A great building becomes a monument over a period of time. But it loses its greatness thereby. Probably, we go wrong in our definition of monuments. A true monument to me is a building which is always in a process. It’s not ‘the building’; it’s a building in process, a building which traces events and eras through inscriptions and ideas. A true monument will record all these- the thought which got it into being, its building process, its commercialization, its detoriation, the reclamation and politics and so on. A building that reflects the fact that it was faked for the sake of humanity and human will. Even a contemporary building which has the power to record and recall/reflect the past and current issues of the society it exists in is a monument to us.
Architecture can never be neutral. It is the biggest political act that an individual can perform. We should thereby look up to preserve, harbor and build such buildings which are shaped by the society and hence have the courage to shape it back.
Today we are facing a crisis. Architects themselves have lost faith in their practice. We don’t know where we are heading towards. With the fight between globalization and individual identity reaching its peak, we fall on either side by accepting the facts or by revolting with tools which don’t belong to our society.
Rather confused people add to the confusion by reverting back to the history and thinking about conservation against developement or by establishing notions of sustainability and awareness to fake the whole system.
Modernism I feel was the most subtle movement architecture went through. The buildings were paradoxically calm and overwhelming. The movement was a bang to the society with utter silence. It had varied ill factors as critics pointed out, but they left the one very important factor which was the root of the unstable thought we have as architects/designers. It was that Modernism had the power to provoke thought in an individual. It had the seed of self-expression and identity which was powerful enough to invite critics and to make people think about what they were building. Ever since, there has been confusion.
Architecture can never be neutral. It is the biggest political act that an individual can perform. We should thereby look up to preserve, harbor and build such buildings which are shaped by the society and hence have the courage to shape it back.
Today we are facing a crisis. Architects themselves have lost faith in their practice. We don’t know where we are heading towards. With the fight between globalization and individual identity reaching its peak, we fall on either side by accepting the facts or by revolting with tools which don’t belong to our society.
Rather confused people add to the confusion by reverting back to the history and thinking about conservation against developement or by establishing notions of sustainability and awareness to fake the whole system.
Modernism I feel was the most subtle movement architecture went through. The buildings were paradoxically calm and overwhelming. The movement was a bang to the society with utter silence. It had varied ill factors as critics pointed out, but they left the one very important factor which was the root of the unstable thought we have as architects/designers. It was that Modernism had the power to provoke thought in an individual. It had the seed of self-expression and identity which was powerful enough to invite critics and to make people think about what they were building. Ever since, there has been confusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment