Shree: Modernity
and architecture
Modernity can
perhaps be spoken simply as capitalization of mindset, individualization and
advertisement. One of its effects is on exploitation of resources and
heightened privacy - now reaching internal fractures.
This has effects on
what one refers to as indigenous values and architecture of built spaces +
public spaces; vernacular values and so on. If one talks of “values” then one
means the whole perception of climate, geography, conception of livelihood, and
subsequently the experience of spaces (in terms of scale and proportions). All
that is imagined is finally expressed in tangible terms of architecture and
landscape.
Now this
imagination may be collective or may become individual. This is a huge
transformation- from collective to individual.
Pre-modern
“cultures” may be spoken from many angles of perception. This is our story
which we have forgotten or given away for something different. At the heart
seems to be recognition of a larger value (maybe of environment or spirit or
religion or culture or geography) and a collective response to the same. That
may translate into large families, compact high density urban fabric, shared
walls and shared spaces, (in fact shared to an extent that the entire city
looks as one mass) and changing internal space syntax as if the meaning of internal
spaces is extremely fluid and not so much conspicuous presence of form. Changes
in cultures may have been slow and this probably meant stronger continuation of
collective values. Dependence on climate or nature was a given and resources
may have been used sparingly. Life may have been hard although I am not sure if
this hardship was verbalized or just accepted with a pinch of salt. Space may
have been emotionally anchored and a strong sense of memory would be layered
along with it, which may resist any change. This has reflections on scale,
proportions, openings, movements through space.
We contrast this to
modern cultures or way of living where the pace of change is accelerated by
technological advancement and the idea of individualism and privacy. This reflects
on detached built forms, increased roads or locomotion networks, more private
spaces, less public spaces, more private landscapes, more “distances” (either
physical or in mindscape), stricter particular refined non shared functions,
non flexible built forms, non standard physical forms, energy intensive spaces
and so on. Life is believed to be made simple, but perhaps it may have also
increased mental stress stemming from mental isolation. Space and its construct
is also a sort of vacuum – disconnected from any idea of shared or common
spaces or a larger value of any kind. The attachment to space is one of fear or
of consumption but very rarely of nourishment and anchorage. All this is a
severe compromise on deeper feelings. We verbalize a lot about stresses, but
cannot rectify the fractures. Does enhanced verbalization inhibit fruitful
action or healing?! Do “words” make our feelings hardened?! This too reflects
on scale proportions and movement through space.
We change mindscape
and that changes space. Nearness or intimacy and feelings can be spoken from
the point of view of proportions and scales – all interconnected and humble
modules and one space flowing over the other as a continuous transition. The opposite
of these qualities of disconnections, lack of transitions, strict boundaries
may express farness.
There was a time
when senses and eye sight could lead to a feeling of nearness - the relation
was simple and direct. What one could see or touch or hear or smell or taste –
that stimuli was “near” and became a part of our memory. It is not so obvious
now. Nearness of stimuli no longer guarantees its presence or character. What generates
closeness or nearness is intellectual focus. If I am attuned to events taking
place in foreign shores (or even in AI), then I am close to those stimuli. If I
am control freak, anxious individual, then I am closer to those tendencies and behavior.
Therefore, the
inquiry is what signals in the mind you would like to be closer to and generate
within yourself? Would that lead to suitable thoughts, feelings, behavior? Would
that lead to suitable activities and relations? Would that lead to suitable
spatial vocabulary and therefore architecture?
Hari Om.