BY Vikram Bhatt, Peter Scriver
After the masters discusses (or questions) how the contemporary Indian architecture is to be seen. The book is published in 1990 and is talking about contemporary architecture of India of 1940s. Unlike Europe or America, this book becomes pioneer to the architectural writing without having trajectory from the past. This book creates important moment of shift in the discourse.
It compares the architecture in other parts of the world and emerging architecture (regional) in India which is developing on its own and then the text sets its limitations. Prior to this book, Vikram Bhatt has written the book called –“ How the other half builds”. Which talks about housing for poor and alternative way of sustainability?
This text discusses number of projects in Delhi and Ahmedabad. How modern architecture in India deals with technical limitations and diverse challenges. Architects and their learning background are also discussed in this text. It flags up the other side like housing and institutional buildings. The idea of architecture as an activist, design as an agency of social change of 1960s is also discussed.
At one hand, they talk about nice examples like Banks, Plazas, Shopping places as contemporary Indian architecture but other side, the they say, only colonial city are appropriate to adopt to this changing urban order. They say, architecture is ready for this context but the context is not ready for the architecture.
Comment for the space-frame of Pragati Maidan is contradictory in itself. They call space-frame of Pragati maidan, as it was interesting effort because it was done in hand poured concrete. But not so heroic because it can never find its full potential while it was done hand poured.- this case substantiate that preconceived idea of backwardness of the place influenced the assessment, the idea of the third world dominated by the idea of technological backwardness.
For Pereira Leo, they wrote, “…Pereira’s aesthetic verges on the puritanical with its white simplicity but its effect is mellowed by a sentiment for the relationship of the building to the natural environment.”[i] – Poetic criticism. By the end of the book, they narrate architectural practice in India in a poetic manner. Here they talk about emerging directions.
The text is not structured in a singular manner, but as a mosaic of multiple, diverse frames overlapping for any particular production of architecture, which is a positive approach.
But, much of the discourse discusses flow of the inspiration in one direction, from West to India. By this way the author ignores the possibility of western architects learned from their working experiences from India. Or for an example, what Corbusier learned from the architects/ engineers of India.
The narrative of backwardness is not the ideology, explored to its full potential. Because of the comparison with Europe, authors have diluted the potential of emerging architecture in Developing countries. Their meaning for Architecture in Europe is standard and other form of architecture in relation to that, in developing countries, is either cheap imitation or unexplored to its full potential.
[i] By Vikram Bhatt, Peter Scriver, “After The Masters”, Mapin Pub., 1990