After i posted this previous post, Aabid dropped me a message asking what i meant by the last sentence, “Architecture can become more inclusive, by understanding what rhymes with the everyday, ordinary, familiar and relevant.” On rereading, it also seemed to me a bit of disconnect to what i was saying earlier on how to bend the genres of modernism and vernacular. I have been thinking of his question and I thought i could explain it a bit more.
Does architecture always has to only rhyme with the unique and the sophisticated (say Modernism), crafted and the refined (like the vernacular)? Can it also rhyme with the ‘everyday, ordinary, familiar and relevant’ and just be rudimentary? – Like this house in my neighbourhood in Mysore has this metal mesh box built on the terrace to house its ever-growing garden. Can i rhyme with a condition like this too.
You must be logged in to post a comment.