I was generally thinkin of indian hindu temples in today's context..You know, if i was asked to design a Hindu temple today, wht am i expected to do? Redefine its function keeping in mind the 'time' of our lives, or modify the legacy, the tradition. Should i purposefully make dark interiors for the feeling for sacredness or should i bring in the light because i CAN? Should i have carved ornamentation or a blank stonewall? Which is more appropriate? Which is more Indian? Which answers time's call? Should we continue to build domes- not of elaborately carved stone, but of concrete? Or should we define today's temples to have pergolas?

In the old times, the sole authority was the king; he was learned, wise and understood the society- he gave the right patronage; chose the right people to do the right job. Even builders had generational history. Do u think the king would have allowed a rajasthani palace to have open screens on the west? The use of wind was understood; the use of the court was understood.
Yet, today, we do not understand it. Democracy has in a way failed us; the right and wrong is lost- wht i like and wht i dont like is more important.
B.arch is a way to make us understand. And once we have understood, it is for us to direct architecture forwards; it would be a complete failure if we decide to build rajasthani palace facades for our offices.

What makes a space Indian? We keep talking about Indian architecture, Indian spaces, Indian feel, and indianness. Wht quality of the space do u think makes it Indian? What do we choose to identify as 'indian'? Are they the colours? Or the rough textures? Mud plaster? Small size? Dark interiors of temples? Can a steel building not be Indian? Somehow i think the process of making a space indian goes deeper than its percievable characteristics- the social that an indian is, or the warm welcome we give to the sun, or the value that we associate with our living spaces- is all reflected in our spaces, in very, very subtle ways. In the architecture of the past, we have identified and praised them; i am in search for a contemporary vocabulary for 'indianness'. Sangath, or even the tube house by correa is deeply Indian. Wht say? 'The fact that it still exists today is indian'...it clearly identifies the amount of importance we associate with our structures, rather we used to. The program for the design of a building in the past, i think, has been to create a masterpiece; not to have a thicker wall than the previous. Today, we seem to ignore the fact that a building is a functional element first, then a bait for comparison/superiority.i also understand the line of indian architecture is 'beyond beauty'; i find 'beautiful' a very, very incomplete description of indian architecture- it is soo beyond it. Im thrilled that someone finally understands it; u have to be able to look beyond the skin.