The Charles Correa Gold Medal 2012 was not awarded to any one.
I had a similar strange feeling yesterday as I took a round after all students pinned up their work. (Being the organizer of the event, one gets to see stuff before any one else, even jury gets to have a look!). As Prof. Punde inspected the room over the evening asking for a good panel to look at, I exclaimed "None!" - Adding further, "One year, they must just not give the gold medal to any one..." To my surprise, I actually found my evaluation was correct! Not only that, my instincts of notable panels was also right - they same 3 panels I thought (exactly those) were cited! Wonder what this meant!
One can clearly point out where things go wrong for gold medal.
1. The fad to compose larger and large (bed)sheets, which students are incapable to compose efficiently, ends up making them hoardings rather than architectural sheets
2. Overly rendered drawings, too many colours, background, flashy views are an eye sore.
3. Panels filled with overflowing essays of analysis. Writeups that flow in every blank inch of space.
4. Pictures like wedding albums, sprinkled all over the analysis panels or design sheets.
5. Unclear drawings, obnoxiously large, pixelated, unoriented, mixing into each other.
6. Non-contextual, irrationally large urban design projects thinking of them to be urban inserts. (a flaw on the part of universities which expect large thesis projects so that students are able to display their skills in all aspects of architecture)
7. Misplaced aesthetic sensibilities - in design, layout (of sheets) and presentation.
And one could probably go on.
The 3 citations, two from KRVIA and another from Bharati Vidyapeeth seemed interesting. I remember pointing out to Punde Sir about Marsha's thesis (KRV: Resonant Memories) that although the panel is poetic, I had serious questions about the program (which was the typical library, exhibition, etc.) - and the jury did pointed that along with circulation issues. I also felt the project layout did not fit in the countour layout well. The jury did appreciate the water colour drawings, that forced me to bring Punde Sir to have a look at it. (Ok, I must clarify I wasn't with the jury, and it was a closed room affair!). The Modern Temple (Dipti, BVP) was well articulated and I knew it was challenging, but it ended up in the shikhara! One would try to look at what Frank Llyod Wright did to Unity temple, which was the first 'modern' church as compared to the classical imagery of the church, in analysing what is a 'modern' form. I did not particularly keenly see the third entry (Nupoor, KRV). It seemed interesting in the way it was composed.
Out of the 21 entries that were received, none of them, the jury felt, lived up to the brief offered to them. They decided to award none on the grounds that, "it would be unfair to the earlier winners who had put in much more hard work" and because they "need to maintain the standards of the Charles Correa Gold Medal" (Kamu Iyer).
Prof. Hazra pointed out very sensitively that "it seemed that many projects were almost there, had there been a little more guidance, would there be really interesting projects". He also candidly expressed that one involuntarily gets into a mode of comparison with the projects that have earlier received the Gold Medal, which seemed much promising. The entries this time only lacked visual communication skills, presentation of analysis and lack of design resolution.
Charles Correa concluded saying that "You all look very disappointed, but that does not mean that you did not put in hard work. All of you have put in a lot of effort, but don't be disappointed since it's a part of life. There will be so many times when clients will not like your design and you will have to start all over again...you all must try and put in your design intent more clearly..."
Students huddled him up as he left the premises - they discussed issues, ideas and what went wrong. After all, Charles Correa still remains a figure in Indian architecture to catch a memorable glimpse of. I re-lived my three year old excitement seeing the students' pin drop silence in the auditorium. This decision only makes the Gold Medal more coveted and desirable, raising the already tall stature of Charles Correa.
I had a similar strange feeling yesterday as I took a round after all students pinned up their work. (Being the organizer of the event, one gets to see stuff before any one else, even jury gets to have a look!). As Prof. Punde inspected the room over the evening asking for a good panel to look at, I exclaimed "None!" - Adding further, "One year, they must just not give the gold medal to any one..." To my surprise, I actually found my evaluation was correct! Not only that, my instincts of notable panels was also right - they same 3 panels I thought (exactly those) were cited! Wonder what this meant!
One can clearly point out where things go wrong for gold medal.
1. The fad to compose larger and large (bed)sheets, which students are incapable to compose efficiently, ends up making them hoardings rather than architectural sheets
2. Overly rendered drawings, too many colours, background, flashy views are an eye sore.
3. Panels filled with overflowing essays of analysis. Writeups that flow in every blank inch of space.
4. Pictures like wedding albums, sprinkled all over the analysis panels or design sheets.
5. Unclear drawings, obnoxiously large, pixelated, unoriented, mixing into each other.
6. Non-contextual, irrationally large urban design projects thinking of them to be urban inserts. (a flaw on the part of universities which expect large thesis projects so that students are able to display their skills in all aspects of architecture)
7. Misplaced aesthetic sensibilities - in design, layout (of sheets) and presentation.
And one could probably go on.
The 3 citations, two from KRVIA and another from Bharati Vidyapeeth seemed interesting. I remember pointing out to Punde Sir about Marsha's thesis (KRV: Resonant Memories) that although the panel is poetic, I had serious questions about the program (which was the typical library, exhibition, etc.) - and the jury did pointed that along with circulation issues. I also felt the project layout did not fit in the countour layout well. The jury did appreciate the water colour drawings, that forced me to bring Punde Sir to have a look at it. (Ok, I must clarify I wasn't with the jury, and it was a closed room affair!). The Modern Temple (Dipti, BVP) was well articulated and I knew it was challenging, but it ended up in the shikhara! One would try to look at what Frank Llyod Wright did to Unity temple, which was the first 'modern' church as compared to the classical imagery of the church, in analysing what is a 'modern' form. I did not particularly keenly see the third entry (Nupoor, KRV). It seemed interesting in the way it was composed.
Out of the 21 entries that were received, none of them, the jury felt, lived up to the brief offered to them. They decided to award none on the grounds that, "it would be unfair to the earlier winners who had put in much more hard work" and because they "need to maintain the standards of the Charles Correa Gold Medal" (Kamu Iyer).
Prof. Hazra pointed out very sensitively that "it seemed that many projects were almost there, had there been a little more guidance, would there be really interesting projects". He also candidly expressed that one involuntarily gets into a mode of comparison with the projects that have earlier received the Gold Medal, which seemed much promising. The entries this time only lacked visual communication skills, presentation of analysis and lack of design resolution.
Charles Correa concluded saying that "You all look very disappointed, but that does not mean that you did not put in hard work. All of you have put in a lot of effort, but don't be disappointed since it's a part of life. There will be so many times when clients will not like your design and you will have to start all over again...you all must try and put in your design intent more clearly..."
Students huddled him up as he left the premises - they discussed issues, ideas and what went wrong. After all, Charles Correa still remains a figure in Indian architecture to catch a memorable glimpse of. I re-lived my three year old excitement seeing the students' pin drop silence in the auditorium. This decision only makes the Gold Medal more coveted and desirable, raising the already tall stature of Charles Correa.
