KRVIA BRIDGE STUDIO IX: HALL OF NATION | NEW DELHI

QUESTION OF BRIDGE STUDIO

The bridge studio is a space where the intellectual formalisation of practice begins to configure with the academic space or academic space begins to interact with practice domain. The practice domain is generally perceived as other side of academics with handful information of practical imperatives & awareness towards making of architecture that resonates its purpose & market that sterilises academics.  However practice in the context of bridge studio is imagine to be an act of design & construction of building that is deemed to be an academic exercise. 

If one looks other way around, only if, practice that reaches out to academics to experiment with the particular aspects of architecture that resonates the act of conflict, deemed unresolved. It is that precise conflict and unresolved condition finds academic space as laboratory for experimentation, where unresolved conflict can emerge in all tones of fresh imaginations, complex reality engages with comprehensible manifestation, architecture that traverse beyond time and tragic views.

QUESTION OF MODERN

The modern word is often limited in its definition when we talk within academics or general conversation as being departure from or repudiation of accepted norms. However the modern also brings about the question on philosophy on which shatters the boundary of orthodoxy and making the modern phenomena more transient and fleeting (continuously & simultaneously emerging). Even though the word modern & heritage are contradictory in terms, it brings about values that shaped thought and philosophy. Architecture of any given time is a product of thought to context. The knowledge reacting to the situation within which the encapsulated boundary of modern transverses and becomes history of ideas. It is this precise conflict that studio attempted to address, to deconstruct the implicit meaning of word modern and seek various possible reaction and manifestation.

POSITIONING ARCHITECTURAL THEORY

The Architectural program is often bases its grounding on three prong approach to formulate comprehensive understanding on architecture discipline: namely, History & Theory | Technology | design. The discourse of architectural theory is generally clubbed with history & theory, with assumption that inquiry system of history or theory of history has same fundamental principles as architectural theory. The intent is to build the argument that theoretically architectural theory is a separate discipline. The history often needs navigation its discourses through linear/comparative timeline, causes, imperatives and historic-ism/ historiography or through social and cultural imperatives,  while architectural theory is a discussion, debate and writing on architectural trends, pattern or history of ideas including theory of history.  Architectural theory is an intellectual discipline locating self and society while history obscures the cult of individualism, bridging the discourses on knowledge and virtues within moral embankment. Architectural theory investigates the methods of critical, creative, interdisciplinary, and outward-facing research while history is inward journey of locating historic-ism logic.  If history brings critical objectivity of past or philosophy to study of fact for contemporary learning, the Architectural theory speculates on past and present simultaneously and influences the process of making of architectural pedagogy.  It’s an epistemological position as a necessary conditions that shapes the architectural theory.

Architectural theory reinforces the individual predilection regarding architectural thinking trajectories and allows re-conceptualization. It initiates and debate on various architectural text not only in linear timeline but also parallel or simultaneous time frame, develops position and critical thinking on the position. Architectural theory is a reading & translation of ideas. It brings about normative foundation (information on form and ideas) along with dialectical (ex. binary of thesis and anti-thesis) understanding.

If one addresses the architectural theory in the context of architectural issues, architectural history and architectural writing by architects, perhaps there would be greater possibility of re-imagining or re-locating paradigmatic shift in the architectural education. It is often seen that architectural theory borrows too much from across discipline for its debate and discussion; in the process it dilutes the architectural discourse as debating discipline as a learning medium.

NON STRAIGHT FORWARD ARCHITECTURE: ROBERT VENTURI

CARTESIAN RIGOR VS COMPROMISED FRAGMENTATION

" This is no an easy book. It requires professional commitment and close visual attention, and is not for those architects who, lest they offend them, pluck out their eyes"

Vincent Scully

Professor Emiretus, Historian

Yale University

The architectural & theoretical work of Robert Venturi in American context can only be compared with the work Aldo Rossi's work in Europe. This is perhaps the time frame that various theoretician across the western globe began to raise the question on modern manifesto and controlled order of Cartesian system. If one looks at the time frame carefully, its the time of early sixties till late seventies where the architecture suffered from heavy handed of high modern & no-where manifestation in practice domain. In the same time the large pause and vaccum in academic domain filled with complex theoretical discourse on architecture and context. The "Imagebiliy" by Kevin Lynch along with Robert Venturi's treatise "Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture in 1960, while Aldo Rossi's work on "Architecture of the City" and Leon Krier's "Rational Architecture"in early seventies meant a lot to ponder about architecture and modernity. 

The Complexity and Contradiction brings about the cultural discourse as main theoretical ideals as compared to Architecture of the City, which brings about the question on Historic-ism.  Both the ideals raises not only the theoretical question within academic space but had far reaching consequences in practice domain as well. The word "Post Modernism" began to propel and re-interpreted in architecture across the globe, as some would define it as cultural logic of late capitalism while others would define in terms of culturally and historically relative construction of truth. 

The contribution of Robert Venturi's work (Theoretical and Buildings) is an important lesson when one begin to construct the architectural discourse in post-war era. It brings about rigorous pluralistic, thought provoking, experiential  and refreshing thought during the phase on intellectual fatigue after overdose modern representation of our everyday reality.

Robert Venturi brings about the chapter on contradiction juxtaposed, highlight the vivid ideas of tensions and scaling as an tectonic device in populist sense & as an contradiction adaptation process. The Lieb House is a classic example of scaling and popular image, bringing about parody to the mass consumption (Radio)

Credit: elseplace for all architecture, January 29, 2009

While the idea of memory, appropriation of parody and nostalgia is critically associated with the project " Ghost House", Franklin Benjamin square. The archaeological palimpsest of left over, formation of public plaza as neighborhood space are important manifestation while perceptual engagement in seeking clarity in the assemblage of  historical event with new functions makes the work far more critical than many of his contemporaries. 

Credit: Blog: Futility Closet

Much of Venturi's work remained in postmodern rethinking on function of art and architecture on one side while the role of an institutions in producing or reshaping the meaning (absolute to relative) on other side. The profession of architecture shall always remain in-debt to Robert Venturi's work and concerns.

Credit: Manoj Parmar | Faculty - Krvia

FALSE CREEK HOUSING: VANCOUVER

The history of False creek is slightly deceptive, as Britisher arrived with assumption that its going up to south via creek but ended in a delta. However the False creek divides the city from downtown to rest of the Vancouver. It has four interesting sides from the urban form point of view. The housing development along the creek has also taken diverse form due to its diverse DNA. The high rise dotting up the north side of the creek is an extension of downtown. The high rise apartment treats the water edge as an end of plot and begin of public space while one movers across the creek, the presence of low rise and high density housing is visible.

This low rise housing are strikingly exploratory in nature as each of group of housing cluster is shaped by its location and various aspects of micro pattern that emanates from simple human traits, almost out of Christopher Alexander's "Pattern Language" book. Each element of the housing, may it be entry, portico, kitchen garden, small bedroom opening, variety, roof light, access to water, activity node, degree of publicness, cluster size etc are clearly articulated in each scheme. The low rise treats the water edge as if its an extension of order from private to semi-public. Each housing within each cluster is topologically classifiable.

While the south east edge of the creek has Olympic village housing, bustling with commercial and retail activity in a large common plaza as an entry point from creek. The each block of mid rise housing has substantial density of units however the presence of regulated green spaces dilutes visual chaos.  The east and north edge brings the leisure and sports activity with high end housing almost merging with downtown. The west side is flanked by Granville island edge with mixed use development.

Due to the diverse housing form across the edge, the creek offers variety of pauses and energised situation and makes it the most popular urban place.

URBANISM ECOLOGY AND PLACE: Reading "City Riffs"

The recent publication of book titled " City Riffs" by Richard Plunz ( Columbia University, GSAPP) is based on urbanism discourse (dialogue) in relation to place and ecology. The preface by Kenneth Frampton argues the production of urban knowledge in neo-liberal economy results in aporetic question on limits and scope in the field of urban study. He brings about three important and critical discourses by Christopher Alexander on low rise, high density model, E.J Mishan work on "The Cost of Economic Growth" and Plunz work on "CIty Riffs" demonstrating the linear process of indictment of urban transformation towards maldistribution of resources.

The book brings the analogy of place and ecology, which needs in-depth understanding as both shares concept of place and space. His argument on place based centrality to urban discourse which perhaps has not been dissected theoretically enough as compare to environmental science. He argues further that how biological diversity merges with urban diversity and how evolutionary process of environmental science can aid the process of advancement of field based urbanism. The place based urbanism (field urbanism) and environmental science (not ecology) can be seen as entangled bank, which engages the challenge of conflict and dependency. 

The argument of  "Riff", improvisation is a disciplinarian movement addressing subtlety, ambivalence in field urbanism.