The Takshila Lecture on Architecture and Society is delivered by an eminent professional / academician that addresses the growing disparity between the practice and pedagogy of Architecture in India, and the realities of our social, cultural and economic contexts. The lecture and the following dialogue aim to challenge the status-quo with a conviction that an open and honest conversation on the state of practice will instigate positive change.
The 2023 Takshila Lecture on Architecture and Society was delivered by Rabindra Vasavada at the Bangalore International Centre on October 02nd, 2023.
Abstract:
Architect and Society:
• Architect as a part of a community, culture and context, consciousness for culture and traditions.
• Training to be an architect. Humanities, technology, arts, and sciences, practical training.
• Profession of an architect, aspects of profession (ethics, codes, conditions of engagement etc) dealing with clients, contractors, consultant, legalities, and be a team leader.
Society and Architect
• Society and its context and its communities’ traditional and contextual understanding.
• Society’s understanding and appreciation of built environment as a reflection of culture and its rootedness in ecology and context.
• Society’s attitude to living and evolving respecting the traditional values which remain constant in the scenario of the progress and technological advancement.
Professional Relationships
Traditional relationship: Always based on expertise required for building tasks. Master Builder, a traditionally trained expert in all arts and its skills, who along with his team, designs and coordinates for the patrons, the entire task of executing a building. He commands full knowledge about lifestyles, and all other physical sciences related to build-environment.
Contemporary relationship: Architect by training and education. No more a vocationally trained master builder. More or less similar role but various aspects of buildings are segregated and detailed by various specialist and coordinated by architects to execute the project. Architect working as a member of team.
Important Questions
Where lays the beginnings?
Shelter (self-help) to Domestic buildings (master builders-architect) to settlement architecture (architects, environmentalists) to cities (power, planning)? All combined.
Family (individual, identity) to communities (collective agreements and characteristics) to society (Power, culture and traditions) to civilisations (multi-cultural)? Nationhood.
What are the evolutionary factors?
Ecological contexts, climate, natural resources, industrial productions.
Population and economic factors of occupations, resource generation.
Cultural traditions and Power in social organisation, administration and controls.
Advancement in resource availability, technology and sciences to meet growing needs.
Sense of optimisation and structure of administration and governance for liveability.
Architect and Society: Action through Perception
Architect and Society are subjects on their own rights for our discussion this evening. Our interest is to examine the role each subject play when both combine in a relationship to achieve a desired goal to appropriate relevant built environment. This relationship is very important to achieve best results. This relationship is based on perception of roles each plays in order to collaborate on a task. This perception of the aspects of task by each is of fundamental importance. Architect and Society create architecture in a context. What are these aspects which are to be perceived, when it comes to achieving a goal?
Architect as a professional is required to be proficient in understanding all aspects of the culture in which he works. This is the key to appreciate human institutions and how each relate to the culture of communities in a given cultural context. This results into understanding of Man and his needs and desires. Perception of these factors is very important for an architect for his design interventions that he has to undertake in his profession. Designing for people and public institutions is an important challenge for an architect when his perception of society and roots of its institutions form key to his conceptual ideas for his design interventions in a given context.
Similarly, society is formed of communities and family units sharing similar evolving traditional values with attributes which symbolise their identities. Perceptions about these and consciousness in its adherence when it comes to its representation in other expressive forms is important to build up a programme for any design situation which can help the architect when he is working on built environment. Appreciation and perception of these societal aspects are very important which can help an architect in his works for better appreciation and relevance of his works befitting a cultural context. Built environment generally reflect the culture of people in the sense that it meets with the needs and aspirations of people for which it is built. Built environment consist of various categories of buildings and places for people which are part of settlements in different physical contexts. Built environments change depending on the times that the society evolves over a period of time and develops.
Building Practices: Traditional & Contemporary:
“Building practices have evolved over time in specific contexts considering its physical and cultural factors. In fact, man’s wisdom in articulation of the available resources, materials and techniques of construction have characterised the regional variations depending on their cultural assets at any given time. These processes have been endogenous and with evolving times, approach to their relevant practices have similarly evolved. The most basic type of building that expresses these characteristic features is the shelter – the family house. A house as type; expresses to the fullest, the culture and physical context in which family lives. A house is conceived as an envelope to provide living comforts from the vagaries of climatic forces in general. In that sense its interior environment creates a comfortable micro-climate within, which can withstand the vagaries of nature in external environment and make the living comfortable within the climatic context of the region. The house is built by using locally available, climatically tested building materials which help create a structure which is resilient to the local climate. It is flexible in use and attuned to the locale. The spaces created by the structure within the building support the lifestyle of the people. Provision of various basic needs for day-to-day living are made a part of the overall building of the house. In that sense, building a house was considered as a personal act of living appropriated from nature around, using locally available natural materials and locally available know-how of building crafts and its concurrent practices within their tradition. This attitude helped people (thereby communities and society) maintain the quality of environment and ecological balance between Nature and settlement patterns in which they lived. This was an important aspect of their cultural traditions. The houses and settlements were considered as self-sufficient physical entities never exploiting any natural resources beyond their reasonable needs.”1
In the traditional societies, Master Builders were very much entrenched in society and were fully aware of their roles and responsibilities in adhering to the values and lifestyles of the people in a society. They worked as per the practices adopted for communal living and the attitudes to community living so that the overall harmony of community life is maintained lending an identity and character within the overall culture of the society. Settlements thus developed carried a distinct reflection of the cultural influences on built forms. These were canonised and written down and agreed upon within the communities and passed on as traditional wisdom in all cultures. Houses, though belonging to different families followed a common practice in climate and buildings and only varied in size and attributes depending on resources at hand but by and large followed similar materials for buildings and basic form with an attitude to climate and settlement size and scale. All these concerns emerged from the society and offered building programmes to the master builders who consciously articulated within their design processes. Master Builders who were also part of the same society did respect these perceptions and followed them as their duty in their actions of building houses which were a part of the larger settlements. These settlements patterns combined developed the neighbourhoods and then the cities, all reflecting a harmonious built environment which eventually were a result of cultural traits of people. If we examine historic cities, this is what we rediscover as traditions which evolved with the passage of time.
There is thus an intrinsic relationship between the Architect (earlier Master Builders) and the Society. Architect being a member of the same society perceives the values and beliefs that the people imbibe from their endogenous culture and appreciates these as the finer aspiration when they suggest the programme. This is an important perception as the building, besides satisfying the needs also relates with the world where larger societal concerns are projected. Thus, a house or shelter expresses its larger role in establishing community identity. A house is just not a building but also a constituent of settlement where collectively it symbolises the identity of family as well as collective image of a society and thereby the culture. Architect’s action in designing a house expects his thorough appreciation of this intangible aspect of culture such that his design just goes beyond the limited scope but also aims at its larger meaning of the culture and society he is a part of. Thus, for an architect, designing a house can extend its larger meaning to virtually influencing the design of settlement and the city. Society and its cultural traits therefore are the foundational perceptions that lead to an architect’s actions.
“A House is a Temple and Temple as abode of Gods.” (Belief in Jainism and Vaishnavism)
“A House reflects Cosmos – Vastupurushamandala.” (Belief in Hinduism)
“A House is a City and City a House” (Aldo Van Eyck, belief in humanity- family to larger society).
What has changed the traditional Practices?
The British Colonial Rule has brought in significant changes in our culture. This has resulted in the entire shift from traditional cultures of earlier times to Westernised dominance in lifestyle to all aspects of cultural life which eventually got influenced. The ruling class on a pan Indian scene accepted westernised culture and became facilitators for accepting the colonial dominance. As a result, all traditional education, lifestyle, attitudes to buildings were suppressed and the western equivalent were imposed. British professionals and administrative agents introduced and became agents for change under whose supremacy the local rulers had to function. The entire social order had to accept this dominance. Since traditions and culture in people take a long time to change, the lifestyle too became dual – one for the outside world where it was necessary to deal with colonial rule and one for inside the family and community where adherence to tradition was considered essential to continue to practise the core traditions which many times were defined by the religion one followed. This kind of socio-cultural transformation of our society has been evolving and if one looks back through history, the society has completely changed over its evolving phases and with it the outlook, preferences and living has completely transformed in what we are today. We have also become more and more individualistic, heterogeneous society with a completely new sense of anonymity of social order, which is still governed by power of resources one is able to command for once living. The lifestyle majorly anonymous with traces of some cultural traditions and society have no control in terms of its earlier homogeneity and cultural identity. Thus, the earlier role of society affirming its common cultural traits and identity is now completely unimportant as a social perception. It is replaced by anonymity and uniformity.
As far as the building practices were considered, the Master Builders became subordinated to the ‘British Architects and Engineers’ who brought in the progressive ideas from West which were readily adopted by the traditional ruling class to please the British Masters. The word Architect was an import, and it replaced the traditional title of Master Builders. In education and training, instead of the centuries old hereditary training of craftsmen remaining within the crafts communities, the architectural education was introduced to those who were interested to train as architects. Such education was far remote from the hands down training in skills and a different class of ‘designers’ and ‘constructors’ emerged which became disconnected for the overall task of building. Considering the limited role of appreciation of societal factors in education, the approach to building design became more design oriented rather than studies on the social needs of people. This problem aggravated as more and more schools and departments of Architecture started growing with a greater number of students getting into such education in architecture. One of the first schools of arts started in Calcutta and then in Bombay in late 19th century2. This was basically established to train Indian architectural draftsmen who could help the British Architects working in India, later in Bombay the first College of Architecture was established to train architects getting the basic graduate degrees. This was basically having the courses based on British models which was adopted. The subjects included Design, History of Architecture, Structural and civil Engineering and partially humanities. Ever since in following decades, after Independence, more and more colleges were added which followed basically the same courses, offering basic graduation. Indian Institute of Architects was also established in early 20th century in Bombay to regulate the architectural practice.
What is the contemporary status of profession?
Architecture is a serious discipline requiring preparedness not only in terms of knowledge and ability to work but also to cultivate an individual’s mind, which through its rigour, develops an intellect to assimilate and synthesise to creatively interpret ideas, which are relevant to the purpose in a cultural milieu. An architect through his creative instincts conceptualises ideas and applies his learning and experience to develop his approach to find his own expression through his involvement in the profession of architecture. Realising a building as a product is a circumstantial act involving a team of professionals, who translate an architect’s ideas into a reality. An Architect’s role thus is though pivotal in his field, is also affected and conditioned by this circumstantiality of its realisation. An architect must satisfy his patron’s needs, he must define practical parameters of his design and he must direct the transformation of his concepts and ideas into a concrete reality with the help of other professionals. Thus, the practice of architecture is a complex profession, and the architect must be continuously aware of his role and responsibilities and the conditions set by the influential circumstances around him, which many times are beyond his control.
The architectural profession historically has emerged out of these conditions and the building works have been realised with quality that captures its relevant spirit in cultures across the world. The cultural influences have affected the architectural expression, and, in a sense, the architectural expression is considered as a mirror reflection of culture. In this sense architects working in a particular cultural context, being the constituent of that very culture, produce works which have analogous identity. When the culture of a period had homogeneous community identity, the architectural expression also reflected that collective character. When the identity assumed an individualised status, the resultant expression also followed that image, which essentially had no bearing on the collective significance. The role of an architect is also thus conditioned by the patronage it receives. His search for an expression also depends on his abilities to define his larger goals as a creative individual in search of an artistic expression. This is also a philosophical pursuit anticipating his ability to search for validity.
The work of architecture reinterprets ideas, which have validity in a cultural context. validities substantiate the evocative quality in spaces that are built, which is culture specific. An Architect’s objectivity results from his understanding of these validities by appreciating the ‘beginnings’ of man’s institutions, which informs him about the ‘nature’ of the institutions. It is through this validity that the architecture expresses its spirit and attains universal appeal in cultures in change. Many times, programmatic ‘needs’ (as requirements) govern, and the ‘desire’ (as aspirations) gets subjugated under its pressure in an architectural problem-solving exercise. The need to identify the ‘beginnings’ of a particular programme and its ‘nature’ gets substituted by what patrons or architects ‘want’ the building to be. The ‘concepts’ which are an architect’s philosophical search and the premise for his creative interpretations get replaced by mere putting together of parts of building in an assemblage projected as ‘design’. This is where the dilemma of an architect’s role begins and the work that he produces gets distanced from its validity in an architectural expression.
There is an effort by a conscientious group of young architects to raise these issues and develop a discourse amongst themselves and the larger fraternity to substantiate and strengthen their urge to excel in the present circumstances of their practice, in response to a perception of difficult realities in profession. It is a search for what is ‘architecture’ and what defines its ‘spirit’. For a reader it is very important to first appreciate architecture as a discipline and then the realities in its profession. And having understood those, the emergence of such an effort should unfold consequently for young architects’ urge to excel accepting those realities, which pervade around us. This is a vehicle for thought catalysing the architects’ inherent urge to excel and to unravel the spirit of architecture through their works and efforts. It is presenting critical thoughts on architecture and arts, observations on significant buildings and works of individual architects, who out of the available opportunities, are trying to search for their expression through rigours, which they have developed by their own hands-down learning efforts. This offers a base for a much-desired discourse on the current thoughts on architecture and its professional practice. Such a discourse is an important need in our country to reinstate the value of an architect’s role in society and seriously consider architectural practice as an important profession for any progressive cultural development.
The architects identify their parameters from within their project definitions, try to search validities and present their own creative interpretations. Most of these are individualised enterprises devoid of any specific influential conditions of their patronage. In that sense it offers an open board where in the architects and patrons try to find their goals. In many instances it is this limitless freedom and meandering to develop concepts and ideas that lend a sense of bewilderment for these young designers. Such situation results into an introspection and self-criticism to examine their efforts to develop their attitudes and conviction towards a more meaningful pursuit in their career. Such an effort in their search for validities require external stimuli by sharing the experiences within the fraternity of like-minded groups to appreciate mutually shared concerns and understand their responses to the circumstantial conditions within which they operate. Such a desire is always an honest way to extend one’s vision and commitment to excel.
This would require a platform contributing towards a meaningful dialogue through theoretical writing, polemics, and individualised contributions representative of creative significance. It is hoped that this will spearhead in a long run a movement for raising qualitative standards of our built environment, which otherwise as rightly realised by these young architects, may fall prey to the exigencies of rapid commercialisation that is forcing our culture to surrender to its aggression and result into characterless built environment with no identity in society.3
How much of this thinking is valid in our present times?
This is a very important question in front of us today for both, architects as well as the society. Architectural practice in present times is pushed to the peripheries of the society it claims to serve. Takshila Lecture on Architecture and Society addresses growing disparity between the practice and pedagogy of Architecture in India, and the realities of our social, cultural, and economic contexts. It would be very important for all those involved in the profession, education, and society to seriously think on the issues which are important to retain excellence in each of these areas as ultimately it is the future of our cities and environment is concerned. It would be imperative to focus on appropriate orientation, architectural education, and its practice to ensure our future. Architect and the Society have intrinsic interdependency and it is best to acknowledge the participation, roles, and responsibility for a healthy future.
1Rabindra Vasavada – Biome Diaries, Chitra Viswanath, ALTERNATIVE BUILDING PRACTICES: Salvaging Old Building Materials – An attitude to Practice for Eco-Sustenance.
2Bombay Art School was started in 1857. Architectural course was introduced as a Class in 1896 under the advice of Sir John Begg, which was recognised by RIBA. In 1907, the training was recognised by the British Government. In 1908, George Wittet the British Architect organised a four-year course in Architecture. In 1914, Robert Cable from the staff of AA in London was appointed from the staff of AA in London to run the course. In 1924 Prof Claude Batley was appointed as a professor. In 1936 a full five-year course was started to which RIBA granted recognition. The other prominent schools in the country in later years were in Delhi, Roorkee, Kharagpur, Nagpur and in Ahmedabad (1962). However, Kalabhavan and later Department of Architecture established as early as 1949 in not mentioned. (Ref: S S Reuben: Architectural Education in India, GOLDEN JUBILEE ISSUE OF THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS 1917-1967, Editor A D Aroskar, Technical Editor S G Randive. Bombay)
3Rabindra Vasavada – SPADE– Review: Inaugural Issue Editor Samira Rathod, November 2008. (references revised)
About Rabindra Vasavada:
Former Professor and Head, Post Graduate Programme in Architecture and Settlement Conservation Faculty of Architecture, and Head Centre for Conservation Studies, CEPT University, Ahmedabad India.
Read the complete profile here.
MATTER 