Suryakant Patel, Bhupen Khakhar and Rasik Shah on Art and Architecture

In conversation with Suryakant Patel, Rasik Shah and Bhupen Khakhar on Art and Architecture

Apoorva: Prof. Patel, What do you feel about Bhupen's works?



Suryakant Patel: I know his work and I like it very much. His work impressed me because of its uniqueness. It was different from people doing routine Expressionist and Abstract paintings in Baroda, when we met for the first time.



Apoorva: I have always wondered if artists and architects can meaningfully co-exist as co-professionals. Did you have any discussion related to this?



Bhupen Khakhar: We have thought about it. We also feel that a seminar or meeting involving architects and artists has not happened in India. Here a discussion of topics would generate an interest in people. The reasons for this probably are that we have not given this serious thought of this sort of coexistence.

Now it has started happening in a way but I doubt if it is coexistence the way you mean it. I think, the only time when it has happened was when Charles Correa designed The British Council building in New Delhi and Howard Hodgkins did a mural which is a part of the building.



Suryakant Patel: Yes, it acts as part of the building and does not become like a small photo frame. The mural overlaps and appears to go in and out. I think that is a correct fashion. One cannot commission artists after the building is complete and ask him to do something on the walls. That is of no meaning. The problem is that this sort of work is often considered as mere decoration.



Apoorva: Baroda has a long history of good art and architecture for almost 200 years. The kind of participation that you are talking about is lacking here and also in the people educated from here.



Bhupen Khakhar: No, there are two things. What are you saying is a work of collaboration, working together. The point we pointed out is, seeing each others work and enjoying it. This has happened but the former has not happened even though 100 years have passed.



Apoorva: What you are saying is that there is some lack of understanding on the clients' part or on Government’s part?



Suryakant Patel: Not just from the government. To convince the client is a difficult job. Above all there is always this confusion about the choice of the artist or the architect who will collaborate. In this confused scenario where does the collaboration come into picture?



Bhupen Khakhar: I agree, This is a big problem.



Rasik Shah: Suryakantbhai, I look at it in a different way. See, we are talking at a very professional level, but even at the level of educating the artist or architect the interaction is lacking. At a later stage we do not treat it as an integral part. I think it should be built into our work culture.



Apoorva: In India, though art and architecture have existed simultaneously, there has been very little interaction even at the institutional level. In Europe Art and Architecture are not distinctly different entities. Here apparently it is the other way round, so what could be the reason for this?



Bhupen Khakhar: To a certain extent artists ignore architectural movements and vice versa. Speaking of which, I have ignored architectural movements like say the Postmodern movement. I would have known them then if I would have interacted with an architect whether this building is Post Modern or not. On the other hand in Art movements occur that perhaps an Architect will not be able to recognize or distinguish.

If you see now in Faculty of Fine Arts, the work has remarkably changed now. The directions are very different from what they used to be a decade back. Now, perhaps you will see some semi abstraction in the work. Mostly symbols which industrial societies use. I observe it in the Art field but I do not know much about Architecture.



Suryakant Patel: See, many forces are at work. One is the client, who gets a priority because he is going to occupy the space. You cannot impose things that he does not really like. Of course you can educate him to a certain level, but you cannot go beyond that. If the client is very appreciative then this is possible. I have always seen this happening. For instance, if I work for Dr. Kurien in Anand, the work is always published. We appreciate his feelings and we develop our works to the highest level.



Bhupen Khakhar: We also do not have any experimenting museums here in India. Today, in Europe, museums initiate numerous experiments. Here, are no funds available for such activities. Museums act as institutions providing a forum for such related activities. It becomes difficult for an individual to come up with funds. This has not developed yet.



Suryakant Patel: Here, bureaucracy is the greatest obstruction.



Rasik Shah: If we look at the European history of art and architecture, let's say in 1915-20 and about Corbusier, Picasso, etc. Their work reflected each others influence. These movements and influences have not occurred here. I feel is there is a big gap.



Bhupen Khakhar: No, It has occurred slightly. In art an inquiry into the indigenous way of painting has happened, Something that relates to our things that we see around. Similarly in architecture also our climate and our materials and I suppose our "pol" housing and all I could see the beginnings somewhere.



Suryakant Patel: It is happening. After all, it is continuity of our glorious history.



Bhupen Khakhar: People have realized that making big boxes is of no use. Now in India the use of spaces is different. In India, we use bedrooms mainly at night. The drawing room and kitchen are the most heavily used. So architecture has evolved and people have accepted not to have doors between kitchen and dining which was happens in Europe.



Suryakant Patel: Earlier, if your architecture looked Western, it was considered progressive. For appreciation, it had to have the Western or European stamp. Now, thankfully, it is different. Architects do explore regional expressions and reinterpret them.



Apoorva: Simultaneously, I believe a similar movement had also happened in Art?



Bhupen Khakhar: It had happened in 1950. Our Indian artists who had gone to Europe, were influenced by Europe. People in India found it very exotic because for we were seeing it for the first time.

Many artists have come back and most of them have come back to our own roots. So there is also a change there.



Apoorva: What could be the reason for this simultaneous shift in both the fields?



Suryakant Patel: The thought process is a continuous process, it may be in literature, it may be in art, it may be in architecture.



Bhupen Khakhar: Politics also. In the sixties, Jawaharlal Nehru & Kennedy always talked about International relations.

But now things are very different. Now everyone thinks about their region, their country.



Rasik Shah: I think that is a very crucial when we talk about regionalism.



Suryakant Patel: I believe that is the right way of looking at your material and technology. If we cannot make bricks the way Britain does then why worry? We should use our bricks in the best way you can.



Apoorva: So, instead of aspiring to some other standards we are now setting our own Standards?



Bhupen Khakhar: Yes, and slowly we will set our own aesthetics also.

Quotes from an Interview with Suryakant Patel

While I was teaching History of Modern Architecture to students between 1995 - 1998 at the APIED, then just known as IED, Suryakant Patel became aware of some of the articles written by me in the Indian Architect & Builder and we got talking on numerous issues. I had the good sense to document all of these at that time. The possibility of a book was also mentioned and we had several discussions along those lines..

Below are some of the quotes I had documented in numerous discussions with Suryakant Patel between 1996 and 1998

On his early jobs and works.

In my early days of practice I had to leave jobs because of certain standards that I had decided to maintain in my practice. I feel it is very much akin to our Hindi films. If your first role is of a comedian then you are typecast for life. The first job will  establish your image. You should have the clarity and dedication towards your work.

While studying in Bombay, I saw that architects could induce respect from everybody. One of the contractors told me, "I hate you architects because you know little and try to dictate terms. Practical aspects are not foremost in your mind. All the same  I respect you because your insistence is infectious and you manage to get things done your way. To say the least most of you are honest people."

Today the scenario is quite different. I feel that the image of Architects is at its nadir. One of the reasons could be the unbelievably low fees that some architects charge and cannot render proper services. The professionalism is missing.

I feel at an early stage in one's career it is better to execute smaller jobs efficiently. One lacks the requisite experience to give adequate justice to a large project. These smaller projects, when published will demonstrate your abilities and people will learn about the work you are doing. This way clients will know your ideas and the kind of work to expect before they come to you. You have to achieve a particular level and maturity before you start getting larger projects.

I have never gone out of the way to solicit clients and canvass for work. It is possible that by canvassing, I will get more work but then I will not be able to maintain the quality of resolution that I expect from my architecture.

In the late fifties, I began my practice in Baroda. Along with it I also taught at the Department of Architecture at the MSU. Then  my mode of transport was a humble cycle. Progress in my career was slow but steady and as time went  I learnt many things. I believe a slower but steadier rise in a career is better than ups and downs. My education from England fostered this confidence in me. Being in England, knowing the people  and their attitudes, working and living with them made me appreciate my Indianness more. Education does something and it did something to me - probably to be more Indian than most Indians

On clients

In my long practice I have found that clients are ready to pay  fees which are reasonable. Any discrepancies in the fees between you and other architects have to be explained because this breeds mistrust in the client. If some architect quotes a lesser amount,  it becomes the standard. This  way everybody loses out to unhealthy competition. The architect works more for less, and the client is not able to judge the discrepancy in the varying amounts. 

While dealing with the client, his requirements should become the basis for a design. His way of life, his behaviour etc. also become important clues and offer valuable insight into the type of a person he is. Above all, he is not totally ignorant and as architects we should try to explain and involve him in the project. This will prevent problems at the later stages and he will not say, "I did not tell you this." or "Oh, this is something different, I never expected this." It will also ensure his trust in you as an architect. If he comes back to you with another job then you are doing good work for your client. I respect my clients' aspirations. I believe Creativity does not always lie in the creation of something exotic, new and strange. Man has taken ages to change the pattern of his daily life. Then why should his form and shelter be so completely and arbitrarily changed by an architect

If clients insist on something that is not in your architectural vocabulary then you may have to leave the work. It is not necessary to take all the work that comes your way. Being selective about clients and the type of work you want to do certainly goes a long way in establishing your image as an architect.

I have found that people do understand if you talk to them nicely and convincingly. Let me give you an example. If somebody is playing music you cannot dictate the way he should play a piece because you like it that way. An architect is also equally creative and this also has to be explained to the client.

On Architecture

Architecture falls in the realm of art where it can be identified as a "useful" art. It has the element of function that the user defines. The architect's and the client's expression  should be interwoven.

Managing construction.

In India we have followed the British system. The concept of Master builder that made the Architect a completely in charge of construction, management and Design is extinct. Now the construction, purchase of materials etc. are done by different parties having little knowledge of each other's work.

Detailing

Detailing should always depend on the material you use, the climate and the purpose you want this detail to serve. In European climates, you want to keep out the cold and damp, and want more sunlight inside. So the windows will have double grooves, and minor detailing so water and cold drafts will not penetrate. The wood used is soft and treated which does not expand. So finer detailing is possible.

Because of this rich experience, they have produced books that we use in our schools and to teach students to follow these details. This process has its disadvantages because in India. Here, good seasoned wood is not available easily. You have to use secondary woods often which may expand. Then you have to check the detailing, the size of wood. In India, breezes in living spaces are more than welcome so the detailing would change. The windows instead of coming in the forefront, will be set back, and you don't have to worry about the weather. These are the problems that we  face even today, because we  blindly follow  details given to us by the West. I have always designed and developed my own details.

Materials

In my opinion, absolutely anything you want to construct and design must follow the relevant constructional technology to the material. The level of construction technology available from place to place in India differs greatly. If you are designing in a village and expect the exposed concrete of the metros, you may be disappointed.

I have always relied on locally available material. I do not mind using deformed bricks in my designs. In a farmhouse, for instance, they add to the character and act as a part of the landscape.

On designer sensibilities

What  I  believe is that a sensitive designer can  design  almost anything. He has the sensitivity and creativity in him to design,  evolve  and  create  new things provided  he  knows  the technology involved.

I  believe that the technology and the scale are the only  variables  that differ, but the sensitivity remains a constant.  Sensitivity in any person can come with the awareness and indulgence of all the five senses. I mean that a human being is highly developed and creative when all five senses are highly developed. I would  call such  a person an artist in the true sense of the word.

On Sketching

Sketching for me is an intense pleasure which brings me complete understanding of spatial relationships and their organizations. Our country abounds in its wealth of vast and beautiful complexes, and each time I sketch, it makes me richer in my understanding of the fabric of our architecture.

Master of the Useful Art

Published in the Baroda Times supplement of the Times of India on 3rd November 1998
In his late sixties, Suryakant Patel’s exposure to architecture began as a child. Being the son of an architect, Suryakant Patel took to Architecture as a profession and after starting his initial training at the J. J. School of Architecture, he left for the Leicester School of Architecture in the U.K. After returning to India, Suryakant taught at the Department of Architecture, MSU as a reader. Simultaneously he set up his practice under the name of Sthapatya Kendra. After quitting from MSU, Suryakant Patel decided to establish a School of Architecture wher principles of construction would be taught as an integral part of the design process that an architect goes through. This process would still encourage fearless experimentation and creative inquiry into the real life issues that surround an architect.


Known for a wide ranging variety of projects, Suryakant Patel’s ideas about architecture of the present day are quoted from an interview.

On his attitudes and practice

In my early days of practice, I left jobs because of certain standards I had decided to maintain in my practice. Architectural practice is like our Hindi films. If your first role is of a comedian then you are typecast for life. The first job will establish your image, which will remain with you for your life. You should have the clarity and dedication towards your work. One of the contractors told me, “I hate you architects because you know little and try to dictate terms. Practical aspects are not foremost in your mind. But I cannot help but respect you because your insistence is infectious and you manage to get things done your way. To say the least most of you are honest people”.

Today the scenario is quite different. I feel that the image of Architects is at its nadir. Unbelievably low fees and improper services rendered by some architects could be the reason. The professionalism is missing.

In the late fifties, I began my practice in Baroda. Along with it, I also taught at the Department of Architecture at the MSU. Then my mode of transport was a humble cycle. Progress in my career was slow but steady and as time passed I learnt many things. I believe a slower but steadier rise in a career is better than sharp rises and falls. My education from England fostered this confidence in me. Being in England, knowing the people, their attitudes, made me appreciate my Indianness more. My education taught me one thing - probably to be more Indian than most Indians.

On clients

In my long practice I have found that clients are ready to pay fees which are reasonable. While dealing with the client, his requirements should become the basis for a design. I respect my clients’ aspirations. I believe Creativity does not always lie in the creation of something exotic, new and strange. Man has taken ages to change the pattern of his daily life. Then why should his form and shelter be so completely and arbitrarily changed by an architect?

I have found that people do understand if you talk to them nicely and convincingly. Let me give you an example. If somebody is playing music you cannot dictate the way he should play a piece because you like it that way. An architect is also equally creative and this has to be explained to the client.

On Architecture

Architecture falls in the realm of art where it can be identified as a useful art. It has the element of function that the user defines. The architects and the client's expression should be interwoven.

Materials

In my opinion, anything you want to design must follow relevant constructional technology. The level of construction technology available from place to place in India differs greatly. If you are designing in a village and expect the exposed concrete of the metros, you may be disappointed.

I have always relied on locally available material. I do not mind using deformed bricks in my designs. In a farmhouse, for instance, they add to the character and act as a part of the landscape.

On designer sensibilities

What I believe is that a sensitive designer can design almost anything. He has the sensitivity and creativity in him to design, evolve and create new things provided he knows the technology involved. Technology and the scale are the only variables that differ, but the sensitivity remains a constant. Sensitivity in any person can come with the awareness and indulgence of all the five senses. I mean that a human being is highly developed and creative when all five senses are highly developed. I would call such a person an artist in the true sense of the word.

On Sketching

Sketching for me is an intense pleasure, which brings me complete understanding of spatial relationships and their organizations. Our country abounds in its wealth of vast and beautiful complexes, and each time I sketch, it makes me richer in my understanding of the fabric of our architecture.