Hafeez,design and Mumbai
font face="arial">Why is Indian design still an imitation of the west? Why is design in India a consequence of theories, ideologies and trends from the west? Having raised that larger question and being an architect, I would limit my opinion to the state of design in the built environment, particularly Mumbai.
After 60 years since the British rule, Bombay is dotted with ugly buildings and an even uglier street-scape. Hafeez is still in business and his buildings look awfully similar, like ugly dildos of concrete. There are several people who will disagree with my view of Hafeez Contractor's architecture. Some of those disagreements are based on a few arguments. I will tackle each argument one at a time
The first argument raised is that "Hafeez delivers what the people want"
-Obviously, People who raise that argument do not understand the processes that make a building. For the uninitiated, those processes involve a builder/promoter to approach the architect (Hafeez in this case) for seeking design options although the promoters often drive the choice of the design. There is absolutely no involvement of the public, be it neighborhood commitees, design boards, public officials etc etc. The design is only reviewed by public officials from a standpoint purely for meeting the building/planning or regulatory boards by the letter of their code. It would not be too much to suppose that many such codes are compromised, deviated and relaxed by approving public officials with money changing hands from the promoters to the measly salaried public officials. This process itself blows the first argument out of water and proves that Hafeez's designs do not come from a consensus of the market.
The second argument raised is that "Design is a matter of taste"
If design is indeed a matter of taste and considering it differs between individuals,then how can all of Hafeez's design look so similar and stylistic. Obviously , the assumption of the matter of "taste" is as subjective as Hafeez 's ethics of practice of architecture.
Having addressed the matter of choice, I would follow up with the argument on design and its influencing factors.
Indians haven't been able to comprehend their background and appreciate their history, culture and tradition. While we may know our history very well, we fail to understand the link of our present age to our past history. India's fascination with the west has not waned despite a renewed growth in the understanding of our recent history. Indian continuity of indigenous ideas, knowledge, learning methods were abruptly disrupted under the British rule. The victor always imposes and influences its subjects
with view that serves their purpose and world view and Britain did not pass this opportunity. British historian James Mill in his "History of India" and  Thomas Macaulay later in his Macaulay's minute on Indian education are examples of the British view over its vanquished subjects. Macaulay's professed in his minute on Indian education Indian knowledge, history and the entire civilization was unworthy and went to an extent of saying The entire Hindu history is equal to one book of Shakespeare. The British tactically imposed a British education; with english as the primary langauage and were suceesfull in creating of a new class who are colloquially referred to as the "brownsahibs" . The brownsahibs were a necessity for the British to rule its 200 million Indian citizenry.The narrow British projection of India and its civilization was also necessary to govern its peoples and enable British expats to subjugate their subjects without remorse.
Despite of 70 years since the end of the world biggest imperial power,Great Britain and its world view of India still perpetuates. India and its history is still enslaved to British interpretation. Amartya Sen, Amitav Ghosh and some other Indian authors have done exceptional work . Art,fashion,architecture today still is bound to the confines of western designs and western models of mass production.
to be completed<
After 60 years since the British rule, Bombay is dotted with ugly buildings and an even uglier street-scape. Hafeez is still in business and his buildings look awfully similar, like ugly dildos of concrete. There are several people who will disagree with my view of Hafeez Contractor's architecture. Some of those disagreements are based on a few arguments. I will tackle each argument one at a time
The first argument raised is that "Hafeez delivers what the people want"
-Obviously, People who raise that argument do not understand the processes that make a building. For the uninitiated, those processes involve a builder/promoter to approach the architect (Hafeez in this case) for seeking design options although the promoters often drive the choice of the design. There is absolutely no involvement of the public, be it neighborhood commitees, design boards, public officials etc etc. The design is only reviewed by public officials from a standpoint purely for meeting the building/planning or regulatory boards by the letter of their code. It would not be too much to suppose that many such codes are compromised, deviated and relaxed by approving public officials with money changing hands from the promoters to the measly salaried public officials. This process itself blows the first argument out of water and proves that Hafeez's designs do not come from a consensus of the market.
The second argument raised is that "Design is a matter of taste"
If design is indeed a matter of taste and considering it differs between individuals,then how can all of Hafeez's design look so similar and stylistic. Obviously , the assumption of the matter of "taste" is as subjective as Hafeez 's ethics of practice of architecture.
Having addressed the matter of choice, I would follow up with the argument on design and its influencing factors.
Indians haven't been able to comprehend their background and appreciate their history, culture and tradition. While we may know our history very well, we fail to understand the link of our present age to our past history. India's fascination with the west has not waned despite a renewed growth in the understanding of our recent history. Indian continuity of indigenous ideas, knowledge, learning methods were abruptly disrupted under the British rule. The victor always imposes and influences its subjects
with view that serves their purpose and world view and Britain did not pass this opportunity. British historian James Mill in his "History of India" and&nbsp; Thomas Macaulay later in his Macaulay's minute on Indian education are examples of the British view over its vanquished subjects. Macaulay's professed in his minute on Indian education Indian knowledge, history and the entire civilization was unworthy and went to an extent of saying The entire Hindu history is equal to one book of Shakespeare. The British tactically imposed a British education; with english as the primary langauage and were suceesfull in creating of a new class who are colloquially referred to as the "brownsahibs" . The brownsahibs were a necessity for the British to rule its 200 million Indian citizenry.The narrow British projection of India and its civilization was also necessary to govern its peoples and enable British expats to subjugate their subjects without remorse.
Despite of 70 years since the end of the world biggest imperial power,Great Britain and its world view of India still perpetuates. India and its history is still enslaved to British interpretation. Amartya Sen, Amitav Ghosh and some other Indian authors have done exceptional work . Art,fashion,architecture today still is bound to the confines of western designs and western models of mass production.
to be completed<
Comments