Alternative Visions to Eurocentric Public Architecture: The Work of Balkrishna Doshi in India and Alejandro Aravena in Chile.
Disciplines
Architecture
Abstract (300 words maximum)
Since the 19th century, public housing projects have remained a dilemma for architects. From socialist housing projects of the East Bloc during the Communist time to large private developments in the West during the new Liberal era, socially-responsible housing projects have been at the center of architectural debates. This paper focuses on alternative vision beyond either the socialist or privatized housing projects by comparing the work of Balkrishna Doshi (1927-2023) and Alejandro Aravena (1967-Present). Despite different temporal, socio-political, and geographic contexts, the work of these two architects shares the same social responsibility, emphasizing community building and empowering the people. On the surface, these two architects, both Pritzker Prize-winners, were from different regions. However, the problems they both tackled marks the intersection of economic systems, cultural forces, poverty, political systems, and environmental issues. This paper draws on Kenneth Frampton’s six principles of “Critical Regionalism” because these principles highlight architecture rooted in local context and possibly engage in global influences. This research also examines the work of Duanfang Lu in Third World Modernism to highlight the global dimension of the practices of these two influential architects. Central to this analysis are the works of Doshi in Aranya Low-Cost Housing (1989) in Indore and Aravena’s Quinta Monroy Housing (2004) in Chile. This paper offers new insight onto the alternative approach from Doshi’s community-centric planning and Aravena’s incremental housing and public empowerment strategies. This paper explores how Alejandro Aravena leaves his architecture open and “incomplete,” allowing the community to incrementally adjust the projects to their emerging needs; whereas Balkrishna Doshi creates architecture that fosters a sense of belonging and addresses the needs of his community through planning strategies demonstrating innovative solutions. The paper investigates and compares the philosophy and ideology of Doshi and Aravena, highlighting their trajectory, practices, and different approaches to public housing.
Academic department under which the project should be listed
CACM - Architecture
Primary Investigator (PI) Name
Ehsan Sheikholharam Mashhadi
Alternative Visions to Eurocentric Public Architecture: The Work of Balkrishna Doshi in India and Alejandro Aravena in Chile.
Since the 19th century, public housing projects have remained a dilemma for architects. From socialist housing projects of the East Bloc during the Communist time to large private developments in the West during the new Liberal era, socially-responsible housing projects have been at the center of architectural debates. This paper focuses on alternative vision beyond either the socialist or privatized housing projects by comparing the work of Balkrishna Doshi (1927-2023) and Alejandro Aravena (1967-Present). Despite different temporal, socio-political, and geographic contexts, the work of these two architects shares the same social responsibility, emphasizing community building and empowering the people. On the surface, these two architects, both Pritzker Prize-winners, were from different regions. However, the problems they both tackled marks the intersection of economic systems, cultural forces, poverty, political systems, and environmental issues. This paper draws on Kenneth Frampton’s six principles of “Critical Regionalism” because these principles highlight architecture rooted in local context and possibly engage in global influences. This research also examines the work of Duanfang Lu in Third World Modernism to highlight the global dimension of the practices of these two influential architects. Central to this analysis are the works of Doshi in Aranya Low-Cost Housing (1989) in Indore and Aravena’s Quinta Monroy Housing (2004) in Chile. This paper offers new insight onto the alternative approach from Doshi’s community-centric planning and Aravena’s incremental housing and public empowerment strategies. This paper explores how Alejandro Aravena leaves his architecture open and “incomplete,” allowing the community to incrementally adjust the projects to their emerging needs; whereas Balkrishna Doshi creates architecture that fosters a sense of belonging and addresses the needs of his community through planning strategies demonstrating innovative solutions. The paper investigates and compares the philosophy and ideology of Doshi and Aravena, highlighting their trajectory, practices, and different approaches to public housing.