MODERN INDIAN ARCHITECT (Page 3)

Earlier attempts at "Indianisation' were merely literal representations of architectonic elements taken from historical buildings, like Chhatris, domes, Chhajjas and arches.

The modernists Were no better. Their icons were the buildings in the international style then holding sway in the West. They too sought to infuse their buildings with a desirable image without questioning the colonial roots of their architectural Strategy or seeking to create a dynamic, locally grounded and contextually responsive architecture that could engage seriously with the international style without being overshadowed by it. To their way of thinking, international style represented the only route to modernity and progress, and they mimicked this style in order to demonstrate their progressive understanding of architecture. Modern Indian identity Continued to be constructed using non-local icons. Such Self perpetrated dependence Was reinforced by the decision, soon after Independence, to have Le Corbusier to design the north Indian city of chandigarh. The heroic Stature of Le Corbusier in the international architectural firmament ensured that he had a profound influence on nascent architectural developments in India. The works of Louis Kahn in the subcontinent in the 1960s must also be seen in this light.

In hindsight, it is clear that both the revivalists and the modernists reestablished the hegemony of Western architectural epistemologies: the former Sourced a native past in the manner of the British architects Working in Colonial India, While the latter Sourced a (presumed Western) future by mimicking the iconic images of international Style. In tying indigenousness to an Indian past and modernity to a Westernised future, neither could truly problematise the condition of postcolonial
ssssslocality and urbanism. Furthermore, in both cases, a reliance on architectural images Substituted for the need to develop ideas to establish an autochthonous architectural tradition after independence. Perhaps, this may begin to explain Why Indian architects have SO far been unable to meet the Spatial needs of society or produce a Satisfactory quality of living environment.

It must also be noted that many successful architects practicing in India today have had an important part of their education in the West and, thereby, experienced the power of the iconic images of Western architecture first-hand. They seldom attempted the more difficult task of emulating the technological transformation taking place in the west which was the basis of those images. For example, the evolution of modernism in Indian architecture Created a Schism between the building and the process of building: the Culture of building as an integrated entity was unaffected. Such a Schism is, in fact, Contrary to the tenets of modernism. Even as newer generations of architects changed the architectural image, there was no thought for the development of construction processes, which remained primitive. Changes in the construction industry have only recently begun to take place and, that too, on account of the introduction of foreign Construction management firms and Capital.

And for those who did not have the opportunity for a first-hand experience, professional journals and imported architectural books provided equally evocative substitutes. Western architectural journals have had far greater influence on the architecture ideals of generations Of Indian Students than any teacher in the Indian schools of architecture. The power of these journals lay in the iconic images they reproduced as attractive photographs and, though Second-hand, they nevertheless influenced those who could not avail of a foreign education and experience the buildings directly. The power of Such images also derived from the fact that, as editors of architectural journals have sadly pointed Out, architects do not read: in these circumstances, the photographs indeed spoke a thousand Words and became powerful substitutes for theorising. These journals have, in the process, Contributed to the 'Indianising of international icons, but little else has changed, especially when one considers the fact that they reinforce the power of images in determining architectural production.                                                                                                                    (continues...)