How
to ‘design’?......
Did
the first people refer to any manual to cook or build houses?
This
is a simple question, but it is time to reconsider this question, since it
seems to be falsely believed that we can’t do a thing without ‘referring’ to
any available information. The above question, if thought over more
deeply, will reveal that the process of learning something depends on
observing, the act of doing and improvising. It also deals with intuition. All
these dimensions constitute something much more that just facts and scientific
information at our disposal or “analysis”.
One
learns to swim by diving in the water, not reading a manual! Same with cooking
or architecture. The problem with today’s education system is that it values
information over the “act” of “doing” a thing and learning/ experiencing a
phenomenon. Ideally, no school (in terms of a bounded space) is required for
learning or gaining knowledge of one’s choice. After all, what is knowledge? Or
better still – what is the purpose of all knowledge? One purpose maybe to know
the Truth (or to understand Fear or Uncertainty). If that is the case, then
knowledge production (or “revelation”) is required to be a personal act –
something not standardized or mass produced. And it seems to have an intrinsic
relationship with the doer. So, a process of self exploration is mandatory. Now
the point to be asked is, does the current education system (and the
information available of the internet) cater to the requirement of self
exploration? Most people may not be aware of what self exploration is, if they
haven’t experienced this process at all.
In
self exploration, there is no prior guidance available in this scenario. One
discovers the process by gut instincts, trial and error and intuition. Over the
period of time, one learns to optimize the process and learns faster. One
learns what suits one’s self. One learns about one’s own tendencies and fears.
I keep on referring to fear because it exposes our limitations of thought. Fear
is a ‘block’. To discover one self is to untangle and decode fear. It is a
painful process. Indeed, the ‘pain’ is a result of opposition our mind creates
to tackle fear. Any new situation will generate this cycle. And therefore,
perhaps the essence of life, is to tackle fear at every step, so eventually, we
may tend to be more free in our approach to do things.
Coming
back to my field –which is design, we are required to generate a solution for a
given unique situation (set of people, time, site, climate, constraints,
budget, materials and so on). We are required to visualize something,
that does not exist before. It is like catching some kind of a ‘ghost’. What
form will that ghost takes eventually (as architecture) can’t be predicted on
day one. We are required to always encounter this unknown terrain of conceiving
ideas. Every design act, if carried truthfully, should make us vulnerable, give
us pain and lead us to a ‘eureka’ moment. The uncertainty and the stress are
inevitable. These experiences are caused because we don’t know answers to many
things at the start. We are required to take millions of things in mind and
think of a solution that can give best to the client (at the minimum) and to
the society (at the maximum). In between, we are required to respond to time,
perceptions, feelings, culture, climate, materials, construction, and so on.
This is learnt, only by doing it again and again.
In
an academic environment, students tend to short circuit this process by
referring to “readymade” solutions offered on the internet. They forget that:
1. Architectural response is “contextual” – very much related
to the spirit of that place and time. One can’t just copy and paste a structure
from one part of the world to another. This tendency seems to exist because
students are not stretching their imagination to a greater extent and perhaps
are not willing to critically ask questions regarding one’s taste and position.
One must develop a tendency to look “beyond” form and be wary of the dizzying
awe inspiring “forms” that global culture consumes. Form is nothing. It is the
idea (or the thought or the value or the concern behind the making of the form)
that should be understood.
We should be aware of the current scenario, where everything
(information) is available in an instant and too short a time is given for
synthesizing a solution.
In practice too, this short-circuiting a sincere effort has
got much to do with compulsions of producing “quantum” of works, cheap labour
or non recognition of talent, undercutting of costs and severe competition. We
all must face this grave scenario. I am not here to say what should be done or
what is right or wrong. In India, there are conditions where people struggle to
survive and in such conditions, how can quality, ethics, be assured? There are
scenarios where “ideal” talk of architecture just breaks down and it seems
useless even to generate any kind of a hope.
Leaving such scenarios apart, can’t we give serious thought
and effort to the architectural product we hope to create? Can’t we begin
today?
No comments:
Post a Comment