hinduism accepts things decaying"

"The medium is the message"

"The man who invented the internet didn't get a penny"

"An Indian mother is never nasty to her son-in-law."

"You can't work on urban problems without political backing."

No TV Day

The "No TV" campaign by Hindustan Times doesn't seem as successful as the "No Electricity" campaign (by RED FM?). Although HT floods its newsprints with 'how successful it was' today, I feel all this hype is just constructed. to begin with, locating problem in TV is highly political.

To begin with, they never explained why No TV day instead of say, No Travel Day...What was the benefit to the people by watching No TV? Without even justifying why, they went on to give alternatives for what can be done if you don't watch TV. And they contacted all the cafes, restaurants, art people and heritage walk people around the city to come up with offers, in favour of / support of the event. In turn, they must have given them coverage and publicity. Basically they made you step out of the house. Most people took their cars, or flood the public transport without any reason - burnt petrol (read 'waste energy') just for not knowing why they weren't watching television. These are our educated people, wanting to support a cause, which has no justification!

Today's Hindustan Times ad reads "We had fun" (see pic).

Of course, they (HT) had fun:
1. They got a lot of publicity from the event (after all, they want to establish themselves in Mumbai)
2. They earned lot of advertisements (money).
3. They did a lot of marketing and developed PR.

All of the above done still keeping people wondering why 'No TV'?

If one sees the amount of advertisement that HT has got out of this NO TV campaign (check Sunday HT), it is phenomenal. It got about more than 100 brands to endorse themselves though placing an ad in HT. Free coupons, discounts, sales, etc...And I am sure people were ready with their scissors to cut coupons for pizzas and 10% discount meals - a complete Kishore Biyani Big Bazaar trick. Completely market driven.

(Obvious reasons for watching TV will be enlisted by beginning to blame TV as the Idiot box, which is much a transferred epithet - It's saying that 'people who watch the kitchy TV programmes are idiots'. The they would criticise the saas-bahu soaps; its ready material for them. They would also say that the reality shows are no more real, and go on and on and on - BUT, they would never talk about channels like Discovery, TLM, or Nat Geo. Or for that matter, they could have asked for a movement to create more sensible TV programmes. But the problem was that they did not know why No TV)

So let us reflect what No TV day did:

• Clearly, it escalated the sales/profits of Hindustan times.
• It made more people step out of their homes on a holiday, making them burn fuel and congest roads.
• It prevented people from watching TV - even the people who watch news, or their daily dose of 'pravachan' or discovery or TLM...
• It increased the people's consumption of outside food, making them waste more money by stepping out of their homes.

Okay, i have no complaints for people who painted a picture or two at their homes, or looked at a butterfly fluttering outside their window or just listened to some music on their i pods. But my argument is that they would have done it anyways.

Here is something from the Society of the Spectacle:

"The spectacle grasped in its totality is both the result and the project of the existing mode of production. It is not a supplement to the real world, an additional decoration. It is the heart of the unrealism of the real society. In all its specific forms, as information or propaganda, as advertisement or direct entertainment consumption, the spectacle is the present model of socially dominant life. It is the omnipresent affirmation of the choice already made in production and its corollary consumption. The spectacle's form and content are identically the total justification of the existing system's conditions and goals. The spectacle is also the permanent presence of this justification, since it occupies the main part of the time lived outside of modern production. "

First Draft - An Evening in the City

Scene 1:

I place the letter on His desk and wait for him to call me in. I wait for the next 4 hours. He leaves the office. Dhaval says it's done. You're free. And vacuum occupies my head. I walk to the station thinking why He didnot address me.

Scene 2:

The crowd rushes inside the compartment as the train halts in Dadar. The man in front of me (moving in) suddenly turns back, picks up his wallet and starts hitting the boy behind him. The train moves. The boy is brought to the centre of the compartment after 4 hard blows. Suddenly in an overly packed compartment, a human trap is made to punish the boy. People join in for slaps and punches - some elbowing, some kicking, some pinching, some tearing apart his hair. All have ideas: "Don't kill him", "Give him to the police", "Today is 27th, the last week of his pay back perhaps to his boss", "Throw him out"....They remove all his clothes and throw them out of the running train.

Scene 3:

The person besides me makes himself almost uncomfortable to see the boy naked, crying and pleading. They laugh as he accepts his crime. All decide to throw him out of the moving train. I remove one earphone from my ear - now listening to multiple sounds. Another man consoles the man who was being pick-pocketed and indicates him to stop beating the boy. The man enjoying the breeze on the footboard on the other end of the compartment directs the side on which the platform should appear. They wait until Andheri arrives and throw the boy naked on the platform.

Scene 4:

In an overly packed compartment, more people gush in, laughing, joking, talking, pushing...They talk about the whole racket - the trade. While they have already forgotten about the boy, and filled their minds with their own everyday insecurities, I secure my wallet. Putting back the earphone in my second ear, I listen to myself. I wonder if I had an opinion on the boy, on the act... The song fades, and I stop it. And vacuum occupies my head. I walk to the bus station thinking why He did not address me...

Quotable quotes

Prasad Shetty...

on working:

"You must work with the masters. If they match to your imagination of them, then you always knew you were right, but if they dont, at least you know why they are'nt great."

on seeing:

"The way you see is the way you understand, the way you understand is the way you intervene."

on things:

"A chair is a chair is a chair"

on abstraction:

"We don't know everything about anything"

on presentation:

"Use the KISS rule - Keep it Short and Stupid (err), you can say Short and Simple. Try explaining it to your grandmother first."

on people:

"He/she's interesting!"

on writing:

"Make it crisp."

more shall be added later.

xxx

In catching up with our ideals, we lose ourselves.

Things to carry

This is a superbly handy list that akhil had prepared for himself during the Hampi tour.
The checklist is for all things you must carry while travelling.

(the cigarettes are a part of his personal things and can be omitted!)

Contraptions

Some sketches for the Street USB
(first year orientation workshop 2010)

a chance encounter between an umbrella and a sewing machine:

Mumbai Profiles

poster design: Anuj Daga

Great works (not equal to) great people

We mistakenly construct identities of architects by seeing their works. When we see great buildings, we feel their architects too must be great. But in this process of labeling, we seldom realize that it is the quality of the work that we assign the person, and it's not the evaluation of the person him/herself. What perhaps I am trying to argue is that qualities of work need not necessarily impersonate an individual. This construction of idols in such a manner is extremely deceitful.

But the society works by evaluating people through their works. You are a good (=useful) person if you can produce good (=useful) work. There is no humanities at work here. Environments are deals made in this realm of exchange of useful work (okay, I may be gross generalizing here). Nevertheless, what I can definitely say is that every building has so much of ruthlessness to itself. But it is all immediately covered up as the building is inaugurated. Would the financier of the biggest building allow its workmen to enter the premises once the building is finished? Never! The workmen will be shooed away as the red ribbon is cut.

Correa is not as human as his buildings. His buildings are "constructed" and therefore, his identity is constructed.

Why I am thinking of all this? Because I am realizing the difference between 'great people' and 'great buildings' - and I am wondering if places must have more of great people or great buildings?