Architecture
In India, the architecture profession is in a deep, unspoken, silent crisis. No one admits it, no one recognises it, no one articulates it. Societal disconnect, distance from the real challenges of environment, ecology, economy, and society; marginalisation in the power corridors and contemporary development equations; contextual irrelevance; and its incompatibility with the rich cultural and heritage milieu of the country characterise its existence, status, and role.
I believe that architecture as a subject, as an art form, as a science, as a Shashtra, is too big and ancient to be treated with anything but respect and pride. But the architecture profession, as perceived and practised now, certainly needs a rethink, a paradigm shift. The multiple crises that include energy, water, space, resources, ecology, governance, values, etc., the new technologies, changing social equations, and emerging realities in the globalising cities make it imperative that the architects re-educate and re-equip themselves. Both de-learning and re-learning are called for. Moreover, a degree of de-professionalisation of the conventional professional, in terms of attitudinal shift, client choices and priorities.
Architecture is a noble profession. In the hands of its conscientious practitioners, it is a medium to serve people and also the environment. “Service” is the word. It combines both art and science. Culture and technology are its pillars. It is a vehicle to translate ideas and dreams into reality. It embraces both reality and vision, creativity and practicality. It has been there from the dawn of civilisation and will always be there.
However, the way it is perceived and practised, it needs to move
from the monuments to people
from magazine pages to practical lives
from the elite to the common people
from top to bottom,
from the pedestal to the ground.
That would take nothing away from its hallow, its mystique, and its nobility. It will only be richer.
Cities
Indian cities are in a deep mess. “Economist”, the much-respected magazine, says, “Indian cities are utterly unprepared for what is about to hit them. The urban population is set to double by 2050.” 870 million people in 25 more years. And India is far from ready.
What is of concern is not only that we are not on the track in managing our very difficult and complex urban challenge, but also that there is little in the system that tells us we can handle it. Time for being concerned is over. It is time to worry.
Let me give some evidence. India has three capital cities. Mumbai, the wealth capital, has more than half of its population living in slums. Delhi, the political capital, has its air so polluted that the high court declared it a gas chamber and unfit to live in. Varanasi is its spiritual capital. It’s Ganga. Yes, Ganga Maiya is so polluted that it requires a special ministry to clean it up, and despite 4 decades of effort, we are nowhere near a solution.
If this is the state of affairs of the capital cities, with money, seat of power, and global attention and investment, what could we speak of other kinds and levels of cities? What must be the status of Barabanki, Purulia or Porbandar?
Housing
Nowhere in the world has so much Public Housing has been delivered by the government. 30 million units (UPA), 30 million units (NDA), and 20 million units (NDA) more units in rural housing, and 12 million and 10 million houses under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (urban). They are good schemes; much needed.
But are they good houses to live in for three generations of low-income people? Good for the environment? Good for the cities, as they determine the new skyline? Good for climate change, as construction is the most carbon-intensive? Are social aspects considered? Is maintenance considered?
Do architects have a role? Are they playing it? Are they equipped to play?
Climate change
The building industry is one of the biggest culprits when it comes to carbon emissions and therefore contributes to climate change. Architects design buildings and get them constructed. Are they aware that climate change is not in the distant future, not even around the corner; it is already here? Yet, the architects and designers are not beyond symbolic gestures. Is that a way to meet a crisis?
Rural settlements
With 6,38,000 villages in the country and despite its ”richness” as human settlements, villages, as habitats, are losing character. Investment is happening in agriculture, irrigation, infrastructure, housing, and poverty. But the village form, quality of living, and rural economy are going down. Migration is the order of the day. Please note that it is a distress migration.
Massive doses of public housing, though needed, are adding to the disfigurement of the village form. Architects do not even know where and how many villages we have in the country, and what they are like. It is a complete disconnect. Do we, architects and planners, have a sense of role-playing? Can we contribute to improving the delivery system of public rural housing? Can we look at our villages as a rich heritage? And remember, habitat or human settlements are an architect’s business, as medicine is of doctors.
Wider Leadership
Some 60 years ago, while contesting an election for the post of secretary of the student council, while campaigning, I wrote, “School of Architecture, Ahmedabad, producing good architects is not a big ask. It must produce leaders of society.”
With what the profession includes in its work—art, science, culture, climate, human behaviour, people, environment, heritage, society, future—and its privileges, it must produce leaders as the country moves to become a 30 trillion-dollar economy, a Vishwaguru and a superpower. Is that happening?
Poverty
Authorities claim that extreme poverty has declined from around 27.1% in 2011-12 to about 5.3% in 2022-23. Great. At the same time, they say that 810 million people in the country, 57 per cent of the total, are being given food subsidy. The commitment is for five years. Who needs a food subsidy? Poor? If so, how are the poor just 5.3 per cent? Yes. Admitted that this is not the question an architect may ask.
An architect, with his/her/their privileges of education and status in society, is also a concerned citizen. Does he/she ask/they that question?
