This conversation touches upon the significance of accessible skills in contemporary Indian practices and their implications on the process of experimentation and their influence on materiality, affordability, application and relevance in the larger agenda of a design.
CRAFT
Rooshad Shroff [RS]: Personally, I feel that the ‘process’ of working with the crafts is one of significance. It begins with understanding the technique of making, the possibilities within as well as the limitations. Our curiosity lies in exploring ways in which we can challenge the material or the craft by persuading the artisan to go beyond that which they know, allowing us to create objects of interest. Our practice is quite diverse in its offering- from architecture & interiors to furniture & product design.
Khushru Irani [KI]: As a practice, we engage more with construction skills than with craft per se. However, when we do engage with craft it stems from a personal connection with the craftsman, a form of professional friendship that is built over time through mutual respect and trust. Crafted products create a kind of intimacy and immediacy that is increasingly difficult to find. Working with craft has its set of issues, and patience, flexible timelines, the uneven nature of natural materials and the care needed in handling a crafted product. Yet when that understanding and willingness to adapt exists, craftsmen are not only supported but are allowed to weave their magic into our lives.
Lijo Reni [LR]: In our experience as a practice, we have had some very successful engagements with craftsmen on projects. They have been rewarding as a learning. However, there have been instances where we have encountered difficulties especially while working with specially-skilled labour or dealing with specific crafts owing to the exclusivity attached to the nature of work or lack of available labour with the same skill-sets. There are instances where a lack of interest to imbibe new ideas has persuaded us to choose alternative methods of execution. We feel it is very important to have the right attitude while collaborating in order to sustain a craft or skill.
CONTEXT
RS: I think the focus on tradition is more to do with understanding the technique of making. However, within projects, our core focus is to make allowance for bespoke finishes and materials that best represent the requirement of the client. This allows us to closely engage with their technique while the artwork is still customised with respect to the branding/proposed identity.
Context for me is not always restricted to immediate surroundings or the geography of a place. It has much to do with the understanding of a given brief and then arriving at feasible solutions that are in cohesion with the nature of a project.
KI: Context is the thread that ties our design process together. From knowing the client and jointly developing the building programme, to working with the challenges of a particular building type- all of these form part of the context of a project. Aspects of context that I have been preoccupied with and try to find answers for, are the search for an appropriate way to build within the specificities of people, project and place. Economic considerations always play a role in selection of materials irrespective of context.
LR: As a practice, we do not believe in using traditional or local skills for the sake of novelty or to simply anchor a project visually into a ‘context’. We continue to prefer using locally available materials and labour wherever possible. The decision to ‘go local’ demands a different set of workers and materials that are location specific. The success of this is determined by the required time to try, test and adapt the available material and labour to suit a specific design.
MATERIALITY
RS: Often with furniture and product design, the material becomes the starting point and the design is the culmination in the process of making. To give you an example, we have designed a C- Chair where the form is essentially a cantilevered structure with two legs. It is not very common to associate wood as a material for cantilevers. The chair was an experiment to create a form that pushed the boundaries of the material structurally.
KI: Materials are increasingly being imbued with meaning beyond their primary functional purpose and their usage often has the tendency to create myths. Myths about design, and about the people behind them: the client and the designer. So much can be said, implied and inferenced by the use of a particular set of materials that their ability to tell stories can be easily abused. While there is an ever-widening array of materials and building products, we find ourselves consciously working with a smaller set of materials which enable a certain degree of integrity and simplicity.
The materiality of a project is so intertwined with the act of building and the stories they tell, that their selection and usage become an integral part of our design process.
LR: Designs evolve in many ways. We do not start any project with a certain material or methodology in mind because each one sets its own trajectory. There have been instances where we require a specific material or skilled labour due to nature of the design. Assessing core characteristics of materials such as strength, durability and aesthetics with respect to context is important for us. Materiality for us is never a predetermined factor, but instead it arises from the specific need or situation.
CONTEMPORARY VS. TRADITIONAL DESIGN
RS: When one is working with an artisan, there is an engagement with the know-how of the craft which has been cultivated through the tradition of transfer of knowledge from one generation to the next. Thus, the ‘tradition’ is embedded in the know-how of the craft, and not in the object being created. The techniques of making, the application of those skills is what is important. What makes it contemporary is an ‘evolved design’ and the translation of those skill sets to produce an object that is relevant in today’s context.
KI: We look at tradition from the perspective of particular challenges and the solutions they provided, rather than as purely visual, stylistic or historical references. Undoubtedly, some traditional techniques and solutions are relevant today, but it is when we are able to contextualise their essence as solutions to a problem that we are best able to reinterpret, adapt and appropriately use them. For me the word ‘contemporary’ evokes a heightened sense of urgency and responsibility. As building professionals, considering the lifecycle of buildings, our work creates not only the present but also the future. With the present full of innumerable challenges, the current practice demands a much higher level of responsibility, and raises an increasing number of ethical and social dilemmas.
LR: Traditional concepts were once contemporary ideas. The concepts that we term as ‘traditional’ today must have risen due to the need of its time governed by several factors. In our practice, we try to address those concepts of tradition to suit our present needs. They could be called ‘contemporary’ but in many cases, it is actually a process of adaptation. The critical learning for us is in understanding the functionality embedded in a tradition, and its relevance.
I think it is imperative to analyse these value systems of the past from an objective viewpoint in order to be able to reinterpret and apply it to a specific project.
COLLABORATION
RS: A collaboration is a union of minds that brings together a new perspective. Every collaboration is a unique form of exploration. They are a great way to push ourselves beyond the comfort zone and innovate.
KI: Collaborating with like-minded practices is something that we have been open to but have so far been unable to make happen. What I have been more successful in doing is working with individuals in allied fields on research, documentation and student mentoring.
LR: As a practice, since we largely resolve most of the design on the drawing table, the primary collaboration is between the two of us. Once we agree upon a direction we initiate a conversation with a fabricator, craftsperson, etc. We enjoy resolving ideas ourselves before involving other people. The only collaboration that happens beyond the studio is with fabricators or carpenters or other skilled labour, where we bank on their experience with the material for the finishes we have in mind⊗
ROOSHAD SHROFF is a multi-disciplinary design and research studio. Founded in June 2011 in Mumbai by Rooshad Shroff, the architectural practice is predominantly dedicated to the realization of spaces soon developed its own design department. He received his undergraduate degree in Architecture at Cornell University where he was awarded the Edward Palmer York Memorial Prize for Outstanding performance in Design. On completing his Masters in Architecture at the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University, his work produced at the GSD has been exhibited at the 2010 Venice Architecture Biennial as well as the 2010 Shanghai Expo
KHUSHRU IRANI is an architect and urban designer whose professional experience spans projects varying in scale, type and cultural context. He was associated with Christopher C. Benninger Architects from 1997 to 1999 and 2006 to 2008, working on various institutional buildings and campus master plans. He studied architecture at the University of Pune and at TU Delft, and Urban Design at the University of California, Berkeley. In January 2009 he founded Khushru Irani Design Studio, focusing on architecture, campus planning and urban design.
LIJO.RENY.ARCHITECTS takes inspiration from art while designing spaces. It is their love for art that keeps them inspired and charged to introduce interesting contemporary sensibilities in the architecture they practice. The several important awards, including the ‘All India Stone Architectural Awards’, JK State Young Architect of the Year Award’ and several IIA State awards to their credit are recognition to their relentless efforts in the field.
