SOAK-Mumbai in an Estuary is the title of an ongoing exhibition of maps, drawings and sounds pertaining to the Mithi "river" in Mumbai.
Conceived and Curated by landscape architects Anuradha Mathur and Dilip Da Cunha, from U Penn, the exhibition comprehensively showcases the form and formlessness of the Mithi.An array of maps (about 70 odd in number)discuss European Colonial perception of the Western India coastline, the profiles of the Mithi and the genesis of its current day form.
It's premise is very interesting in that the authors say that Mumbai is a city in an estuary rather than the other way around. The issues of flooding, therefore, seem to be a way of life for the natural landscape- a fact obscured by continuation of the manners and methods of the English. The authors say that Colonial Urbanization in Bombay has looked at the edge between land and water as a solid line/permanent datum during dry spells, when in reality it is an ever-changing one, especially during monsoons and as a cycle over decades.
So, Salsette Island is where the action this time around is at. An area regarded to be beyond civilization by the English and perhaps classified as wilderness.
The revelations from self-reading of the maps were many and include:
1- Trombay, Madh, Erangal, Aksa etc were isolated islands
2- Khar Danda was actually a "danda"
3- Most parts of the city whose existence we take for granted are actually built over mangroves, marshes or tidal flats.
4- All the 'creeks' we see today as nallahs were actually formless just like the Mithi.
5- Kanheri is finally accorded its much lost-out status as possibly the oldest settlement in the city along with the fishing villages that dotted habitable coastal fringes.Something that Conservation Architects have been at great pains to communicate.
What is apriori great about an exhibition like this is that it moves away from the history of Bombay being the history of the Fort Area, Nariman Point and Mahalaxmi. It is a welcome change and an eyeopener for all the 'bricks-in-the-wall' kind of awareness of Bombay/Mumbai's Urban Histories.
However, in comparison to what the authors eventually end up saying, I felt the design proposals of SOAK did not break new ground, when scrutinized beyond the glitz. The architecture colleges in Mumbai have atleast 3 theses which have said the same things- Conserve the forts, open them out for cultural and social use and clan up the river. Not to mention the various private consultants who have at some time or the other worked on the river's "beautification".
The Mithi as a series of floating /anchored wetlands is perhaps a bit different line of thought like those seen in the Netherlands and the US making it a living landscape unit.
Conceived and Curated by landscape architects Anuradha Mathur and Dilip Da Cunha, from U Penn, the exhibition comprehensively showcases the form and formlessness of the Mithi.An array of maps (about 70 odd in number)discuss European Colonial perception of the Western India coastline, the profiles of the Mithi and the genesis of its current day form.
It's premise is very interesting in that the authors say that Mumbai is a city in an estuary rather than the other way around. The issues of flooding, therefore, seem to be a way of life for the natural landscape- a fact obscured by continuation of the manners and methods of the English. The authors say that Colonial Urbanization in Bombay has looked at the edge between land and water as a solid line/permanent datum during dry spells, when in reality it is an ever-changing one, especially during monsoons and as a cycle over decades.
So, Salsette Island is where the action this time around is at. An area regarded to be beyond civilization by the English and perhaps classified as wilderness.
The revelations from self-reading of the maps were many and include:
1- Trombay, Madh, Erangal, Aksa etc were isolated islands
2- Khar Danda was actually a "danda"
3- Most parts of the city whose existence we take for granted are actually built over mangroves, marshes or tidal flats.
4- All the 'creeks' we see today as nallahs were actually formless just like the Mithi.
5- Kanheri is finally accorded its much lost-out status as possibly the oldest settlement in the city along with the fishing villages that dotted habitable coastal fringes.Something that Conservation Architects have been at great pains to communicate.
What is apriori great about an exhibition like this is that it moves away from the history of Bombay being the history of the Fort Area, Nariman Point and Mahalaxmi. It is a welcome change and an eyeopener for all the 'bricks-in-the-wall' kind of awareness of Bombay/Mumbai's Urban Histories.
However, in comparison to what the authors eventually end up saying, I felt the design proposals of SOAK did not break new ground, when scrutinized beyond the glitz. The architecture colleges in Mumbai have atleast 3 theses which have said the same things- Conserve the forts, open them out for cultural and social use and clan up the river. Not to mention the various private consultants who have at some time or the other worked on the river's "beautification".
The Mithi as a series of floating /anchored wetlands is perhaps a bit different line of thought like those seen in the Netherlands and the US making it a living landscape unit.
While the jazzed up presentation made the proposals look more complicated than what they were speaking, the repeated recurrence of the city's topographical sections as a leitmotif seemed more like an overkill. Rather than a leitmotif the sections could have been used to hinge arguments more effectively rather than ending up as a cake cut in many ways, too many times. The acrylic installation showing the section through the city's landmass from Colaba to Ghodbunder road was a nice thing to have. It could have been more interactive since it was the only place in the entire exhibition where the slices/sections were "touchable".I wonder how many people saw it from "below" i.e. crouching on their knees. It is quite a revelation.
Perhaps my critique of SOAK stems from its superb scholarship showcased by the authors alongwith a nifty eponymous publication. When something pedagogic and a sort of "art/design" is mounted on such a scale, and someone chooses to focus on the joints and transitions, there are bound to be untrimmed seams. It would not be wrong to say that the work of Anuradha Mathur and Dilip Da Cunha on the Mithi is a landmark event.
Furthermore, hopefully people will realise that landscape architects are best equipped and geared towards a dovetailing of the issues of geomorphology, history, culture, urban planning,urban design, infrastructure and environmental issues- because they see the land as a living system. This change in perception has not happened till date perhaps due to insecurity of the architect and the self relegated niche of plantsmanship and beautification that the profession of landscape architecture has largely been identified with.
What is also surprising is that the Panel Discussion chose to focus on the non-readability of the drawings, and whether an exhibition like this is deemed "appropriate" for a venue like NGMA Mumbai. My answer is this...
People stay apparently transfixed onto paintings which do not have more than a brushstroke on them. The panels at SOAK demanded that the reader/viewer observe them more closely and take some trouble of adding up two and two. In an age of spoonfed dumbed down gyan, expecting the audience to take the trouble to understand stuff is a risk that Anuradha and Dilip have taken. Common people can be excused. Not all art/science is easily understood by the common man. But it is symptomatic of a virus called "make it easy or we aren't interested" attitude when students of architecture say they can't read such panels. Especially stduents of KRVIA, where the Manhattan Transcripts are a sort of Bible.
The SOAK exhibition should be seen by the current 3rd Semester batch of KRVIA PG who did a studio project on the Mithi, without acknowledging its flooding and its genesis. It is another debate and a hornet's nest if I spell out who should know this before instructing the students... and not take offence at a landscape architect pointing out this anomaly in a random studio.
Urban Design is not just about stances, theories and power-plays. But it will always be about the land on which the city will come alive and the people who will live on it to curse the Urban designer if their spaces are a muck.
No comments:
Post a Comment