Category: BOOK REVIEWS

Image Source: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/JmpChd5D0d0/maxresdefault.jpg

 

From: Notes around the Doppler Effect and other moods of Modernism, by  Robert Somol and Sarah Whiting

 

Critical architecture^[1] can be defined now as projective architecture. Where (in Perspecta vol.21) critical architecture was categorized in “Between” the cultural product and individual, politically judged discipline. Now, (in Perspecta vol.33) author defines the projective architecture, which can be seen as an alternative to the largely accepted definitions of critical architecture.

Cultural architecture is seen as a complete product of pre-defined principles. It focuses on methods of restoring its original meanings.  The new idea not falling under such principles becomes unacceptable.

Autonomous architecture focuses on formal evolution, in absence of historical concerns. That is valid until proven invalid.

The critical analysis of architecture should be free from preconceived notions/ principles- it is not a comparative analysis of history of architecture. It should be free from resistive or  attitude. The mere description as a critique turns out as recording the past or present. Instead, it can be reflective, free from sympathetic engagement, by purging oneself from vantage position.

“What for Hays was then an exceptional practice, has now been rendered an everyday fact of life.”^[2] Therefore, Projective architecture now, needs to be analyzed from different parameters than the conventional ones.

There should be this alternative method- Projective architecture, than these pre-described ones- cultural, autonomous and critical. That focuses on effect and includes materials, program, writing, atmosphere, form, technologies, politics, economics and other such disciplines. It considers the multiplicity of contingences and quality of sensibility. The designer may not act as expert of all disciplines but the expert of design affecting economics and politics.

“A projective architecture does not shy away from forms reinstating architectural definition, but that definition stems from design and its effects rather than a language of means and materials.”^[3]

Following to McLuhan’s Hot to Cold practice, critical architecture is hot.^[4] It is about resistance, it does not follow background or normative approach but it is about prioritizing definition, delineation and distinction, which has hi-definition effect. Perceiving hot is difficult and belabored. Unlike hot, cold (Projective architecture) would be an explicit work, and doesn’t produce high definition effect. It requires the context and interpretation of viewer to complete the understanding of it. Alternative architecture is like cold.^[4]

Doppler Effect is adopted to substantiate the position and motion of the source in relation to the perceiver. Similarly, in architecture, we can approach through similar method to perceive emerging architecture. This text suggests perceiving architecture in such way, which can identify the potential of emerging architecture. This is an alternative approach to the cultural, autonomous or critical architecture, more than mere criticisms or literal readings of the architecture in practice.

[1] K. Michael Hays, Critical Architecture: Between Culture and Form, published by Perspecta volume 21. (1984)

[2] Pg. 73, Robert Somol and Sarah Whiting, Notes around the Doppler Effect and Other Moods of Modernism, Published by Perspecta, Vol. 33, Mining Autonomy (2002)

[3] Pg. 75, Robert Somol and Sarah Whiting, Notes around the Doppler Effect and Other Moods of Modernism, Published by Perspecta, Vol. 33, Mining Autonomy (2002)

[4]  Pg. 76, Robert Somol and Sarah Whiting, Notes around the Doppler Effect and Other Moods of Modernism, Published by Perspecta, Vol. 33, Mining Autonomy (2002)

 

 

The efforts of change from traditional or conventional prior to the following texts, were un-noticeable. “Ornament and crime” and “Manifesto of Futurism” in early 1900s, evidently advocated the importance of technology and machine in shaping up the new, futurist human life.

“Ornament and crime”, the text was presented by Adolf Loos in disagreement of the contemporary practice in architecture. Traditional methods in architecture used ornamentation to make objects and architecture aesthetic. He argued that ornament affects labor, health and economy, Divides classes. Ornament is anti-progress. “The evolution of culture marches with the elimination of ornament from useful objects”[1]

“No ornament can any longer be made today by anyone who lives on our cultural level … Freedom from ornament is a sign of spiritual strength”[2], he tried to define beauty in eliminating ornamentation then.

Parallel to this event, F. T. Marinetti, a poet, published his Manifesto of Futurism in 1909 in Italy. It also talked about unconventional form of art, literature and architecture.

“Museums: cemeteries! […] Why poison ourselves? Why rot?^”[3] Said Marinetti, …what is there to look at the art displayed in museums.. The compromised dreams of artist… instead, he urged the artists, poets to join him…to be a part of the change… change to the old and framing new today. He criticized the institutions, museums for holding the youth back… abandoning the creativity and talent. “…But we want no part of it, the past, we the young and strong Futurists!”[4] He said that the next future would be for the next generations, let them throw us, our manuscripts and follow the course of future… their future. The artists like, Umberto Boccioni – Painter, sculptor and Antonio Sant’Elia – Architect, accompanied him.

Boccioni gave painting and sculpture, the new forms of expression rather than conventional, literal Classical style like Nude and Landscape. His expressions were made from heterogeneous materials and mixed media.

Antonio Sant’Elia, an architect became participant of the movement after world war-ii. His drawings of strong vertical lines and inclination towards technology characterized futurist architecture. This later on was described as art deco style in late 1960s. He imagined the industrial technology in architectural production and then more for urban form.

These events of ‘futurist manifesto’ or ‘ornament and crime’ later on fuelled the movement of modernism in architecture. Adolf Loos, Marinetti,  Sant’Elia were the pioneer thinkers of modernism. Moreover, they influenced the artists like Tullio Crali (painting- Shaking Flight) and architects like Corbusier (vision of Villa Radieuse).

[1] Loos, A. (1908). Lecture on Ornament and Crime, 1910

[2] Loos, A. (1908). Lecture on Ornament and Crime, 1910

[3] by F. T. Marinetti, The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism, Translated from French: Le Figaro, Paris, February 20, 1909

[4] by F. T. Marinetti, The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism, Translated from French: Le Figaro, Paris, February 20, 1909

ON THE COMPARATIVE METHOD

By Sir Banister Fletcher

 

‘The History of Architecture on the comparative method’ was written by Senior Banister Fletcher and his son Sir Banister Fletcher in 1895. Senior Banister Fletcher was an architect from London, Britain. He was surveyor and politician. He was professor in King’s College, London. His son Sir Banister Fletcher served as lecturer under his father at the same college. His work for the history of architecture became reference book for the next generation students, scholars, professors and craftsmen. The recent edition of the book published is the 20^th in 1996 after almost 100 years of its 1^st edition (1895).

The idea of one reference book as a compendium in books like Encyclopedia of different information has existed from 2000 years and has evolved and modified over the centuries. ‘One compendium for all different fields’ and ‘one compendium for one specific field’ are the notions or principles on which these texts were written by now. But importantly, why the compendium is necessary is here to be thought of. Philosopher Rene Descartes approached to uncover the truth of natural world from mathematics and science in 16^th century.  Scientists like Newton and Einstein also have explored the knowledge from questioning out of the preset framework of knowledge.

1^st edition of this text covered European architecture that was published in 1901. There were two categories of architecture that time. One, kind of architecture included in the text and another was the left outside the compilation. The arguments between elites decided what type of architecture to be included or to excluded from their cultural, social gatherings.

In introduction the tree of architecture shows different styles and their growth or evolution from different aspects like culture, physical conditions, politics etc. canonical principles, structural, geometry and ideology.

19^th edition structure of the text completely changed. There are new chapters on the twentieth-century architecture of the Middle East (including Israel), South-east Asia, Hong Kong, Japan and Korea, the Indian subcontinent, Russia and the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and Latin America. History writing is also seen from the local perspective and tried to be understood from local cultural perspective in newer editions of the text.

Contemporary to that time, James Fergusson and James Burgess also wrote History of eastern architecture. But unlike Sir Banister Fletcher, these were regional category of architecture. Sir Banister Fletcher’s attempt covered the architecture across the world.

In India, one does not find the written/ documented historiography of the civilizations. Similarly, the documentation of styles of architecture is also not found through any historical documentation. This text has documented not only Indian, but also various styles of the world architecture. The methods of writing are also modified to the emerging approaches according to appropriateness. This text has been a reference text to study architecture for generations and continues to be… for architects, students, historians, artisans and so on…

BY Christian Norberg Schulz

            “Architecture means to visualize the genius loci, and the task of the architect is to create meaningful places, whereby he helps man to dwell.”^[1]A belief in classical Roman religion called “genius loci” means the protective spirit of a place. Author here, interprets it to be a design principle of an architect in consideration with the sensory experiences for whom he/ she is designing.

Christian Norberg Schulz has written about architecture as a means, its importance to existential in his books- Intentions in Architecture and Existence, Space and Architecture, Meaning in Western Architecture.[2] The text- Genius Loci is further an effort to study the psychic implications of architecture. The author does not negate the existence of practical aspects of architecture but he tries to find the interrelationship between psychical and physical and their implication over built environment in architecture.

The phenomenological study is unlike semiotics. It is not just the verbal description of the form and composition but also the study of experiential perception of an environment formed by architecture and man. This separates the architecture from merely a shelter, place from space. “How do people orient themselves in space… what makes a space existential…”[3] He tries to decipher these concrete phenomena of architecture in this text.

The text criticizes the principles of modern architecture, which tend to be pure and try to achieve infinite precision. Author says, visual perception is not the only driving factor of making architecture, which is dominant in modernism. Modern cities have lost their poetic quality by following the assembly line production principles. The medieval settlements are in harmony.

He elaborates the principles of Le Corbusier and Richard Meyer- “sight as a frontal encounter or kinesthetic eye of the Promenade architectural.”[4] He says that Corbusier and Meyer emphasize just on visual senses, which is an incomplete approach to architecture.

“Alvar Alto’s and FLW’s architecture is based on a full recognition of embodied human condition and of the multitude of instinctual reactions hidden in the human unconscious.”[5] Alvar Alto’s concern for glare in daily habitat (visual sense) and for conduction of heat in chairs (tactile sense) shows experience centric design approach.

Kevin Lynch talks about intangible aspects of urban planning and the memory formed based on perceptions in “Image of the city”. Robert Venturi’s critique on Purist approach of Modern architecture in ‘complexity and contradiction in architecture’ refers to psychological perception. He says, “I like elements which are hybrid rather than “pure”… boring as well as “interesting”…”[6]

Pallasmaa substantiates, “Architecture is the art of reconciliation between ourselves and the world, and this mediation takes place through senses.”^[7]

This text has made a significant benchmark for the phenomenological studies in the field of Architecture. In 1980s the recognition to popular consciousness started emerging. In 1985 the concept of dwelling (being improved from Housing,) started emerging. These discussions became possible and we started looking at architecture from experiential and psychological perspective now, because of this initiative through Genius Loci.

[1] Christian Norberg Schulz,  Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture, Published by Rizzoli-1991

[2] Christian Norberg Schulz,  Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture, Published by Rizzoli-1991

[3] Christian Norberg Schulz,  Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture, Published by Rizzoli-1991

[4] Christian Norberg Schulz,  Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture, Published by Rizzoli-1991

[5] Christian Norberg Schulz,  Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture, Published by Rizzoli-1991

[6] Robert Venturi, Complexity And Contradictions In Architecture, published by

The Museum of Modern Art, 1966 (Translated in 1977)

[7] Pg. 72, Juhani Pallasmaa, The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses, published by Willey-Academy-2005

 

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

by JANE JACOBS

“This book is an attack on current city planning and rebuilding.”[1] – Jane Jacobs, 1961. In 1930s and 40s many historic buildings were destroyed and neighborhoods were ruined by the insertion of flyovers and roads to facilitate cars. Jane Jacobs, housewife and part time journalist came forward as social activist to respond to this destruction done in the name of greater good.

New York in 1930s- 40s, was shaped by a figure- Robert Moses- the master builder. His primary concern was to build parks as recreational places for the people of NY. The roads and highways started taking place to reach the parks, from other parts of the city. Car was the symbol of modern recreation and freedom of the people that time. He advocated, “Cities are created by and for traffic. A city without traffic is a ghost town.”[2] Moreover, new city planning principles by Frank Lloyd Wright (Broadacre) and Le Corbusier (the contemporary cities) promoted the extensive adaptation of cars in city planning.

The one thing was missing in all these situations, was a life of Human being. Safety of children and old people, social life of citizens were hindered because of these cars and the infrastructure prepared for cars.

Jane Jacobs argued in the text, the authorities have favored clear winners and neglected left out losers in the name of greater good of the society. They applied tactics of patronizing in the name of economic growth. As a result, a nicely cultivated neighborhood since long time was ripped off by one decision of making Cross Bronx Expressway.

She criticized high-rise apartments, which restrict social behavior of residents. She called Six floors syndrome to a hypothetical lifestyle, in which a person spends his life in 6^th floor from birth to death. She showed concern for urbanism where diversity is missing and she criticized The Giraffe condominiums and suburban sprawls.

She gave commonsensical concepts of urban planning like; Eyes on the street for safety, Side walk Ballet for activity, safety and vibrancy evoking social life on streets, Integrating slums in the cities for mixed residential development and nearby livelihood of slum dwellers. Diversity of residential with various amenities and livelihood is essential for growth where zoning does not work efficiently.

She suggested, agglomeration of resources as shared transport (today’s car pulling) is always good for economy of the city. Bringing together the mixed uses, class & castes would create social environment in a neighborhood.  A regimental (implementing stark distinction) policy of planning would destroy interaction within neighborhood. Urban blocks having smaller sizes would allow more permutations of circulation (traffic and pedestrian).

In order to build social capital we blindly urge for economic growth, ignoring the life on streets and in neighborhood.

Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs are symbols in any society. The text is about expert (singular power) vs. ordinary citizen (life). It is not always as binary as we discussed here, but important is to eliminate the negligence of human life happening often in expert oriented planning. Professional experts should include public participation for social and cultural values of the city. Here, Jane Jacobs advocates public conciliation and consultation of experts by manifesting the inclusive process of planning.

[1] pg.3, “THE DEATH AND LIFE OF GREAT AMERICAN CITIES”, Random House, New York-1961

[2]  A statement from an interview of Robert Moses for Greenwich Village, to advocate his urban renewal plan.

“Architecture depends; the question is, on what? On people, time, politics, ethics, mess; the real world.”[1]

Paul Shepheard says, “A provocative declaration of war on utopia, powered by a fuel rich in social justice and sharp humor…  With this book Jeremy Till raises the starting price on all our discussions of architecture.”

A program “The House That £100k Built” by BBC raised the question whether the architect is required or not. The key concerns for hiring an architect were the cost, fees, functional complications etc. and profession started becoming reductant. “Jeremy Till claims that architecture exists in a bubble and ignores the way people really live.”^[2]

Jane Jacobs and Habraken’s theory advocated social practice… why cannot the architectural practice adopt contingency if other practices do. Social practice has inclusive process of policymaking stakeholders for social projects.

Architecture Depends discusses architecture in three parts: Part I talks about the concept of contingency with different people in profession of architecture. Part II talks that the architectural space should be taken in to account and not the phony desires of the architect. Part III discusses how the processes of making of architecture should be prioritized and not the product of architecture.

“The fact that this responsibility is vested in the Institute of Architects (and not Architecture) only goes to confirm that it is architects alone who control this patch of knowledge called architecture.”^[3] The constitution makes an architect the supreme authority for the concerned project and there the possibility of negotiation or contingency is neglected. Jeremy here talks about contingencies and not just the problems.

Real project vs studio project: the studio project is for academic purpose and there the end user or client is imaginary (though professors are experienced enough), the actual condition or requirements from end-user is not dealt with. Whereas the real project is meant for the end-user/ client and his needs, requirements imagery for the project may change during the project life. Moreover, at that time architect should deal with the requirements as being a spatial agency and not as the supreme authority. An architect is not a negotiator, but he is an agency.

It is like family rules and social rules and not like norms or regulations. For the betterment of client/ end-user, the attitude of the professional should be adoptive. Spatial agency talks about needs of the user where as spatial praxis talks about theories of space and pedagogy. However, the end-user should not be kept out of consideration.

In India, generally we have seen the practice not followed strictly, as per the rules set by Council of Architecture (COA). The journey of the project from conceptual drawing to final execution passes through number of changes and (having loopholes in the sanctioning process,) after modifications are possible. Nevertheless, there should be appropriate framework by authority. Also in academics, the curriculum should introduce how to deal with the contingencies along with ‘professional practice’ in profession.

[1] Review of the book,  Jeremy Till, “Architecture depends”, The MIT Press, London-2009

[2] Discussion on: Architecture and Living – Class Endures, BBC

[3] Jeremy Till, “Architecture depends”, The MIT Press, London-2009

-Form & Control in the Built Environment

by JOHN HABRAKEN

 

 

The text talks about how the housing with density in urban and city area should be designed with active involvement of people in design process. Because of world war-ii, the mass destruction of the buildings in European cities, planners and architects initiated to shape new housing strategy for people. Due to industrial development, the migration of people from villages to city happened. Because of which the need of housing emerged. Modernist housing strategies failed to address social needs of the residents as resultant. “Support dwelling”[1] principle by Dutch architect John Habraken was reaction to industrial housing and solution to postwar European housing problems. Later on, he came up with the alternative theory of form, planning and designing the built environment for people, by people through this text in 1998.

The book is structured in three parts- Form (physical order), Place (territorial order) and Understanding (cultural order). Involvement of user in determining form and configuration makes the configuration live and active. This live configuration has more chances to last long. He advocates the customization instead of mass production through his Support-infill model. The customization with mass production does not produce configuration and leads to catalog model and not the support- infill model. Therefore, the support- infill model is essential to produced architecture.

This customization is categorized in four levels- City, Urban Block, Building, Room and Furniture. Lower level (Furniture) can have more degree of modifications where as the higher level (City) can have less degree of changes as it affects large number of people. E.g. City (support) shall last 500 years and furniture (infill) can last 20 years.

The author comments, “Ordinary growth patterns that had been innate and self sustaining, shared throughout society, have been recast as problems requiring professional solution”.[2]  In his principles of mass housing, full public control of outside space in low-rise housing is desired. Unlike in high-rise housing the association of the residents with the street gets lost. “It is… much less simple to develop a close and fine-grained territory than an open coarse – grained territory with the same housing density.”[3] This customization theory leads to have increased level of control and so the social environment.

The other architects argued that the responsibility of an architect does not end with providing the design of the Support only. Hence, the outcome of the design is uncertain in terms of the form. In addition, the time consumed in the process of involving end users would be more. These principles are difficult to implement in the developing countries due to limitations of money and time. The governance is also complicated while following these principles. The positive aspect of these principles is that the end user becomes active participant of designing process, which would establish the strong association of the user with the building.

[1] John Habraken,  “Supports: an Alternate to Mass Housing”, 1972 English edition.
[2] John Habraken, “The Structure of the Ordinary – Form & Control in the Built Environment”, MIT Press 2000
[3] Habraken, “The limits of professionalism”

by Le Corbusier

Frederick Etchells translated the book from French to English, writes about Le Corbusier in the introduction of the book that he is “a sober minded thinker inspired by a fierce austerity.” This book was written in French for French readers, but it made a significant impact on the fraternity of architects’ worldwide. The book makes us to think about and discover or inquire the direction in which we are heading.

Le Corbusier wrote the text, originally published in 1931, to generate a discourse among the architects. And he advocated the principles of high modernity and functionalist approach to architecture, necessary for further evolution in the age of machines.

In the text, by juxtaposition, he preferred the architect to work as the engineers do for humanity and innovations. He celebrated the innovation of cars as a machine. Automobile as metaphor, inspired him to think about architecture in similar manner. The standardization in automobiles made him to cherish the modernization. He advocated Carl Marx’s theory- equality of every human being (and therefore the needs) and hence, the significance of standardization. The standardization to him was a necessary response to the problem of perfection.  “A standard is necessary for order in human effort.”[1]

Corbusier said Michael Angelo- the man of last thousand years. According to him, 17^th to 20^th centuries separate us from renaissance to modern age and make us to see through modern eyes. Rome does not separate modern age from renaissance through these four centuries. It is necessary to critique, appreciate or verify rather than celebrate it immaturely. “The lesson of Rome is for wise men… to send an architectural student to Rome is to cripple them for life.”^[2]

“Architecture finds itself confronted with new laws…Styles no longer exists… There has been revolution in the conception of what Architecture is.”[3] The technology of construction has been changed (new means have been invented) and accordingly the architecture should evolve. That is what he believed.

This book helps us to understand modern study of architecture and therefore the concepts of modern architecture. It influenced architects by this book. This text is considerably significant of the 20^th century, for modern architects and modern principles of architecture to understand.  The significance continues in 21^st century with same intensity.

[1] pg.135, “Towards A  New Architecture”, Dover Publications, New York-1986

[2] pg.173, “Towards A  New Architecture”, Dover Publications, New York-1986

[3] pg.288, “Towards A  New Architecture”, Dover Publications, New York-1986

 

By Maganlal Vakhatchand

             ‘Amdavad no Itihas’ was written by Maganlal Vakhatchand in 1850. His essay on Ahmadabad was selected by jury of Gujarat Vernacular Society (GVS) in the competition of writing a history of Ahmadabad. He was historian and so the text is different than an architect’s history text. His text is a history of rulers, architectural monuments and stories of Ahmadabad city in form of literature and photographs.

            Prior to his essay, Dalpatram Dahyabhai and Alexander Kinloch Forbes were working for local literature of Gujarat and for that they traveled to different parts of Gujarat. They compiled manuscripts and transcribed folk songs and literature of Charan, Bhat from villages. Dalpatram was poet and knew Gujarati, Sanskrit and Vrajbhasha. Forbes was assistant judge colonial administrator in Ahmadabad of Bombay Province. He promoted the literary education and established Gujarat Vernacular Society (GVS).[1]

            Dalpatram and Maganlal both wrote the history Ahmadabad but their sources were different so the history was different. Dalpatram focused more on Hindu stories and contemporary cultural issues where Maganlal being a progressive philosopher wrote about rulers, architecture and lifestyle of the people from all religions. This text was one of the first attempts of writing history, literature and contemporary social issues along with “Vartmaan”-the news paper, Bhootnibandh (later translated in English and named “Lakshmi Natak”) and Buddhiprakash by Dalpatram etc. These texts were the significant writings of the late nineteenth century.

            James Burgess wrote a book[2] about Islamic architecture in 1896. He was archeologist, Head of the Archaeological Survey, Western India, 1873. His description about monuments of Islamic architecture were based on terminology for elements, spaces and typology such as “clear storey”, “porch” etc. He described the entrance from where to enter, the dimensions of the space etc. The terminology associated with churches was also the same so the experiential meaning of these Islamic monuments could not be conveyed through this text.

            Where Maganlal described his experience and meaning of the names of the monuments e.g. meaning of Jami (big) and Jumma (Friday) while describing about Jami mosque. The height of minarets was described as the top floor is accessed through spiral staircase and distance of 12 villages is visible from the top. So no stylistic or architectural description is explained in the text but the lifestyle, experience and local facts, believes are written. This is the other way to look at the history of Ahmadabad. May be local and common people would be intended readers of the text and not the scholars from architecture.

            History has many truths and not just one. Such as, James Burgess focused on Islamic monuments and architecture where as Maganlal focused on Pol, facts and believes about pols, ideologies of rulers how they ruled/ administered Ahmadabad, stories of conflicts or politics among the rulers as history, contemporary economics and industrial production as sociology derived and verified from different sources. He covered prachin (Mirate A Ahmadi), arvachin (talks from maratha people) and haalni vyavastha (administration of now) in his text. Not inclined to any religious prejudice and as being one of the locals Mahganlal Vakhatchand has covered various facts in the text. And so this text has left a remarkable legacy in the historiography of Ahmadabad.

references:

[1] Yagnik, Achyut, Sheth, Suchitra, “Ahmedabad from royal city to megacity”, New Delhi Penguin Books 2011

[2] James Burgess, “On The Muhammadan Architecture Of Bharoch, Cambay, Dholka, Champanir, And Mahmudabad In Gujarat”, W. Griggs & sons, limited, 1896