A·斯里瓦桑/A.Srivathsan

天妮 譯/Translated by TIAN Ni

從很多方面來說，2010年代對于印度建筑都是重要的10年。印度經(jīng)濟比以往任何時候都更加全球化、網(wǎng)絡(luò)化并且活躍——增幅從2017年的6.7%增長到2019年的7.8%[1]——其影響是顯而易見的。房地產(chǎn)業(yè)正在急速擴張，預(yù)計2028年的投資額將超過8500億美元[2]。如果建筑院校的數(shù)量是反映建筑服務(wù)需求的一個指標(biāo)，那么在過去70年中，該數(shù)值已經(jīng)翻了100倍。印度在1929年僅有158名注冊建筑師，如今，這一數(shù)量已經(jīng)超過60,000人，且市場需求還在不斷增長。然而，快速的城市化進(jìn)程也帶來了諸多挑戰(zhàn)，如保障性住房短缺、環(huán)境壓力、人口流動性問題、日益擴大的貧富差距、資源減少以及城市缺乏社會包容性等等。

當(dāng)代境遇之下，多種多樣的建筑實踐應(yīng)運而生，其中相當(dāng)一部分是新生代建筑師完成的。在全部印度注冊建筑師中，40歲以下的占70%以上[3]。不再被舊有觀念約束，不再背負(fù)著自我施加的壓力，建筑師們已經(jīng)接受了當(dāng)前挑戰(zhàn)和機遇的新格局?；蛟S印度建筑實踐沒有引發(fā)任何引人注目的先鋒運動，也沒有帶來重大的理論轉(zhuǎn)折，但它們同樣具有思辨性、批判性和實用性。建筑師們已經(jīng)意識到該行業(yè)的多元化需求及其所處環(huán)境的特殊性，并渴望通過創(chuàng)新途徑作出回應(yīng)。然而，一切并不盡如人意。挑戰(zhàn)和阻礙比比皆是，例如亟需更多認(rèn)同高設(shè)計品質(zhì)的客戶群，建筑設(shè)計的公共影響也需要再三重申。與創(chuàng)造性實踐蘊含的可能性相比，意義深遠(yuǎn)的設(shè)計占比甚少。這些問題將留待后文討論，先來談?wù)劧鄻有詫嵺`過程中的那些重大進(jìn)程。

1 傳承

自印度建筑學(xué)生協(xié)會在孟買成立以來，印度的現(xiàn)代建筑行業(yè)已有約100年歷史了。這個由學(xué)生組成的小團(tuán)體快速成長為印度建筑師學(xué)會——一個國家級的專業(yè)組織，旨在對該行業(yè)進(jìn)行定義并構(gòu)建該行業(yè)的宏觀價值體系。英國建筑師克勞德·巴特利曾在孟買執(zhí)業(yè)，并在印度第一所建筑學(xué)院任教。1942年他曾憂心忡忡地說，當(dāng)時的首要挑戰(zhàn)是建立起建筑這一行業(yè)，并通過制定嚴(yán)格的專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來保護(hù)其不受低劣和鼓吹的影響。建筑師的自我提升可經(jīng)由3種途徑完成：教育、司法體系及專業(yè)實踐。事實證明，建筑師通過專業(yè)實踐所取得的成就似乎比他們在其他兩個領(lǐng)域所取得的成就具有更大意義和更大的影響力。

對于很多人來說，除了近年來的建筑實踐以外，印度當(dāng)代建筑可謂是乏善可陳。盡管種種跡象表明，許多評論都是以默認(rèn)的分類方式——如現(xiàn)代派或后現(xiàn)代派——來描述印度建筑，并有結(jié)論認(rèn)為，印度建筑實踐在1980年代呈現(xiàn)出其自身特色之前都是拙劣的模仿。諸如此類的評論有失偏頗，正如謝爾登·帕洛克在思想文化史研究中敏銳指出的那樣，評論者試圖形成一種與西方建筑運動“在概念上的對偶”，而這種呼應(yīng)其實并不存在[4]。

這并不是說大規(guī)模的國際建筑運動對印度建筑的實踐沒有影響。建筑師并不是被動的接受者，他們的反應(yīng)也各不相同。正如克勞德·巴特利在其評論中總結(jié)的那樣，印度建筑受到了“世界運動”的一定影響，但各種不同的氣候條件和地方性需求也對這種形勢有所調(diào)和[5]。本土的現(xiàn)代性、裝飾藝術(shù)的雜糅、建筑實踐、優(yōu)質(zhì)的資源和工匠們在同一時期出現(xiàn)并協(xié)同作用。在印度獨立后的1950年代——也就是勒·柯布西耶和路易·康前來印度的時期——也出現(xiàn)了類似的發(fā)展軌跡。二人都為印度建筑帶來了不可磨滅的影響，但緊隨其后的并不是對他們遺留理念的盲目模仿。有的建筑師追隨勒·柯布西耶和他的昌迪加爾規(guī)劃，還有一些人，如查爾斯·柯里亞，則在甘地紀(jì)念館等項目中探索著不同的風(fēng)格體例；在德里，納里·甘地創(chuàng)作了一系列對環(huán)境有所回應(yīng)且令人回味的作品；約瑟夫·斯坦因在其建筑設(shè)計中將氣候條件與景觀精妙整合；北方有本杰明·波爾克和比諾伊·查特吉在加爾各答忙著用建筑干預(yù)解決區(qū)域性問題；南方有勞里·貝克潛心建造著具有社會意識的建筑——他以一己之力推動了一場運動，主張建造低成本且環(huán)境友好的住房。

近年來，特別是1990年經(jīng)濟自由化之后，印度的建筑實踐百花齊放。近期，一場名為“建筑現(xiàn)狀”的展覽（由拉胡爾·邁赫羅特拉、卡萬·梅塔和蘭吉特·霍斯科特策展）清晰地表明，印度建筑彌漫著一種“合鳴之音”。 因此，為了更好地了解當(dāng)前印度建筑發(fā)展所處的狀態(tài)，較為明智的做法是摒棄默認(rèn)的分類方式，轉(zhuǎn)而透過一系列并置的建筑快照來勾勒全局。

2 剖析

孟買工作室的比喬伊·杰恩與薩姆普·帕多拉及合伙人事務(wù)所的薩姆普·帕多拉，他們都對現(xiàn)有工藝和建造技術(shù)有著同樣的關(guān)注，這些都是方法多樣性的例證。孟買工作室設(shè)計的恒河真木紡織工作室（圖1，見52頁），是喜瑪拉雅山腳下一個根植于當(dāng)?shù)?、居民和手工藝的小型紡織設(shè)計和生產(chǎn)車間。平面布局很簡單，4個設(shè)置有存儲、服務(wù)和工作區(qū)的L形轉(zhuǎn)角空間圍合成五邊形的庭院。建筑外觀是手工精心堆砌的，巧妙結(jié)合了當(dāng)?shù)厥a(chǎn)的傳統(tǒng)材料，如磚、石、大理石和竹子。設(shè)計師的多次引導(dǎo)加之工匠們靈巧的手工藝讓材料呈現(xiàn)出詩意之美。比喬伊·杰恩認(rèn)為手工藝不僅僅是對材料的鑲嵌，還關(guān)乎情感與溝通。對于材料和技術(shù)的運用他一向目的明確，美學(xué)的考慮滲透在他所有的決定之中。建造這樣一個項目的過程是緩慢且謹(jǐn)慎的，例如，一個10m2的石灰混凝土屋頂花了5天時間才完成。

薩姆普·帕多拉也非常關(guān)注材料和建筑技術(shù)，但他不像杰恩那樣在工藝?yán)砟畹南嚓P(guān)問題上那么一成不變。他以多種方式尋求切實的材料表達(dá)和材料利用率。他設(shè)計的祇園——一個位于馬哈拉施特拉邦瓦里村的佛學(xué)中心——創(chuàng)造性地使用了玄武巖石粉和粉煤灰廢料制成的夯土材料。他與昆納什勒建筑技術(shù)與創(chuàng)新基金會合作（一個位于喀奇縣致力于傳統(tǒng)建筑技術(shù)服務(wù)的機構(gòu)），以可再利用的木材和回收的粘土磚片為貧困人士提供住房和基礎(chǔ)服務(wù)。另一方面，在沙爾達(dá)學(xué)?，斞拧に黢R亞圖書館 （圖2，見58頁）中，他選用了地中海的建筑技術(shù)——加泰羅尼亞磚拱系統(tǒng)。帕多拉在傳統(tǒng)拱頂?shù)幕A(chǔ)上進(jìn)行了創(chuàng)新，將蘇黎世聯(lián)邦理工學(xué)院建筑技術(shù)學(xué)院區(qū)塊研究團(tuán)隊的研究和算法應(yīng)用其中。基于這種便捷的算法，他設(shè)計出了舒展平滑的建筑形態(tài)和流動的室內(nèi)閱讀空間。屋頂是一個令人印象深刻的纖薄結(jié)構(gòu)，由3層20mm厚的磚材組成，垂直鋪設(shè)并用砂漿粘在一起。帕多拉對工藝?yán)砟畛书_放態(tài)度，并根據(jù)場地、特殊情況和成本來選擇適宜的技術(shù)。

另一個建筑師們非常關(guān)注的問題是如何讓建筑設(shè)計根植于其所建造的場所中。許多人借由歷史先例來解決這個問題，但并非總能成功。蒂洛森曾批判性地指出，有些設(shè)計師已經(jīng)退而求其次，選擇了仿制和令人失望的技巧拼湊[6]。對真實性的渴望應(yīng)優(yōu)先于對創(chuàng)造性解決方案的追求。而最近，一些建筑師開始更深入地關(guān)注這個問題，并提出了細(xì)致入微的解決方案。

浦那建筑師吉里什·多西，他以人們所熟知的借鑒歷史先例的方式解決問題，但他很謹(jǐn)慎，不允許自己的作品以失真的象征性符號告終。其設(shè)計風(fēng)格讓人想起印度教的寺廟和馬哈拉施特拉邦的傳統(tǒng)房屋“瓦達(dá)斯”，但他并不主張追求真實感的再現(xiàn)。吉里什將自己的實踐稱為“傳統(tǒng)的當(dāng)代性”，并試圖在歷史對策和現(xiàn)代風(fēng)格體例之間建立對話。在他近期項目浦那磚砌建筑學(xué)校（圖3，見64頁）中，多西運用了圍繞軸線展開的對稱布局以塑造空間的層次感，這種手法在印度寺廟中比較常見。他甚至直接借鑒了“哥普拉斯”（一種有華麗裝飾的神廟大門）和金字塔的形制，但他選擇的又是當(dāng)代的建筑材料和結(jié)構(gòu)，功能排布十分務(wù)實。他傾向于使用純粹的形式和真材實料來賦予空間靈活性。他顛覆了傳統(tǒng)的觀念，這種運用裸露磚塊和粗糙混凝土的風(fēng)格在多西求學(xué)的昌迪加爾和艾哈邁達(dá)巴德比較常見。

1恒河真木紡織工作室，北阿坎德邦，印度/Ganga Maki Textile Studio, Uttarakhand, India（攝影/Photo: Studio Mumbai Architects）

2沙爾達(dá)學(xué)?，斞拧に黢R亞圖書館，戈伯爾岡，馬哈拉施特拉邦，印度/Maya Somaiya Library, Sharda School, Kopergaon,Maharashtra, India（攝影/Photo: Edmund Sumner）

3磚砌建筑學(xué)校，浦那，馬哈拉施特拉邦，印度/Brick School of Architecture, Pune, Maharashtra, India（攝影/Photo:Hemant Patil）

4CARE 集團(tuán)，蒂魯吉拉伯利，泰米爾納德邦，印度/The CARE Group of Institutions, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu,India（圖片來源/Source: Sanjay Mohe/Mindspace)

5印度管理學(xué)院教學(xué)綜合體，班加羅爾，卡納塔克邦，印度/Class Room Complex, Indian Institute of Management,Bengaluru, Karnataka, India（攝影/Photo: PHX India）

6國際管理學(xué)院，布巴內(nèi)斯瓦爾，奧里薩邦，印度/International Management, Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India（攝影/Photo: Pradip Sen）

另一方面，來自班加羅爾的建筑師桑杰·摩訶和加爾各答建筑師阿賓·錢瑞的實踐呈現(xiàn)出了不同的建筑情境。他們在借鑒歷史先例的同時也關(guān)注著區(qū)域氣候條件。摩訶常以富有表現(xiàn)力的庭院、便于交流的體系以及水體等元素來創(chuàng)造空間層次和局部聯(lián)系。同樣重要的是，這些特性也作為熱帶高效能的調(diào)節(jié)裝置發(fā)揮著作用，創(chuàng)造了人們可以聚集在一起輕松交談的公共空間。他設(shè)計的蒂魯吉拉伯利CARE集團(tuán)項目（圖4）與班加羅爾印度管理學(xué)院教學(xué)綜合體（圖5）清楚地呈現(xiàn)了他的理念。阿賓·錢瑞也用到了類似的“調(diào)節(jié)裝置”，但他有自己的建筑語言。例如，在布巴內(nèi)斯瓦爾國際管理學(xué)院項目（圖6）中，他用鐵礬土這種當(dāng)?shù)夭牧虾屯ピ?、水體等設(shè)計元素將建筑與場所聯(lián)系在了一起。這些裝置調(diào)節(jié)了場地的微氣候，遮擋了眩光，減少了熱增量。對環(huán)境問題的考慮已然成為當(dāng)務(wù)之急，同時，建筑表達(dá)也不再像前文案例那樣受到限制，而是更具標(biāo)志性且建筑規(guī)模更加宏大。

另一方面，居住在喀拉拉邦特里蘇爾的年輕建筑師利喬·喬斯和雷利·利喬在面對類似問題時則較為激進(jìn)。他們對建筑語境的定義不依賴曾經(jīng)的理念，而是基于當(dāng)下所面臨的問題。通過借鑒先例來處理問題不一定是最適宜的方式。例如，喀拉拉邦以木建筑、鐵礬土建筑和坡屋頂而聞名，而利喬和雷利卻并沒有運用這些形制。對他們來說，地域問題更為重要?？钫媾R沙土、鐵礬土嚴(yán)重稀缺的問題，木材也越來越珍貴。這種情況下，如仍在設(shè)計中沿用一直以來的形制和傳統(tǒng)材料，環(huán)境問題并不會得到改善。因此，他們大膽地在蒼翠的景觀中置入了混凝土拱頂結(jié)構(gòu)和呼吸式幕墻（圖7）。對環(huán)境危機的應(yīng)對和效能使該建筑在場所中有了立足之地，沒有僅停留在對符號或形制的表面運用。

持有同樣理念的還有什姆爾·賈瓦里·卡德里的作品，注意力集中于對文化和氣候環(huán)境的適應(yīng)。在該事務(wù)所的許多高端項目中——如位于蒂魯帕蒂的馬拉薩薩羅瓦酒店（圖8，見70頁）——她們雖然選用了傳統(tǒng)的寺廟，卻對其形制進(jìn)行了深遠(yuǎn)地重新詮釋，并沒有過多沿用歷史風(fēng)格。對于借鑒歷史先例的探討暫且停留在概念形制層面，緊隨其后的是審慎地選擇關(guān)乎氣候和功能的當(dāng)代建筑材料。SJK建筑事務(wù)所對材料的運用與杰恩或帕多拉迥然不同，既沒有刻意考慮成本，也不為提升趣味性，但卻高度唯美和奢華。此外，她們傾向于以折衷的策略解決問題。

值得一提的是，印度當(dāng)代的建筑實踐并不僅僅關(guān)注工藝和場所營造，許多主流設(shè)計師也在對城市環(huán)境作出回應(yīng)，為城市化問題尋求上乘的解決方案是關(guān)注點之一。來自金奈的建筑師團(tuán)隊architectureRed設(shè)計了一系列令人印象深刻的高層建筑，如金奈新月大學(xué)的教學(xué)樓（圖9-11）。他們創(chuàng)造性地將樓板層疊、精心打造門窗、圍合出室內(nèi)庭院、提供寬敞的聚會空間并引入良好的照明系統(tǒng)。拉胡爾·邁赫羅特拉在海得拉巴為KMC公司總部大樓（圖12，見76頁）所做的設(shè)計則更勝一籌。在垂直的辦公樓建筑結(jié)構(gòu)普遍比較單調(diào)的時期，該建筑因種種原因脫穎而出。它通過設(shè)置雙層表皮的立面，有效解決了氣候和社會問題，使其他許多高層建筑望塵莫及。它的內(nèi)表皮由混凝土框架和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)鋁合金窗組成，外表皮則是可種植各種植物、附帶有水培托盤的鋁合金網(wǎng)狀結(jié)構(gòu)。灌溉系統(tǒng)與智能表皮合二為一，需要澆灌時可以適量放水。該體系不僅澆灌了植物，還能為建筑內(nèi)部的空氣加濕，這正是海得拉巴炎熱氣候條件下亟需的解決方案。園藝維護(hù)人員則可以穿行在雙層表皮之間的空隙進(jìn)行維護(hù)。邁赫羅特拉高度評價這種做法并認(rèn)為這將有助于“提供一個社會界面，軟化印度一種典型的企業(yè)組織中由階級差異造成的常見的等級劃分”。

對很多建筑師來說，其建筑實踐以商業(yè)和居住類的項目居多，但也有少數(shù)設(shè)計師致力于解決一些日常問題，為城市和居民帶來改變。古吉特·辛格·馬塔魯在蘇拉特設(shè)計的阿什溫尼庫瑪火葬場（圖13，見80頁）即是如此。1994年，以鉆石貿(mào)易和紡織工業(yè)聞名的蘇拉特爆發(fā)了嚴(yán)重的瘟疫，居民的死亡和疫情給政府和社區(qū)敲響了警鐘，繼而開始大力整治該市的公共衛(wèi)生。疫情發(fā)生后，一家私人信托機構(gòu)決定采用更清潔、更高效的方式來火化死者，并采納了馬塔魯?shù)脑O(shè)計方案，修建一個專供火化和哀悼的肅穆之地?；鹪釄鲈?000年開始動工，除了空間的功能性，用空間來承載情感也是該設(shè)計的可取之處?？臻g的組織邏輯結(jié)合了哀悼者及舉辦殯葬相關(guān)儀式的共同需求?？此票涞幕炷帘砥ぐ仓黧w，卻把內(nèi)部進(jìn)行了恰當(dāng)?shù)姆謪^(qū)。入口走廊通向一個可以放置焚化爐和柴堆的寬敞空間，哀悼者可以在焚化爐前的庭院聚集、靜坐或唱祈禱歌。該場所向所有人免費開放，人們會互相提供力所能及的幫助。

另一個關(guān)注社會問題和環(huán)境條件的創(chuàng)新項目是象村（圖14，見86頁）。這個由拉胡爾·邁赫羅特拉設(shè)計的居住與旅游目的地位于齋浦爾的阿米爾堡山麓，約100頭大象和馴象人常住于此。該項目對那些服務(wù)于旅游活動卻在沒有使用價值后便無人看管的大象進(jìn)行了照料。大力支持該項目的州政府選擇了邁赫羅特拉的設(shè)計，他為大象庇護(hù)所和馴象人居所設(shè)計了建筑組團(tuán)。住宅單元和庇護(hù)所圍合出一個共享空間，每個庇護(hù)所雖然只有18.5m2，卻并沒有被設(shè)計成局促的小空間。相反地，還有很多寬敞的戶外空間，為加建留有余地。正在為旅游業(yè)服務(wù)或處于康復(fù)期的大象都可以受到照料。對景觀的關(guān)注是另一個設(shè)計亮點。景觀設(shè)計師穆哈·拉奧提出了一系列關(guān)于雨水收集和水循環(huán)的舉措。自然界的水經(jīng)由洼地、盆地、池塘和相連的蓄水池被收集起來。設(shè)計旨在盡可能地重建大象的棲息地，同時防止水土流失。

盡管非宗教領(lǐng)域的建筑造詣有很多亮點，但仍有不少宗教類的項目正在修建，印度建筑師們依然在努力為此尋求一種適宜的當(dāng)代建筑語言。那些介于傳統(tǒng)與現(xiàn)代性之間的實踐危機四伏，似乎沿用已有的先例才是更為穩(wěn)妥的做法。在此情境下，薩姆普·帕多拉在馬哈拉施特拉邦設(shè)計的濕婆神廟（圖15，見92頁）具有重要的意義。有人將該項目視作創(chuàng)造力的原點。帕多拉認(rèn)為印度傳統(tǒng)的建筑形制將永遠(yuǎn)是設(shè)計語匯的基石——如室內(nèi)圣域“咖巴格利哈”和外堂“曼達(dá)帕”—— 而建筑師的職責(zé)是將這些語匯融會貫通之后再創(chuàng)造性地用精準(zhǔn)有力的方式呈現(xiàn)出來。該設(shè)計遵循了傳統(tǒng)寺廟的空間邏輯，并將 “錫克哈拉” 式寺廟的裝飾特征進(jìn)行了簡化。與典型的密閉式做法有所不同，該寺廟頂部微微開了一個小窗，以天光凈化著內(nèi)室。

3 挑戰(zhàn)

印度當(dāng)代的建筑實踐當(dāng)然也有不足之處。主要的建筑類型是私人委托、企業(yè)客戶和部分國家級的項目。這里僅列舉幾個并不引以為傲的案例。拉胡爾·梅赫羅特拉、彼得·史克瑞沃和阿米特·斯里瓦斯塔瓦近日發(fā)表評論指出，目前的建筑實踐只涉足了印度的極少數(shù)地區(qū)，“當(dāng)代城市中有許多同質(zhì)化的空間”還未被建筑實踐潛在的新機遇所涵蓋[7]。絕大多數(shù)的實踐都發(fā)生在大都市，而發(fā)展中的二三線城市更需要優(yōu)質(zhì)且專業(yè)的建筑服務(wù)。此外，我們還面臨著其他一些較為復(fù)雜的問題——如建筑師自身的局限性、沒有贊助商以及缺乏追求高建筑品質(zhì)的客戶群——這些因素都導(dǎo)致了社會構(gòu)筑物的品質(zhì)良莠不齊。建筑實踐一方面依賴于承建私人宅邸或委托機構(gòu)給予的傭金是否充足，另一方面，社會住房的建造雖然是一項由國家支持的行為，卻身陷在官僚體制的規(guī)章制度及未必富于遠(yuǎn)見的政策洪流之中?；蛟S住房委員會還未意識到，建筑設(shè)計和建設(shè)是大幅提升經(jīng)濟適用房覆蓋率的有效途徑。就部分建筑師而言，他們也還沒有嘗試解決這些問題。

盡管可持續(xù)的建筑實踐由來已久，但環(huán)境危機仍是一個尚未得到充分關(guān)注的問題，這方面還未取得長足的進(jìn)展。最新情況僅限于LEED評價體系倡議的那些空泛舉措。經(jīng)濟自由化帶來了一系列未必節(jié)能環(huán)保的新材料，使這個問題愈發(fā)嚴(yán)重。雖然政府制定了能源法規(guī)和相關(guān)政策來解決這些問題，但并沒有顯著的變化。

安得拉邦的新首府阿馬拉瓦蒂，是近年來最令人失望的建設(shè)項目之一。在昌迪加爾建成近60年后，人們自然對這個項目寄予了很大期望，它被視為新規(guī)劃與新建筑理念最具潛力的試驗田。問題的關(guān)鍵并不在于政府把項目委托給了一位外國建筑師，而是推進(jìn)項目的方式不太可取。它為青年建筑師設(shè)置了不合常理的門檻，導(dǎo)致了操作層面不那么透明[8]。除了一些效果圖，并沒有公開過多的項目細(xì)節(jié)。阿馬拉瓦蒂規(guī)劃不僅沒有像昌迪加爾那樣讓整個國家都充滿朝氣，甚至都沒有在相關(guān)領(lǐng)域及業(yè)內(nèi)人士當(dāng)中產(chǎn)生漣漪。在當(dāng)代創(chuàng)造性建筑實踐正大步向前并謀求新機遇之時，諸如此類的項目著實會拖行業(yè)的后腿。

作為法律綱領(lǐng)的《建筑師法》，其修正草案也并不鼓舞人心。草案中的變革并不符合當(dāng)前的經(jīng)濟形勢，且仍是對過度管控的舊事重提。這些政策既不能提高建筑教育水平，也無法振興建筑實踐。

建筑從業(yè)者非常清楚，盡管存在諸多阻礙，但他們沒有退路。這個過程中，樂觀、希望與未知、疑慮并存。或許印度當(dāng)代建筑實踐唯一可能的發(fā)展方式，就是構(gòu)建該行業(yè)的宏觀價值體系。正如尤哈尼·帕拉斯馬所言，興建具有“更深遠(yuǎn)意義和從更深層面解決問題”的項目才應(yīng)是建筑師的心之所向?！?/p>

In many ways, the current decade is a momentous one for Indian architecture. The Indian economy is globally networked and buoyant than ever before, growing from 6.7% (2017) to 7.8%(2019)[1]and the impact of this is visible. The real estate sector is expanding and the investment is estimated to exceed 850 billion USD by 2028[2]. If the number of architecture colleges is any indicator of demand for architectural services, it has multiplied a hundred fold in the last 70 years. From a meagre 158 registered members in 1929, the number of registered architects has exceeded 60,000, and more are needed. However, the rapid rate of urbanisation has also brought forth challenges such as a shortage of affordable housing, environmental distress,mobility issues, increasing wealth gap, dwindling resources and a lack of social inclusiveness of cities.

An overwhelming variety of architectural practices have emerged in response to these contemporary conditions, and a sizeable number of them are young. More than 70% of the registered architects in the country are less than 40 years of age[3]. Unfettered and unburdened by old perceptions and self-imposed categories, architects have embraced the current landscape of challenges and opportunities. Indian practices may not have thrown up any seductive avant-garde movements or offered major theoretical turns, but they are no less speculative, critical and pragmatic. They are conscious of the multiple demands made on the profession and the specificities of the context in which they are building and aspire to respond through creative approaches. However, all is not well. Challenges and impediments abound as the number of meaningful practices compared to the possibilities created are disproportionately less.The constituency for good design has to widen, and the public consequence of architecture has to be repeatedly reiterated. However, these issues are to be discussed later; first the significant strides that have resulted in the diversity of practices.

1 Legacy

It is about 100 years since the modern architecture profession emerged in India with the establishment of the Architecture Student's Association in Bombay. This small group of graduates soon grew into Indian Institute of Architects, a national level professional organisation tasked with defining the profession and establishing its relevance. As Claude Batley, the English architect who practiced out of Bombay and taught at the first school of architecture in India, worriedly remarked in 1942, the primary challenge of the time was to establish the profession and protect it from quacks by setting strict professional standards. Architects worked on three tracks to develop themselves:education, legal framework, and profession.Upon reflection, it appears that what they have accomplished through professional practice is more significant and impactful than what they have achieved in the other two.

在臺北迎接跨年，有很多民眾涌上街頭，看臺北市政府前廣場舉辦的免費的跨年演唱會；在101大樓周圍的大街小巷穿梭逛夜景，品嘗夜市香飄四溢的小吃；在街頭看藝人的花式表演……這一切，都是為了等待101大樓的煙火秀和新年的到來。

For many, contemporary architecture in India before recent times is not a story worthy of telling.Despite compelling evidence, many narratives describe architecture in India through universal categories such as modern and postmodern and conclude that Indian architecture was a poor imitation until it came on its own in the 1980s. Such commentaries are problematic, as Sheldon Pollock would incisively point out in the case of intellectual history, since they try to force a "conceptual symmetry" with the western architectural movements which did not exist[4].

It is not that the larger international movements did not cast impact on Indian practices.However, architects were not passive receivers nor were their responses uniform. As Claude Batley summed up in his comments, architecture in India was influenced "by the world movement", but various climatic and local demands also tempered it[5]. Homegrown modernity, art deco hybrids and practices working with optimal resources and artisans were simultaneously present. A similar trajectory followed in the post-Independence period when Le Corbusier and Louis Kahn arrived in India.Both left an indelible impact, but what followed was not a blind imitation of ideas left behind. If some followed Chandigarh and Le Corbusier, a few others such as Charles Correa explored different idioms in projects such as the Gandhi Ashram. Nari Gandhi created evocative works with a new material sensibility while in Delhi, Joseph Stein carefully integrated climatic conditions and landscape in his buildings. While Chatterjee and Polk in Kolkata were looking at how to address regional issues, in the south, Laurie Baker was quietly building socially conscious architecture and single-handedly inspired a movement for affordable and environmentally sensible buildings.

A thousand more flowers have bloomed in recent times, particularly after the economic liberalisation in 1990. As a recent exhibition titled the State of Architecture (curated by Rahul Mehrotra, Kaiwan Mehta, and Ranjit Hoskote) clearly showed, Indian architecture is sufiused with a "polyphony of voices."Hence, to get a better picture of the current state, it would be wise to drop categorisations, and, instead,portray a panoramic view by placing a series of snapshots next to one another.

2 Perspectives

Bijoy Jain of Mumbai Studio and Sameep Padora of sP+a architects (Sameep Padora & Associates),both of whom share the same concern for living crafts and building techniques, are illustrative examples of the diversity of approaches. In Ganga Maki Textile Studio (by Studio Mumbai,fig. 1, page 52), a small textile design and production facility at the foothills of Himalayas is rooted in place, people and craft. The plan is a simple arrangement of four L-shaped rectangular boxes around a courtyard with storage, service, and workspaces buttressing them. The buildings are carefully handmade, and it sensitively combines traditional materials such as locally harvested bricks, stone and marble, and bamboo. The materials gained poetic quality in the considerate hands of the craftsmen while also being continuously guided by the designer. Bijoy Jain believes that craft is not just embedded in materials,but is also about sensibilities and communication.Jain's use of materials and techniques have a clear destination, and aesthetic consideration permeates all decisions. The process of building such a project is slow and requires care. For example, a 10m2lime concrete roof took about 5 days to complete.

Sameep Padora too pays careful attention tomaterials and building techniques, but he is not as fixed as Jain regarding the provenance of techniques.He seeks tangible expression and material effciency in multiple ways. In his project Jetvan, a Buddhist Centre in Wari village, Maharashtra, he innovatively used rammed earth made from basalt stone dust and fly ash waste. He also chose repurposed timber, and salvaged clay roof tiles, and collaborated with the Hunnarshala Foundation for Building Technology and Innovations, an institution based in Bhuj that supports traditional techniques. On the other hand,in Maya Somaiya Library (Fig. 2, page 58) built in Kopergaon, a village near Jetavan, he preferred the brick Catalan Vault, a Mediterranean construction technique. Padora innovated on the traditional vault using the research knowledge and computational methods developed by the Block Research Group at the Institute of Technology in Architecture at ETH Zürich. The improvised method allowed him to design a free-flowing form and a fluid space inside to house books and reading spaces. The roof was an impressive thin structure made of 3 layers of 20 mm brick tiles, laid perpendicular to each other and held together by mortar. Padora is open about the idea of the craft and chooses his techniques based on the site, contingencies and cost considerations.

One of the issues that architects are still obsessively concerned about is to invent ways to root their buildings in the places they build. Many resort to historical precedents to achieve this and not all have been successful. As Tillotson would critically point out, some have slipped and settled for pastiches and disappointing collages[6]. Anxiety for authenticity has often taken the better of the quest for creative solutions. However, in recent times, a few architects are beginning to understand the issue better and have proposed nuanced solutions.

Girish Doshi, an architect, based in Pune goes down the familiar route of excavating historical precedents, but he is careful not to end up with a cardboard of symbolic elements. His rhetoric evokes Hindu temples and wadas (traditional houses of Maharashtra) but stops short of making na?ve claims of recreating authentic experiences. Girish who calls his practice "traditional contemporary"tries to set a dialogue between historical strategies and modern idioms. In his recent project, Brick School of Architecture in Pune (Fig. 3, page 64),Doshi evokes the spatial layering and symmetrical arrangement around an axis commonly found in Hindu temples. He even makes formal references to gopuras (temple gateways) and pyramidal profiles. However, his materials and constructional choices are contemporary, and the arrangement of programmes are pragmatic. He prefers pure forms and authentic use of materials and configures his spaces to provide flexibility. By choosing the worn look of exposed bricks and rough concrete, which is common in Chandigarh and Ahmedabad where he trained, he unsettles traditional references.

On the other hand, architects such as Sanjay Mohe based in Bangalore and Abin Chaudhuri based in Kolkata demonstrate different ways of contextualising buildings.As much as they look to historical precedents, they also pay attention to climatic considerations. Mohe's designs use expressive courtyards, communicative frames, and elements such as water bodies and levels to create spatial layering and local connection. Equally important, the features also work as effective tropical devices and create collective spaces where people effortlessly gather to converse. His design for the CARE Group of Institutions,Tiruchirappalli (Fig. 4) and Class Room Complex,Indian Institute of Management, Bengaluru (Fig. 5) are clear demonstrations of his approach. Abin Chaudhuri also similar devices, but his architectural language is different. For example, in his design for International Management, Bhubaneswar (Fig. 6) also uses local materials such as laterite, and elements such as courtyards and water bodies to anchor the building with the place. These devices modulate the microclimate, cut harsh light and reduce heat gain, which are beginning to become imperatives. However, the architecture expression is not restrained as in the earlier examples but more iconic of a monumental scale.

On the other hand, Lijo Jos and Reny Lijo(young architects based in Thrissur, Kerala) who also engage with similar questions, take a radical route.To them, addressing context through precedents is not necessarily the best approach. They define context not as historical ideas, but based on issues faced. For example, Kerala is known for wood and laterite buildings and pitched roofs. However, Lijo and Reny's buildings do not make any reference to them. To both, issues of the place matter more.Kerala faces a severe shortage of sand and scarce laterite, and wood is getting precious. In such a situation, designing using historical references and traditional materials is unhelpful. They have boldly inserted concrete vaulted structures and breathing wall buildings in the verdant landscape (Fig. 7).Thus, performance and response to contextual challenges anchors the building to the place more than symbolic or formal references.

Placed in this continuum is the work of Shimul Javeri who is keen on accommodating culture and climate. In many of the firm's high-end projects such as the Marasa Sarovar Premiere (Fig. 8, page 70) in Tirupati, they chose traditional idioms, a temple in this case, and vastly reinterpret them leaving a minimal trace of its source. References to historical precedents stop at the conceptual stage and what follows is a careful choice of contemporary materials related to climate and function. Their use of materials is vastly different from that of Jain or Padora. It is neither cost conscious nor playful, but highly aestheticised and sumptuous. Moreover, their strategies are eclectic.

It is important to also register that contemporary practice in India is not all about crafts and placemaking. A good number of them are in the mainstream and respond to urban conditions. One of their key concerns is to find elegant solutions to vertical living. architectureRed based in Chennai has created a set of impressive tall buildings such as the one in Crescent University, Chennai (Fig. 9-11). They have creatively stacked floors, sculpted forms, created inner courts, provided generous gathering spaces andmade ways for good light. Rahul Mehrotra's design for KMC Corporate Offce in Hyderabad (Fig. 12, page 76)pushes the envelope further. Against the backdrop of mundane vertical offce structures, this building stands out for various reasons. It addresses the climatic and social concerns that daunt many tall buildings by putting in place a double skinned fa?ade. While the inner skin is made of a concrete frame and standard aluminum windows, the outer one is of the aluminum trellis with hydroponic trays used for growing a variety of plants. The exterior fa?ade works intelligently, and the misting system integrated with it releases water in a suitable amount if required. It not only takes care of the plants but also humidifies the air that enters the building inside, a much-needed solution for the hot climate of Hyderabad. The space between the two skins allows for the gardeners to walk and mend the pants. Mehrotra values such gestures and sees them as attempts to "provide a social interface that softens the common hierarchical divisions created by class differences in a typical corporate organisation in India."

7墻與拱的住宅，坎吉拉帕里，喀拉拉邦，印度/The Walls and Vaults House, Kanjirappally, Kerala, India（攝影/Photo:Praveen Mohandas）

8馬拉薩薩羅瓦酒店，蒂魯帕蒂，安得拉邦，印度/Marasa Sarovar Premiere, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India（攝影/Photo: Rajesh Vora）

9.10新月大學(xué)航空學(xué)院，金奈，泰米爾納德邦，印度/Department of Aeronautics, Crescent University, Chennai,Tamil Nadu, India

11新月大學(xué)生命科學(xué)院，金奈，泰米爾納德邦，印度/School of Life Sciences, Crescent University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu,India（9-11圖片來源/Sources: architectureRed）

For many, commercial and residential buildings are the mainstay of their practice, but a few have also tried to engage with everyday problems to make a difference in the city and for its people.Ashwinikumar Crematorium in Surat (Fig. 13, page 80) designed by Gurjit Singh Matharoo is clear a demonstration of this intention. In 1994, Surat, a city known for diamond trade and textile industry was severely affected by the plague. The deaths and trials that followed galvanised the state and communities to improve public health in the city.A private trust, following the disaster, decided to adopt cleaner and efficient ways to cremate the dead and chose the proposal by Matharoo, which created a dignified place to cremate and mourn. The crematorium is in operation since 2000. The success of this design is not only in its functionality but also in the manner in which it escapes the burdens of representation. It weaves spaces with needs of the mourners and the rituals associated with death. A grim concrete skin wraps the building and comfortingly isolates the areas within. The entrance corridor leads to an ample space that shelters the furnaces and the burning pyres. The garden in front of the furnaces allows the mourners to gather collect and sit in silence or sing bhajans (devotional songs).The whole facility is free and open to anyone who wishes to use it. People offer what they can or what they desire.

Another innovative project that is socially and environmentally conscientious is Hathi Gaon or Elephant Village (Fig. 14, page 86). Located at the foothills of Amer Fort, Jaipur, this residential enclave and tourist destination designed by Rahul Mehrotra houses 100 elephants and their mahouts.It takes care of elephants which are often exploited for tourist activities and left uncared after the purpose is served. Mehrotra's design, which was chosen by the State government that supported the project, created elephant shelters and mahout housing in the form of clusters. Dwelling units and elephant pavilions are organised around shared spaces. Shelters though small, about 18.5m2, are not built as timid boxes. Instead, they have generous outdoor areas and allows for incremental addition.The upgraded facility accommodates elephants in active use and also those convalescing. An equally important aspect of the design is the care bestowed on the landscape. Mohan Rao, the landscape architect who collaborated in this project, proposed a series of steps to harvest rainwater and recycled water. Through a series of swales, retention basins,ponds and interlinked reservoirs, water were collected. The planting strategy tried to recreate an elephant habitat as far as possible, while also preventing soil erosion.

While a lot could be said about the accomplishments in the non-religious realm, Indian architects are still grappling tofind a contemporary language for the religious places that are still built in large numbers. Practices are perilously torn between tradition and modernity, and often gravitate towards historical modes of designing. It is in this context that the Wadeshwar Temple in Maharashtra(Fig. 15, page 92) designed by Sameep Padora assumes significance. To some, this marks a creative beginning. Padora thinks that tradition will always remain as the beginning and will provide design elements such as garabhagriha (sanctum)and mandapas (pillared pavilions). The task of the architect is then to articulate and juxtapose them inventively. The design dispenses with the traditional sequential spatial configuration and strips off ornamentation on the Shikara (tower over the sanctum). Unlike a typical temple tower which is sealed at the top, here it is gently opened to allow light to wash the inner sanctum.

Another impressive turn in this context is re-imagination of sacred places as the extension of social spaces. Sai Mandir (Fig. 16,17), a Hindu temple in Venncahed, a village in Andhra Pradesh by Hari Krishna and his firm Studio for Environment and Architecture, based in Hyderabad, is an illustrative example of refreshing thinking. At one level, the design tries to rethink the architectural language of a temple by abstracting the historical form and using new construction techniques. At the other level, through intelligent design moves,the inner sacred spaces connect and extend to the adjacent public place. The inside permeates toembrace the sizeable 100-year-old neem tree outside and shares its shade. The sound and light from the inside enliven the outside in the evening. The temple interior draws the villagers to worship and rest,while its exterior with raised and extended plinth affords a place for the community to gather, chat,and at a time for business.

12KMC公司辦公樓，海得拉巴，安得拉邦，印度/KMC Corporate Offce, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India（攝影/Photo: Tina Nandi）

13阿什溫尼庫瑪火葬場，蘇拉特，古吉拉特邦，印度/Ashwinikumar Crematorium, Surat, Gujarat, India（攝影/Photo: Matharoo Associates）

14象村，齋浦爾，拉賈斯坦邦，印度/The Elephant Village,Jaipur, Rajasthan, India（攝影/Photo: Rajesh Vora）

15濕婆神廟，瓦德什瓦爾，馬哈拉施特拉邦，印度/Shiva Temple, Wadeshwar, Maharashtra, India（攝影/Photo:Edmund Sumner）

3 Challenges

Contemporary architecture in India also has its equal share of fallacies and flaws. It mostly services private interests, corporate clients, and a few state projects. There are several ignominious examples and indulgences. Further, recent commentaries by Rahul Mehrotra, Peter Scriver and Amit Srivastava have pointed out that practices have only touched a small percentage of the conditions in the country and"there are parallel places within the contemporary city", where the benefits of new opportunities have not reached[7]. Most of the practices are located in the metropolitan cities, while better professional services are more needed in the growing tier two and three cities. There are also other compounding issues such as the limitations of the architects, and the narrow patronage and limited constituency that demands good design. The absence of well-designed social housing is an example of this condition.On one level, practices are mostly engaged with commissions for private homes and institutions.On the other level, social housing which remains a state-sponsored activity is caught in the bureaucracy of protocols and standards, and myopic policies.The housing boards are yet to realise that design and construction could substantially improve the affordable housing conditions. Architects for their part are yet to take this up the issue.

Environmental issues are another concern that are yet to be adequately addressed, despite a rich history of sustainable practices. Impressive strides have not been made in this realm. Recent interest has been limited to LEED ratings and other superficial responses. The problem is exacerbated with economic liberalisation that has brought with it a new bag of materials which are not necessarily energy efficient. Though energy codes and policies are in place to address these issues, change is not yet visible.

One of the most disappointing developments in recent times is the making of Amaravati, a new capital city in And hra Pradesh. Coming as it does, almost 60 years after Chandigarh, hopes were pinned on this project. It was seen as a potential test bed for new planning ideas and architecture. The issue is not that the state government awarded the project to a foreign architect, but the whimsical manner in which the entire project was conducted. It placed steep entry barriers for young practices and led the exercises less transparently[8]. Barring a few seductive images,not many details of the projects are available in the public domain. Unlike Chandigarh that animated the whole county, Amaravati has not created even a ripple amidst the professionals and institutions. When creative practices today are moving forward and looking for opportunities, projects such as this pulls the profession backwards.

The proposed amendments to the Architects Act, which provides the legal frameworks, have also not been encouraging. Proposed changes are not in keeping with the current economic landscape and still harp on excessive controls. This neither improves education nor enables practices to fl ourish.

Architectural practices know well that despite impediments, they have to go forward. There is optimism and hope as much as there is skepticism.The only possible way to move ahead is to establish the relevance of the profession by striving, as Juhani Pallasamaa would encourage, to build structures that have "deeper significance and purpose". □

16.17圣曼地亞寺廟，維納赫德，安得拉邦，印度/Sai Mandir, Venncahed, Andhra Pradesh, India（攝影/Photos: Ujjwal Sannala）