| Based on the study of the development process of Indian modern architecture from the 1960 s to the 1990 s,this paper discusses the "transplant,graft,revive" process which represents how modern architecture transformed from the West to India.By combing through India geography,history and culture,the paper concludes that "tropical climate" and "pan-cultural values" are major factors affecting Indian architecture;and by studying of Indian architecture development process,the paper concludes that "the integration of modernity and locality" has always been Indian’s concern.On this basis,this paper analyzes the architectural practice works of two western architects Le Corbusier and Louis Kahn,and two local architects Charles Correa and B.V.Doshi in India.By comparison this paper concludes that,on one hand,Correa and Doshi was significantly influenced by the western architects,and on the other hand their works have been exhibited differences with the later.This article then further analyzes the influence and differences.At the level of influence,first,the mutual influence of Corbusier and Kahn to the young generation not only lies in the introduction of a brand-new architectural language,but also in the "outsider" perspectives towards Indian culture which help the young generation to re-understand their own,as well as in passing an open way of thinking and the firm belief in design.At the same time,this strong influence also becomes a "sweet burden" of the young generation urging them to think critically and reflectively after the masters.Secondly,Corbusier and Kahn’s architectural pursuit in India showed "polarization" :while Corbusier loves diversity and complexity,Kahn seeks after purity and order.However,this corresponds with the polarized Indian cultural background – the complex and secular Hindu versus the clear and pure Islam.This contradiction allows Indian architects to understand their culture more objectively.At the level of differences,first,Corbusier and Kahn’s integration of climate,materials,and forms with locality is short-sighted and hard to go deeper than the surface of cultural semiotic symbols.Secondly,Corbusier and Kahn tends to ignore indigenous consideration subjectively when it conflict with their personal architectural pursuit,while Correa and Doshi’s architectural pursuits are in consist with indigenous concerns,if not combined into one.Thirdly,it should not be ignored that the socialbackground of western masters’ Indian projects defers from the later local architects’.The former involves mostly in governmental projects and was burdened with the task to showcase the strength of the country;while the latter participated mostly on nongovernmental or personal projects which allows them to focus on people’s lives.Finally,this paper presents three meaningful indigenous design strategies: first,"from form to non-form" meaning to be away from cultural semiotic symbols and focus on life and living.Second,"From exaggerating tradition to embracing the moment" which can only be fulfilled by developing a strong culture confidence.Third,"from the exclusive rationality to a pluralistic tolerance" which encourages architects to eliminate their pre-determined will.In the end,this paper compared the social and cultural differences between China and India,in order to bring forward how this study could serve as a reference of Chinese local architectural practice. |
PDF Full Text Request