O NOVELTY, WHERE ART THOU…?
In some obscure corner of the world somewhere, someone suddenly said “let there be glass” and there was. In every nook and corner of the world, in every conceivable form and shape. It is the wonder material of our age, ‘skins’ of our spaces, and cladding for our buildings.
Glass, per se, has been around for ages. But the phenomenon of ‘curtain walling’, or the external glass façade that does not carry any load, took its roots much later. To be very specific, the idea was born in the Bauhaus school in post-war Germany, and showcased extensively by architects such as Mies Van der Rohe and his protégé, the infamous Philip Johnson. The advent of steel and reinforced concrete spurred on the use of glass in the construction industry. This gave rise to the seemingly boundless shiny sculptures in the new urban landscape that was emerging rapidly. “Less is More,” said Mies, attributing legitimacy to the huge sums of money spent in achieving unbroken surfaces and thereby creating the surface look that was to later become the unwrit prototype for architects and builders the world over. Johnson’s Glass House, a radical showcase of this wonder material, further emphasized the point.
Closer to home, a new kind of revolution was taking our society by storm. In the period of pseudo-modernism that arose as an offshoot of modernism the world over, reckless and sometimes notorious façades of glass were springing up throughout the nation. This was a trend that very few architects and planners managed to resist. The argument- clients want the ‘international’ look. The result- architects having to comply. This brings us to a valid debate on the social and environmental obligations of architects, as opposed to their livelihood. A classic illustration of Darwin’s theory of natural selection- “survival of the fittest”. The difference being that in this case, it is merely the survival of the ‘compliant’. “It is the client’s money, after all”, sounds back the voice from the architectural circles. An argument that cannot, no doubt, be dismissed as juvenile banter.
The glass industry has been very receptive to this movement. Newer types of glass, and innovations in packaging and marketing have kept the sector alive and kicking. There are many reasons as to why major differences of opinion occur along these lines. From an environmental standpoint, glass increases the incidence of radiant heat being trapped inside a building, due to its sheer transparence and properties of absorption. In the case of a centrally air-conditioned space, the effect would be felt in terms of power consumption. Apart from the increased spending on power bills, the implications of this are directly on the environmental pollution. In a country like India, the main source of power is obtained from the burning of fossil fuels. Conventional fossil fuels pollute the environment as they burn, emitting huge amounts of smoke into the immediate atmosphere. Higher demand for power call for increased production and more burning. The long-term effects are directly felt on health, and give rise to respiratory diseases. The ailing power sector in India is and should definitely be able to catch up. On a parallel vein, global players are called in, and the energy projects fall flat on their faces.
Manufacturers have foreseen this problem and have tackled it efficiently, says an optimistic voice from the professional circles. Newer varieties of glass have been invented, including the reflective glass with mirrored surfaces. ‘Low-emissivity glass’, or so goes the market name. This glass is very effective in keeping out the incident radiation from the interiors of the building, by reflecting it back into the atmosphere. It is not very detrimental on power bills for the immediate occupant. But then what could possibly be the hitch here. The fact is that reflecting back the heat waves and incident light solves only half the problem. The other half is that the surroundings of the glass-clad building would heat up very rapidly. The brunt of this is taken on by the adjoining buildings, and the pedestrians in the area. In a hot tropical climate like ours, these levels would shoot up uncontrollably. Walk along any major road in the city during the sweltering heat of mid noon, and the relevance of this critique will strike you all at once. This gives rise to a no-win situation, and many a gray hair is lost trying to formulate a valid conclusion.
Our Indian metropolises are no different; Chennai being rather late to cash in on the trend. And yet we see perfect clones—those crowding the already battered skyline of our city. The prototypes of our ‘Brave New World’ as Huxley would have put it. But then ironically, this compliance is neither new, nor is it in any way brave. As we stand as lone witnesses to this prototyping, we also see old wine being poured in new bottles; and we are forced to slowly suppress our cynicism with sighs. The aspiring architect in me longs for radical change, and a shocking deconstructivist. “Don’t follow standards, set them,” he says. And my mind wanders back to the words of Buckminster Fuller “I may be of lower than average intelligence, but I am well-informed”. In the end, that has to amount to something. What say you?
Glass, per se, has been around for ages. But the phenomenon of ‘curtain walling’, or the external glass façade that does not carry any load, took its roots much later. To be very specific, the idea was born in the Bauhaus school in post-war Germany, and showcased extensively by architects such as Mies Van der Rohe and his protégé, the infamous Philip Johnson. The advent of steel and reinforced concrete spurred on the use of glass in the construction industry. This gave rise to the seemingly boundless shiny sculptures in the new urban landscape that was emerging rapidly. “Less is More,” said Mies, attributing legitimacy to the huge sums of money spent in achieving unbroken surfaces and thereby creating the surface look that was to later become the unwrit prototype for architects and builders the world over. Johnson’s Glass House, a radical showcase of this wonder material, further emphasized the point.
Closer to home, a new kind of revolution was taking our society by storm. In the period of pseudo-modernism that arose as an offshoot of modernism the world over, reckless and sometimes notorious façades of glass were springing up throughout the nation. This was a trend that very few architects and planners managed to resist. The argument- clients want the ‘international’ look. The result- architects having to comply. This brings us to a valid debate on the social and environmental obligations of architects, as opposed to their livelihood. A classic illustration of Darwin’s theory of natural selection- “survival of the fittest”. The difference being that in this case, it is merely the survival of the ‘compliant’. “It is the client’s money, after all”, sounds back the voice from the architectural circles. An argument that cannot, no doubt, be dismissed as juvenile banter.
The glass industry has been very receptive to this movement. Newer types of glass, and innovations in packaging and marketing have kept the sector alive and kicking. There are many reasons as to why major differences of opinion occur along these lines. From an environmental standpoint, glass increases the incidence of radiant heat being trapped inside a building, due to its sheer transparence and properties of absorption. In the case of a centrally air-conditioned space, the effect would be felt in terms of power consumption. Apart from the increased spending on power bills, the implications of this are directly on the environmental pollution. In a country like India, the main source of power is obtained from the burning of fossil fuels. Conventional fossil fuels pollute the environment as they burn, emitting huge amounts of smoke into the immediate atmosphere. Higher demand for power call for increased production and more burning. The long-term effects are directly felt on health, and give rise to respiratory diseases. The ailing power sector in India is and should definitely be able to catch up. On a parallel vein, global players are called in, and the energy projects fall flat on their faces.
Manufacturers have foreseen this problem and have tackled it efficiently, says an optimistic voice from the professional circles. Newer varieties of glass have been invented, including the reflective glass with mirrored surfaces. ‘Low-emissivity glass’, or so goes the market name. This glass is very effective in keeping out the incident radiation from the interiors of the building, by reflecting it back into the atmosphere. It is not very detrimental on power bills for the immediate occupant. But then what could possibly be the hitch here. The fact is that reflecting back the heat waves and incident light solves only half the problem. The other half is that the surroundings of the glass-clad building would heat up very rapidly. The brunt of this is taken on by the adjoining buildings, and the pedestrians in the area. In a hot tropical climate like ours, these levels would shoot up uncontrollably. Walk along any major road in the city during the sweltering heat of mid noon, and the relevance of this critique will strike you all at once. This gives rise to a no-win situation, and many a gray hair is lost trying to formulate a valid conclusion.
Our Indian metropolises are no different; Chennai being rather late to cash in on the trend. And yet we see perfect clones—those crowding the already battered skyline of our city. The prototypes of our ‘Brave New World’ as Huxley would have put it. But then ironically, this compliance is neither new, nor is it in any way brave. As we stand as lone witnesses to this prototyping, we also see old wine being poured in new bottles; and we are forced to slowly suppress our cynicism with sighs. The aspiring architect in me longs for radical change, and a shocking deconstructivist. “Don’t follow standards, set them,” he says. And my mind wanders back to the words of Buckminster Fuller “I may be of lower than average intelligence, but I am well-informed”. In the end, that has to amount to something. What say you?
posted by Farzana Kader at 10:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home