Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Notes: S,M,L,XL

DRAMA
It often happens that the real tragedies of life occur in such an inartistic manner that they hurt us by their crude violence, their absolute incoherence, their absurd want of meaning, their entire lack of style. They affect us just as vulgarity affects us. They give us an impression of sheer brute force, and we revolt against that. Sometimes, however, a tragedy that possesses artistic elements of beauty crosses our lives. If these elements of beauty are real, the whole thing simple appeals to our sense of dramatic effect. Suddenly we find that we are no longer the actors, but the spectators of the play. Or rather we are both. We watch ourselves, and the mere wonder of the spectacle enthralls us.

DUTCH GREY
A Dutch friend asked me if I would like to see the tulip fields. Inwardly I really did not want to see the tulip fields. For some reason I thought that seeing so many tulips - red, yellow, white and purple would be too much. In any case, I did not want to see the tulips. My friend persuaded me to go with him. I am glad that he did. He brought me into a deep view. When we rode along the roads which moved through the tulip fields, I began to understand Mondrian. I always thought him to be an international painter. It was not the colour of the tulips but the density of the sand and earth where the bulbs were planted which reminded me of Mondrian. It was the atmosphere of opacity. The place, the land, the earth was dense opacification. The coloured flowers were not the issue, it was the infinite penetration and the compaction of trapped light crystals in the earth which illuminated the air into a grey solidity...dutch grey.

IMAGE
A picture esp. in the mind.

LOGIC
  1. The science of reasoning by formal methods.
  2. A way of reasoning.
  3. Reasonable thinking.
MORAL
There are no moral phenomena at all, only a moral interpretation of phenomena.

Claiming Ideas

We don't live in a space that values / respects other people's ideas. Ideas are generated, and shared with good intentions but there is always a 'someone else' that capitalizes on it without crediting the person who originally thought of it. What is the incentive then, to the person who thinks of an idea, for sharing and expanding knowledge?

A few months ago in my conversation with a colleague studying abroad, I came to know that any kind of data is precious and needs to be preserved and protected only because it may be crucial for the ideas one produces. This data is the proof if you wish to every curate an idea or delve into a deeper research. I realized only later, what crucial data I was handling at Charles Correa Associates during the archival process. Imagine holding a letter written by Rajiv Gandhi in your own hands discussing matters of architecture...I think although I understood its importance, I missed out on capitalizing at the opportunity...Tremendous records of stories of important buildings lie in the archives of Mr. Charles Correa. I don't know how much of it would be really retained as 'useful' material at the end of his archival process. But one could even do a research on how tenders were made 60 years ago in the country if someone decides to work on all the junk that Mr. Correa decides to throw away all his correspondences of old commissions that he executed.

No, the post is not about Mr. Correa - it is about the practice of archive and mobilizing it through ideas. I introduced the idea of translating "Form, Space & Order" by Francis D K Ching in Marathi to facilitate deeper architectural thought into the minds of non-English speaking student body here. There are layers to the importance of this idea. But some one has already been thinking on it surreptitiously. Anyway, if it's translated, it would do only good to the community. But sometimes, I do feel that I let out a lot of ideas.

In a space where people build their careers out of such capitalization, one must be really aware and careful about acknowledgement. In being modest, we build up a lot of uncalled-for frustration for ourselves. It is important to claim right over the things you do today - its unfortunate (and sometimes petty), but that is the world we live in.

The Architecture of Architectural Institutes

If we understand architecture in terms of its aesthetic value, then one can say that no Architectural college in the city of Mumbai has any architectural value.

I have visited almost 7 out of the 11 architectural colleges of the city and found that they do not even suffice the spatial requirements of the course, forget the visual ones. Institutes seem to be crumbling under the pressure of accommodating more and more students imposed upon them by the council. However, we were producing almost 4000 architects per year till the last year nationally, the number shall soon rise by double in the next two years. Still, this shall not suffice the need for architects in the country. It is projected that we need about a lakh architects to comprehend the kind of development the nation is going through. Amongst those who pass out, we can clearly rule out 50% graduates who either don't end up practicing architecture or pick up an alternative stream of engagement.

Given these logistics, it is crucial that we have a a fair number of architects who can collectively give an cohesive architectural direction to the country. The aestheticization of this production begins from the environment they are themselves trained in. If we are to discuss the architectural production in the future with this premise in mind, the physical output of the profession is questionable. 

A rough breezing survey of the architectural institutes in the city of Mumbai will show how uninspiring spaces they are. Inspite of being the oldest architectural college of India in the city - the J J college has not produced any strong responses to its site in the recent times. The building is an old introvert heritage which manages to fetch huge amounts of grant from the Government (recently it was offered a sum of 5 crore rupees) for its developmental and other activities. The campus is fascinating, but reasonably dead. Other colleges do not enjoy such huge grants, still, a college like Academy of Architecture has been struggling with its image. The history of the institute has been interesting with the land transforming from a silk mill to a modern building. However, the internal planning of the building is absolutely orthodox which does not allow any flexibility of activities pertaining to the architecture course. The institute is unable to decide its stance over more intake or better education. But it is negotiating this dilemma through the projection of seductive images of its future make-over and extension.

The Indian Education Society in Bandra is a building block worked out in plan and extruded over 7 floors. It has dead wells (courtyards) that are fairly out of proportion within its layout. Hiray college of architecture was almost deserted when I last visited it a few years ago. It did not have any formal spaced out entrance and felt like a municipal hospital. Rizvi college fortunately had a campus but its space did not evoke any kind of pleasant response. Kamla Raheja (in Vile Parle) has a strong introvert planning which looks over to its own landscaped mound. It has huge hollowed spaces which the faculties use in all possible ways. But it has to be noted that the architectural quality of the building may not have any effect in the making of an architecture graduate. 

Campuses in New Bombay enjoy a good expanse of land, but buildings on the campus seem to be planned in a childish way. D Y Patil college has passive landscaped patches and its Architecture block is very glocal in character. It is a cross between a mall and a municipal office. I have not really seen Bhartiaya Vidyapeeth, so I may not be able to comment on that.

Amongst the recently opened colleges - Balwant Seth COA is just a floor of the building dedicated to the course. It is thus, fairly an interior experience to be in the college. I haven't visited Asmita or LS Raheja.

It is a paradox that buildings that produce architects are themselves not architecturally rich (according to me). And I have already specified that I am only trying to look at the physical being and environments of the buildings. It's appalling!