04 December 2012
03 December 2012
CnT Katte 7
MindTree named Subroto Bagchi as the Executive Chairman on 29 February 2012 with an effective date of 1 April 2012.
"Leave your Newspaper and your Toilet, the way you expect to find it. Business begins and ends with that simple precept" - Subroto Bagchi
23 November 2012
15 November 2012
Friday Movie 16 Nov
The film premises itself on the idea that architecture is a metaphor for
civilisations and subsequently, uses five architectural examples from
modern India to illuminate the inflections of an environmental
sensibility on emerging Indian design aesthetics. It looks at five
monumental works of architects Rajesh Ranganathan, Prem Chandavarker,
Sanjay Mohe, Bimal Patel and Raj Rewal - disparate as they may seem to
explore their thematic consonance. What emerges is a myriad ways in
which these architects have incorporated an interplay of light and
landscape to create spaces that are reverberate with natural energy.
Insightful analysis of these works by Prof. A. G. K. Menon reveals the
reinventing of a modernity that is in constant dialogue with tradition
to transform places into spaces.
16 August 2012
12 July 2012
04 July 2012
29 June 2012
Ice Ice Eisenman
There's just no escaping Peter Eisenman if you want
to talk about iconicity in architecture. There's pretty much no escaping Peter
Eisenman no matter what you want to talk about in architecture, of course, but
especially so with things iconic. Just lost myself (again) in Diagram
Diaries and M Emory Games.
Some quotes:
From "Diagram Diaries" (New York,
Universe Publications, 1999)
"While diagrams of painting, sculpture,
and architecture were often seen as similar in their content, my use of the
diagram proposed that there was some critical difference between them. This
difference was found in the unique relationship in architecture between its
instrumentality and its iconicity, between architecture's function and its
meaning, and ultimately between its sign and its signified." (pp. 49-50)
"Previously, specific forms in
architecture were always linked to a function (a column must always have a
shape and a material dimension) and, therefore, to a meaning. My innitial idea
in the use of the diagram was that the substrate of form, here referred to as
an aspect of architecture's interiority, could be detached from such
programmatic concerns. This is what Yve-Alain Bois and Rosalind Krauss have
called the need to preserve the singularity of objects by cutting them off from
their previous modes of legitimation. For architecture, this would mean a
process that would displace form from its assumed necessary relationships to
function, meaning, and aesthetics without at the same time necessarily denying
the precense of these conditions." (pp. 50-51)
"...[Eisenman's idea of the formal]
articulated both a quality of what at the time was called generic form, such as
linearity - as opposed to a specific line - and the idea of a process of form
suggested by a relationship of form in space, such as rotation and shear, which
again had nothing to do with the actual physical character of the form but with
something implied in the relationship between forms." (p. 52)
"...In any built work, while there were
columns and beams - precences in the space - they were not holding anything up.
These 'structural' elements asked whether it was necessary to have a
functioning structure in order to be necessarily iconic (i.e., to symoblize
function). Was the actual material column to be considered merely a functional
element or was it also a sign? Was the unstructural or 'cardboard' column,
since it was not a functioning structure, also a sign?" (pp. 57-58)
"A self-referential sign was defined in
the House II diagrams as the difference between an iconic sign and an indexical
sign. Traditionally, the diagram had been used as an iconic sign - one which
referred outward to some metaphoric existence. Now, the diagram was seen
instead as a series of indexical signs: a system of differences that had little
metaphoric or iconic content, but rather could be seen as a notational system
understood as different from other formal systems. These indexical signs were
thought to exist in some sort of suspension from their iconic condition yet as
a potential condition of interiority. It was not that these indexical signs did
not also have an iconic value, but this value could coexist with their
indexical quality." (p. 64)
"...Walter Benjamin's thesis that
architecture is viewed by an essentially distracted observer." (p. 65)
"The need to detach the icon from the instrument
in order to read architecture not merely as a language but as a singular
manifestation of an interiority of difference became an important part..."
(pp. 67-68)
From "M Emory Games" (in "M
Emory Games: Emory Center for the Arts" (New York, Rizzoli International
Publications, 1995), p.58-59
"Our work imposes a conceptual memory on
the volumetric massing of an object, and in doing so attempts to subvert icons
of presence, the building mass itself, with a striated network of what could be
described as lines of memory. Little of the iconicity of these lines of memory
comes from the traditional forms of iconicity in architecture, such as
function, structure, aesthetics, or a relationship to the history of
architecture itself. Rather, the iconicity of these lines comes from a writing
that is indexical as opposed to iconic. An index is something that refers to
its own condition. In this sense its iconic role is more one of resemblance
than it is one of representation. The facade of a building, while traditionally
thought to be a representation, also has the possibility to be indexical. The
plan, on the other hand, while clearly indexical also has iconic
characteristics. Writing attempts to suggest that both the plan and the facade
can be used as indices. In order to have a writing in this context one must
first make a distinction between a resemblance and a representation. A
representation always refers to something external, while a resemblance also
refers to internal characteristics. Representations rely on a traditional
notion of memory that is linguistic and historical. A resemblance can also be
understood as a simulacrum that is not based on a visual relationship. In a
sense the simulacrum is a representation without resemblance or the sign of a
sign. Such a condition of sign becomes an index. Thus the lines of memory act
as a simulacrum rather than a representation."
07 June 2012
28 May 2012
Public, Private and the Sacred
Every morning, as I impatiently wait for
the lift to arrive – the old lady in the neighboring flat sits outside her
door, painstakingly drawing out an elaborate kolam. The elaborate diagram that I inadvertently stamp upon every
evening, in my haste to reach back home.
It was an image of this kolam that we began our discussion with,
this Thursday. We spoke about Charles Correa’s article named “Public, Private
and the sacred” wherein Correa brings forth the need to address the realm of “sacred” in the art of building.
According to Correa – while the word
“sacred” might have a million implications – it primarily refers to the human
fascination with the infinite and unbounded. This endless fascination has
manifested itself in various forms over the ages. The mandala, the Jain cosmograph, the Islamic
char- bagh pattern, each evolving from the thoughts, aspirations and shared
history of a population – and developing unique architecture that seems
timeless.
The question that was posed before the
forum was to identify the myth of modern India. Is it the neon lights, the
nylon sari or the TV antenna? How do we
create architecture that that matters to the people of India – that
allows them a habitat to live with their own mythic imagery, their aspirations
and their dreams?
The discussion that ensued showed a
definite drift from the thought that echoed in the article.
There was a general agreement that this
“nostalgia” towards history and the bygone is merely blocking our path. There
was a counter – argument which stated that we are now in an increasingly
globalizing world, and must look forward instead of looking into the past for
inspiration. The question of context need not be “over-philosophized” but
merely taken as a matter-of-fact condition that needs to be dealt with. Designs
need not essentially respond to the surroundings in the conventional sense.
They may fascinate – or even shock – and these very buildings may form the
context of tomorrow. Some of the young architects were of the opinion that we must
now cut off this umbilical cord to the past that seems to the limiting our
design possibilities and must wholeheartedly embrace the future and all its
possibilities.
The myth of today, as someone stated – is
the sharp whip of rationality and scientific innovation. As such – why must we
shy away from bold forms and cutting edge materials?
Then
again – when I look around me - I see the most wonderfully pluralistic society.
Every day that I drive by the little slum near my apartment complex – I see
almost a replica of the living patterns of yore. The little open to sky court
that forms the major living space, the verandah which forms the social space.
I see Vedic symbology painted on modern
doors and as I gingerly walk past the neighbor’s kolam, I realize that in our
country – the past and its myth – the sacred is fundamental to the aspirations
of the people. It is exactly what makes us what we are.
How do we cut off this umbilical cord and
forge ahead – fascinating, shocking and creating a whole new pattern?
02 May 2012
18 April 2012
12 April 2012
09 March 2012
03 February 2012
20 January 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)