Beyond Postcolonialism: New directions for the history of non-western architecture / Kathleen James Chakraborty/ 2013

Kathleen James Chakraborty's comparative literature study calls attention to new scholarship on non-western modernism. While the first part is a historiographic survey of scholarship on colonial and post colonial architecture from the non-western countries, the second part prescribes what new directions this emerging scholarship can lead into.

She traces the historiography of colonial and postcolonial architecture, beginning with the 1980's books on Indian colonial architecture which worked with the lens of postmodern classicism and the writings of Said, Hobsbawm, and Foucault, to turn of the century "Berkeley School" of non-western studies. She outlines the changing trajectory of postmodern/postcolonial studies as they changed from stylistic study of buildings to the scale of cities and the changing place of buildings in it (influenced by Stuart Hall and Henry Lefebvre). She writes that in 1980's when scholarship on African and Asian colonial architecture first emerged, there was tension in the literature because the relationship of architecture to power had been undeniable shown by Said and Foucault. (Metcalf's 1989 book on IndoSaracenic architecture showed the style as a tool to solidify political power rather than as being respectful of indigenous traditions). In tracing the emergence of scholarship on colonial architecture she identifies the early graduate seminars taught by Renata Holod, Bozdogan, and Anthony King as pioneering which was later bolstered by the emergence of a 'Berkeley School' which was spearheaded by Norma Evenson and Spiro Kostof. At Berkeley, modern non-western architecture occupied center stage as Paul Rabinow and Gwen Wright authored important books on French Urbanism. Supported by its faculty - Nezar Alsayyad, Dell Upton, and Kathleen Chakraborty herself, a string of monographs on 19th-20th century urbanism in non-western world was published by students. The work of those trained at Berkeley, Chakraborty writes, "focussed not on issues of architectural style or its relation to identity but instead on space and the social processes through which it was constituted." She argues that even as the relationship between modernism and social progress is debatable, it is certain that iconic examples of modern architecture has been widely distributed around the world and their study marks the new direction for postmodern studies in architecture.

Four topics that Chakraborty identifies as the most promising in this new direction are 1)the study of  the architecture of empire 2) recognizing the periphery as the place where innovations are occurring 3) analyzing architecture as the locus of cultural memory, and 4) studying the ways in which immigrants are changing the fabric of the western world. The study of architecture in Empire and its colonies is important to understand the question of exporting of modernity, and the questions of who wanted modernity and why. She argues that it also helps in the dissolution of the presumption that all new ideas come from Europe or European architects. Study of migration of both people and ideas is necessary to uncover the ideas and perspectives that have been taken to western countries by European architects working in the 'other world' (Corbusier's inspiration from Mughal palace pavilion and Lois Kahn's philosophy on bricks). Chakraborty suggests that 'memory studies' is one of the most rapidly growing areas of enquiry in humanities. The role of buildings and cities in shaping the ways we understand the past, and how the buildings' own changing role can reflect the changes in the society are key questions.

In concluding James-Chakroborty asks several questions which remain unanswered in the realm of architectural history, and whose answers can change our understanding of cities in colonial and postcolonial times.
"New knowledge about the people who commissioned, designed, constructed, inhabited and viewed colonial and postcolonial buildings has implications for the humanities and the social sciences as a whole, as it overturns preconceptions by no means unique to architectural historians. What does it mean if some of the most potent symbols of modernization created during the twentieth century sunk deeper roots in Calcutta and Cairo than in the suburbs of Chicago and even possibly Copenhagen? Who was the modern movement really for and why? Did it more effectively express the aspirations of working class Europeans for political empowerment or middle class Indians and Egyptians for economic progress? Was it above all the purview of a small cluster of immensely talented designers intensely aware of what each other were doing or is it the property as well of relatively unskilled labor and of housewives? And is it a living tradition, or is it time for it to be consigned to history as the tree of architecture gains a new crown in response to different concerns, such as sustainability."

Disappearing Dichotomies: Firstworld - Thirdworld; Traditional - Modern/ Janet Abu-Lughod/ 1992

This paper permeates the dichotomous boundaries of Firstworld - Thirdworld, Tradition-Modern by delving into the making and meaning of these terms. Abu-Lughod argues that tradition is not a product but a process, and this process is the same in different parts of the world. She calls for a distinction in understanding 'traditional' and something newly created that is yet to be named. 

Abu-Lughod identifies three ways in which the dichotomies of Firstworld - Thirdworld narratives are breaking down in the social and economic spheres: First, with more 'developing' countries being classified as 'developed' (most famously Japan); Second, as the congruence between geographic location and the social formation fades, dichotomous terms like colonizers - colonized, east- west, north- south are rapidly becoming obsolete (Is Australia South and East?); Third, with the changing International Labor laws it is hard to classify a country let alone a region or a continent into one particular group. Lughod argues that these changes in the economic sphere are reflected in the built environment thus problematizing our understanding of what is 'traditional' and 'modern' architecture.

It was proposed in the early 20th century that the processes of urbanization, industrialization, and modernization could be the determining factors to divide the world two distinct groups. But these lines are increasingly getting blurred. New meanings are created for 'traditional' as the third world id adapting the practices of the first world. Traditional rugs made by an African tribe that depicts war tanks and bombs, Bedouin music tapes that bring together traditional Egyptian horse dance music with European pop tunes, and vernacular self-built houses around the world that are built using ubiquitous cement blocks are but a few examples. Abu-Lughod asks two questions to understand the agencies involved in preserving traditions: whose tradition do we preserve, and why are certain traditions favored over others. She contends that the criteria used to determine whose tradition has to be upheld can only be indeterminate because it eventually obtains a political narrative (ex: which layer of history should archeologists blast, and at which layer do they stop). Also, certain traditions or vernacular practices are favored by modern states simply because they can control and impose ways of life that fits with their ideology (ex: traditional Islamic quarters that segregates the sexes)

By calling upon John Turner's concept of 'traditioning' (verb as opposed to a noun) which says that attention has to be paid to the process through which 'tradition' is created and not the product (traditional) itself, Abu-Lughod proposes three identifying criteria to understand 'traditional’. One, in a traditional product there is a link between the maker and consumer, in that somebody unrelated to and with little empathy to the consumer does not produce the product for profit. Two, traditional things have symbolic meaning and emotional content which is shared by both makers and consumers. And three, traditioning is a collective process where houses/objects are collectively built, collectively interpreted and collectively consumed. 

With changing definitions of 'tradition' and the disappearing boundaries between first and third worlds, Abu-Lughod argues that there are commonalities in the ways 'traditioning' happens at both places. She takes examples from both first world (Harlem, NewYork) and third word (Cairo) where there was a need to creatively re-use old buildings that had symbolic and emotional value to the society. Both in Harlem and Cairo, she writes, the solution to renewing historic buildings that were abandoned in the city center was similar. Thus showing the disappearing dichotomies between the worlds.

Tourist Gaze - Theoretical Debate

*Incomplete. For reference only*

Tourist Gaze - John Urry  (Postmodernist perspective on tourism)
The Tourist - Dean MacCannell (modern construct)

Urry uses Foucault's concept of the 'clinical gaze' to present his idea of the tourist gaze. Urry states the tourism involves a particular way of seeing that he terms tourist gaze. “And this gaze [the tourist gaze] is as socially organized and systematized as the gaze of the medic.” 
For Urry tourism is pleasure activity, and everyday activity is work. he creates a binary between the two. 

Against MacCannell’s explanation of tourism as search for authenticity, Urry emphasizes a “difference between one’s normal place of residence/work and the object of the tourist gaze.” He introduces a new kind of tourist -- the post-tourist. The ‘post-tourist’ does not care about authenticity anymore, he/she makes everything extraordinary: “’Post-tourists’ find pleasure in the multiplicity of tourist games. They know that there is no authentic tourist experience, that there are merely a series of games or texts that can be played” 

While Urry proposes that the motivation for tourism lies in the desire to leave the ordinary and find the extraordinary. MacCannell argues in a binary between visible and invisible, within which the tourist desires the invisible: “The second gaze is always aware that something is being concealed from it; that there is something missing from every picture, form every look or glance. This is no less true on tour than it is in everyday life. The second gaze knows that seeing is not believing. Some things will remain hidden from it.”  


 

Architecture, Power, and National Identity/ Lawrence Vale/ 1992

This book, through several case studies, seeks to explore how architecture has been used by national
regimes to express political power, and how the urban built environment has been manipulated to promote a version of identity that would benefit the government in power. Divided in two parts, this book discusses the various agencies influencing the creation of new 'capitals' and the design of new 'capitols'.

Chapter 1 introduces the terms 'capitol' and 'capital', where capital refers to the city housing the government, and capitol refers to the building housing the government. Vale identifies four ways in which buildings 'mean' - denotation (through meanings), exemplification (drama), metaphorically, and through mediated reference. He provides a historic overview of the development and design of modern capitals, and identifies three types of modern capitals:  

a)Evolved capitals  like London, Paris, Vienna, Berlin which have been in continuous use much before becoming the center of power for national administrations. Here, the political capitols are treated as equals with non-government and public institutions.  These capital do not have one single center of architectural focus, but are poly-vocal. At different stages in history, the various ruling regimes have architecturally imprinted the city to signify their power.

b)Evolved capitals 'renewed' like Rome, Moscow, Athens are cities that have been serving as capitals for several centuries, and whose architecture and urban fabric has been renewed time and again to suit the changing needs of subsequent regimes. As power changed from royal families to papal state, from imperialism to democracy, and to socialist and communist regimes, the city's architecture was continually redefined by adding capitols, memorials, and congregational  spaces which helped in spatially and physically anchoring their political ideologies.

c) Designed Capitals are cities that have been clearly designated as a capital. They are either carried forward from a colonial past (Delhi) or designed afresh to suit the image of a newly formed nation-state (Brasilia).

Chapter 2 discusses the role of capital city and capitol buildings in construction of national identity. While the first chapter introduced the terminology and gave a historical overview of the evolution of capital cities, the second chapter focusses specifically on 'postcolonial capitals' and their importance in nation building. For this Vale begins by surveying the academic landscape of 'nations' and 'nationalism'. Quoting postmodern scholars like Gellner, Hobsbawm, and Anderson, Vale suggests Nationalism to be a modern invention. National identity, he says, was born out of a necessity to have a shared cultural, linguistic lineage among the residents of a newly independent nations who found it easier to identify themselves by who they are not, rather than who they are. Vale proposes that even as capitals and capitols are supposed to be representative of a national distinctness, they often represent the culture and power of only the dominant group within a plural society. This group usually is the ruling political power, and becomes especially problematic if the central division of the nation-state is on religious lines. Then, national identity proposed through capitol buildings can be thought of as 'constructed identity'. He identifies three types of identity projected through the construction of capitol complexes:
a) Subnational identity: In postcolonial nations construction of new capitals becomes a mere demonstration of power and a search for legitimacy by a new regime in power. Ex:Brasilia
b) Personal identity: The personality and influences of the designer or the political sponsor overshadows the showcasing of national identity, especially when a non-native architect is imported to design the new capital Ex:Chandigarh
c) Supranational identity: When architecture (often ostentatious) is used by a self-interested political bureaucracy to symbolize the modern aspirations of a new country and its emerging economic development. 

Chapter 3 discusses four capitals which were designed for union, imperialism, and independence. Vale describes them to be representative of early forms of nationalism. While DC was one of the first capitals to be designed by a union, the colonial capitals were European inspired to served the interests of an overseas empire. 

1. Washington DC was the first postcolonial modern capital. Vale traces the history of DC as one of early capitals designed based on French gardens and town plans and Italian renaissance design by Pierre Charles L'Enfant to today's touristy DC which is a 20th century product. He notes the role of the Capitol building as a symbol of unity from its standing as a locus of power.
2. Canberra: In Australian capital Canberra there were debates over an appropriate symbol for democracy, and the relevance of a master plan that spoke an aristocratic and imperial language.
3. New Delhi: Designed as an Imperial capital, the master plan of New Delhi was the physical manifestation of race, rank, and socioeconomic status prevalent in the Indian society. The colonized and the colonizers had distinctly demarcated spaces in the capital.
4. Ankara: Unlike Imperial Delhi which had a history that pre-dated arrival of British, Ankara was chosen over Constantinople (Istanbul) which had a history of over 1500 years. It was symbolically moving away from European ties of Constantinople and centuries of Ottoman rule to a new Turkish republic. 

Chapter 4 provides an in-depth analysis of two post-war 'modern' capitals - Chandigarh and Brasilia where architecture and urbanism was used to symbolize modernism and national identity of new nations.
1. Chandigarh: Vale is largely sympathetic towards Corbusier and admires his efforts on designing a modern Indian capital which is also evocative of India. He marks the architectural convergence of Corbusier's ideas with that of Lutyens, and notes that by detaching Capitol complex from the city Corbusier represented the supremacy of the executive.
2. Brasilia: The capital was moved inland to the geographic center from the port city of Rio De Janeiro to symbolically claim the newly acquired vast expanse of land. Even as the masterplan of the new capital was said to be influenced by the cross of the catholic church, scholars like Holston argue that this was only done to hide the more radical aspects of the city's design. Unlike in Chandigarh where class segregation was consciously pursued in residential design, Brasilia aimed to break the divide by building all residential units alike. But it only ignited riots amongst the residents. The central capitol complex was not designed by bureaucrats, Vale writes, but for them. 

Chapter 5 discusses three capitals (Islamabad, Abuja, Dodoma) that were designed after 1960's and were significantly influenced by the masterplan of Chandigarh and Brasilia. Here, the ideas of the prior capitals were reconsidered and improved upon. Post-war capitals have not only imported western architecture but also western democratic ideologies. 

Chapters 6 to 9 discusses four capitals built after 1980's : Papua New Guinea, Sri Lanka, Kuwait, Bangladesh. Vale brings out the strengths and failures of each of the capitols, and ends every discussion on a hopeful note that the building that is currently unsuited for the people may in future shed its negative connotations and become naturalized in its setting.  

1. The architecture of Papua New Guinea's (PNG) capitol complex was said to be inspired from various aspects of traditional village life of the region. The architecture was drawn from vernacular roof forms, the aesthetics came from ritual objects, and urban form was taken from village men's houses etc. But in all this the political struggle was embedded. The vernacular structure was found only in some parts of the region, which had been traditionally seen as the dominating class, and hence the architecture of capitol complex was accused of favoring one set of people over others. The ritual objects and art pieces were taken out of context and presented as secular indigenous objects which was seen as disrespectful. Vale argues at PNG both subnational and supranational identity were being constructed by the collaboration and cross-pollination of various groups' identities.  

2. Sri Lankan island parliament designed by native architect Geoffery Bawa differs from the previous case studies by embracing indigenous architectural traditions and a  multitude of references from different ethnicities. But being in a country that is plagued by ethnic conflicts and civil war it came to be seen as representative of the unchallenged Sinhalese power on the Island. 

3. Kuwait's National Assembly complex was designed by John Utzon and was inspired by local Arab tents in the the marshlands, but the symbolism was lost in abstraction.

4. Dhaka's National Assembly building designed by Lois Kahn appears to be the most severe failure of all the capitols studies in the book. Being influenced much more by the architect's ideologies than the government's the building appears to a  army stronghold rather than a house of democracy. Kahn's over utilization of the elements of Mosque provoked strong reactions from the 11 million Hindus in the region. 

Chapter 10 brings together all of the case studies where Vale offers a prescriptive conclusion for designing capitals and capitols. He presents three ways to approach the design of a  capitol complex that would symbolize both national identity and the power. a) he argues that capitol complexes should move beyond politics where the designer should consciously steer away from the political intentions of its sponsor. b)Vale questions if it would be possible for one building to be a microcosm of an entire society, and if so who should be the judge of its accuracy. He offers that since it is impossible to have a microcosm the symbolism of the national building is significant and hence must be carefully designed. c) Vale argues that since Capitol complexes end up being instruments of political power, and they cannot be representative of an entire society, the buildings should be designed to reflect an idealized form of governance and intergroup relations in the country. Here again he wonders who would have the power to decide what an ideal representation should be.
Vale concludes his prescription of a 'good capitol' with the thought that even as Capitol complexes have not been ideal buildings and have favored one group, regime, political institution, or even a designer over the interests of the common public, they showcase the the hierarchy of power structure in the country. He writes, "Regimes build capitol complexes chiefly to serve personal, subnational, and supranational interests rather than to advance national identity; designers cannot mold political

change; and governments still find it necessary to demonstrate their power through aesthetic exaggeration." 

Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism/ Benedict Anderson/ 1983

Imagined Community: Imagined political unity, imagined as inherently limited and sovereign. 

Imagined - citizens don't see each other

Limited - bounded by borders, even if they are elastic

Sovereign - the nations have administrative/political power 

Community- horizontal comradeship

Emergence of Nationalism:

1. Decline of coherent religious communities

2. Decline of dynasties

3. Emergence of empty homogenous time.

Print Capitalism: unified fields of exchange and communication.

Creole Pilgrimage and Print:

First nations were nationalism emerged were not in Europe but in Latin America. Spaniards traversed their territory on secular pilgrimages, and met other spaniards from their territory. These introduced a national consciousness that was further bolstered by newspaper (print media) that carried information about ships, commodity prices etc. 

Old languages-New Models: European Nationalism 1820-1920

Print capitalism - vernacular lexicographers made dictionaries, translations etc in vernacular languages. Scholars were producers in this print-capitalism market and the growing bourgeois its receivers. Europe was filled with vernacular imagined communities. This form of nationalism, was made modular (blueprints) by Europe, and transported to colonies around the world. 

Official Nationalism:

While Latin America was the model for European nationalism, Europe packaged and transported this “official nationalism” to colonies in 19th century. Anderson calls this “top-down-nationalism’ were countries with dynastic realms were also forced to adopt national symbols and foster nationalism. 

Census, Map, Museum

Census: Everybody is identified with a number. Everybody has one place. Nation is naturalized, since nationality becomes a necessity, like gender. 

Map: creation of map helped imagine the nation as limited. There are bounded nations, next to which other nations lie. 

Museum: construction of a linear history. Shared heritage. 

Chandigarh's Le Corbusier: The Struggle for Modernity in Postcolonial India/ Vikramaditya Prakash/ 2002

Chapter 1: With Nehru's vision for Chandigarh different from Corbusier's vision, was there a east-west dialectic playing out in the city's design? While for Nehru, the city had to be a symbol of modernism, and reflect the modern aspirations of a newly emerging industrial nation, Corbusier imagined a modern city that was nostalgic for India's poverty and primitivism.

Chapter 2 discusses the element of modernity in the masterplan of the city from its conception to its final form. Where was the design imported from and who were the actors?
 In Postcolonial India, are the terms 'modern' and 'Indian' mutually exclusive? Is Chandigarh perceived as an 'un-Indian' city because it was designed to be modern and by a western architect?Prakash traces the initial idea for Chandigarh, beginning with Fletcher's strong call for a 'Garden City' model, and PL Verma's stronger opposition for it. Verma's opposition ensured that Chandigarh would be a designed as a more typical city but would preserve Ebenezer Howard's 'Garden City' ideas. Albert Mayer, an american town-planner working in Uttar Pradesh was appointed to materialize the garden city idea. Mayer's design promised a city "strongly Indian in feel and function, as well as modern. With Mayer's partner's premature death, Verma approached English husband-wife architects Fry and Drew who in turn referred him to Le Corbusier. Corbusier was initially appointed only to 'advise and actively assist' in construction of Mayer's plans, but he gradually took charge and demanded to re-design the city to reflect his ideology. A 'Capitol' head was put in place, and arterial roads were designed to connect various 'Sectors'. Prakash argues that Corbusier did not design Chandigarh based on Lutyens' New Delhi, even though he admired it.

Chapter 3 discusses the design of the Capitol Complex. By delving into the religious influences in Corbusier's life, it aims to show a human side of a "fallen hero who failed in deliverance". Prakash examines the Biblical and philosophical influences in Corbusier's painting of the Capitol Door, and his idea of rural-utopia.

Chapter 4 offers an in-depth (psycho)analysis of Corbusier's sketches of the high court and the assembly building. He argues that the scale of these buildings seem vast and limitless to human scale because Corbusier measured them against the backdrop of Himalayas. Prakash (through Fruedian principles) analyzes that his design of the assembly building as reminiscent of an Indian bull indicates his eagerness for the villagers to understand his buildings (as he fascinated with noble savages).
[Thankfully, the author ends this chapter with "it is impossible for me to verify whether Le Corbusier ever meant all that I have understood his buildings to be." But sadly, he also adds, "Nonetheless, it would be disingenuous to deny that one always writes, and designs, with the hope of verification."]

Chapter 5 discusses the history of symbolism of Corbusier's 'open hand' icon that was adopted by the city of Chandigarh almost 30 years since its proposal. Prakash does a survey of several of Corbusier's 'Hand' paintings and argues that the inspiration for Chandigarh's open hand came from the monument in memory of the left-wing mayor of Villejuif in France in 1938. Prakash divides the analysis in three parts - He describes the first wave of open hand designs to be Corbusier's personal thoughts and obsessions, with the figure the second wave to reflect India's position as a non-aligned nation during the war.  By the time of the third wave (the time when the open hand was installed in Chandigarh) its meaning entangled with Corbusian ideas and Nehruvian politics was largely forgotten. "The open to give, open to receive"  hand is today only graphically remembered as a symbol of Chandigarh.

Eighty Summaries: The What, Why, and How.

This blog will contain summaries of eighty books that I will be reading for my qualifying exam. I am a doctoral student studying the history and architecture of Hindu temples in the Indian subcontinent from 19th century to the present. The books here come from various disciplines: architecture, urban studies, tourism studies, South Asian religious conflicts, post-colonial studies, nationalism etc.

As this blog is primarily intended to summarize the ideas/ concepts of each book into succinct points that can be easily called upon when necessary, I will keep my personal critiques and comments to a bare minimum.

The contents of this blog may not be reproduced without prior permission from the author.