19th20th Century Bungalows

IMG_20180316_163205:
Mumbai Carpenter Gothic details can be seen in many cities across India even though they
were not as popular as in Bengaluru. A specific type developed in Mumbai where the front
verandah became an informal socializing area. The Dean's bungalow located on the campus of
the Sir J.J. School of Architecture is an early example (see Figure 5.9a). It was built in what could
be called the Mumbai vernacular version of Carpenter Gothic, popular at the time in the city.
The building was built almost entirely of timber and displayed the high level of craftsmanship
available at the time.
Carpenter Gothic was an architecture of a romantic era, rich in detail and intricate in
workmanship. Art Deco architecture was a move towards a simpler, modern design idiom.
IMG_20180316_162720:
Buildings as a vehicle for self-expression provide for the creative acts of designers. Here one is
referring to the need to create for its own sake. The need is manifested more clearly in arts
such as poetry, music, painting and sculpture where, nowadays, there is seldom a specific client
whose requirements have to be met. Sometimes buildings function in the same way, but
usually architects are striving to fulfil their own basic needs for professional survival and for
self-esteem. The bungalow is less constrained than many other building types in providing
opportunities for householders and architects to get their own 'jollies' — pleasure.
IMG_20180316_162709:
What one generally regards as the symbolic aesthetic function of architecture is
important in meeting, affiliation and esteem needs. The architectural environment, however,
provides for two other sets of aesthetic functions. It represents something to contemplate for
its own sake and it can be a vehicle for sell-expression. Whatever their level of motivations,
people sometimes pause to contemplate the environment around them, to enjoy it or not for
the sake of the contemplation. Some societies around the world, such as the Japanese, claim
this behavior to be a hallmark of their cultures.
In looking at buildings as objects, in particular, there is the related cognitive need of, at
least, the educated elite to understand the aesthetic theories of architects. George Santayana
(1806) referred to this activity as the intellectual aesthetic function of works of art. Intellectual
aesthetics involves dealing with aesthetic phenomena as moral and aesthetic evaluations. To
many architects, particularly those who think of architecture as a pure fine art, this function
distinguishes buildings that are architecture from mere buildings.

IMG_20180316_162625:
Belonging to an ethnic group or to a status group was reflected in outward appearance of
buildings - the face they presented to the world. Traditional houses had aspects of the facades
– from the color to the level and location of decoration - that were statements of group
identity. The bungalow itself was a signifier of group identity. In the twentieth century the
bungalow became a mark of individuality for Indian families; the pronounced entrance gate
symbolized entry to an individualized world. It also symbolized a changing world.

By the end of the nineteenth century the bungalow had already been through several changes
in facade treatment in order for its inhabitants to be seen to be architecturally up-to-date.
Bungalows earlier in the century had switched to long, low classical lines and details. When the
Gothic Revival made its appearance in the 1880s, bungalows began to have pitched roofs again
and richly carpentered details including such decorative features as the monkey tops of
Bengaluru (Pott 1977, Staley 1981, lengar 1987, Issar 1988). Their meanings differed for British
and Indian nationalists. For the former it meant being modern with reference to 'home'; for the
latter they were a symbol of domination.

The need to be perceived as belonging to the elite shaped the external face of the palaces of
the princes and the mansions of the great families of Kolkata but the internal layout reflected
the nature of the joint family and Hindu traditions. The furnishing and decorations that they
chose often represented their desire to be seen as modern and of high status if not to be
comfortable. Many of these displays were highly idiosyncratic. The bungalow afforded Indians
the opportunity for such individualistic displays while the traditional houses tended to restrict
it.

IMG_20180316_162619:

All individuals need to have distinct identities although the degree varies considerably from
person to person and from culture to culture. One's own identity is wrapped up in that of the
groups to which one belongs. Affiliation needs are met by knowing that one is a member of a
group and a social and moral order. These groups are diverse and are based on such common
characteristics as kinship, locality and common interests. The cost incurred by a society if these
needs are not met is often high because it can result in people feeling isolated and alienated.
They may withdraw from society and/or engage in anti-social behavior.

In the bungalow, the size of plot, the nature of the walls and gate posts, the portico and the
verandah as well as the size of house were indicators of the status of its inhabitants. What the
bungalow afforded, perhaps more easily than the traditional house, was the display of
individuality. Sitting in a compound, the bungalow also enabled a display of status through the

IMG_20180316_162509:

In the cities of north India (such as Delhi and Jaipur) British families who had resided in the
traditional city had moved to the Civil Lines by 1900. The trend began on a large scale after the
1857 War of Independence. The families became segregated from the indigenous life of the old
city and their lives became more anglicized. When the British families lived in Shahjahanabad,
the sahibs often adopted local manners and the memsahibs shopped in local stores and strolled
through Chandni Chowk in the evenings. After 1857, the British withdrew into their own circles.
Entertainment focused on the home and visits to the club for meals, card playing and other
recreational, including sporting, activities.

The Civil Lines was a European city in India made possible by large numbers of lowly paid Indian
servants and the dominant position of the British. The Civil Lines were generally laid out in a
grid iron plan in contrast to the plans that had evolved over time in the old city. The bungalows
were the standard type. They were, with their gardens, set in walled compounds. The
compound contained the bungalow proper and behind it the servants' quarters and kitchen,
the stables and carriage and harness rooms. Generally, there was also a well for water supply.
The lowly-paid servants — the khansama, the masalchi, the dhobi and sweeper — were
accommodated in the servants' quarters. Entrances in the wall would be flanked by gateposts
that acted as symbols of status. There would be two entrances, a major one and the other
minor, that would be used by servants. The compound might have contained a trellis for
climbing plants, such as bougainvillea, a rose garden, fernery, marble basin and fountains and,
by the beginning of the twentieth century, a tennis and/or badminton court (Davies 1985).

As in the generic type, the bungalows had verandahs in the front and rear. Bathrooms were
located at the two ends of the rear verandah with the living rooms in between. The front
verandah had dressing rooms on the sides and the living room would open off its centre. One of
the rooms was used as a hall where parties were held. Only minor variations from this general
statement occurred. Over time ways of life changed but for the British in India it remained
remarkably the same until World War Il changed just about

IMG_20180316_162513:

Everything. Independence in 1947 saw an end in one sense to British colonial life but much of it
was taken as its own by the modernizing middle-class Indian society.

IMG_20180316_162442:

After 1900 along with the gradual changes in the form of the roofs, the verandah was retained
only in the front and the back. As these new types differed considerably from the traditional
kutcha bungalow, the term 'bungalow' started to lose its original meaning and was applied to
almost any flat-roofed, single-storey building within a compound. Indeed in India it began to
mean any type of freestanding house inhabited by Europeans and later, in the twentieth
century, by Indians.

The bungalow with its Doric, and later, Tuscan ordered columns on the facade holding up the
roof became a symbol to Indians of the commercial and the military might of Britain although it
was often dismissed as inferior and 'colonial' in Britain. The bungalows were never, however,
entirely European in character. The laborers and contractors building them were Indians.
Indeed many of the bungalows rented to British military personnel and civilian families were
owned by Indian landlords. The physical fabric of the bungalow thus remained rooted in Indian
architectural traditions in spite of changes in materials, technology and construction practices
(Glover 2004). Over time the bungalow underwent alterations particularly in the denser parts of
cities.

The bungalows sites were encroached on and verandahs enclosed to achieve privacy. The
building originally had a porch, main hall, verandahs and rooms. By 1914, the verandah had
been enclosed, the rooms subdivided with the hall now being a parlor and a sitting room and
more bed- and bathrooms. Shops were added to the periphery of the compound.

IMG_20180316_162434:

While more elaborate bungalows had emerged on the scene in the nineteenth century to
indicate the superior social position of their owners, the Tikapore bungalow built in 1906 was
by no means atypical. It showed the continuity of the type being similar to the bungalows of
half a century earlier. It had a front verandah, central hall with bedrooms, bathrooms and
dressing rooms on each side and a dining area behind with the kitchen at the back. The central
room had a fireplace as much as a symbol of home as for heating during the brief Bengal
winter. The bathrooms had external doors for the sweepers' access.

As time went by the departure from the hipped roof type with its heavy timber beams and
rafters, allowed the plan form to be freer and enabled designers, primarily military engineers,
to develop classical layouts akin to those in Europe. The hipped roof did not entirely disappear
but the overwhelming proportions of the roofs of the early bungalow types gave way to flat-
roofed or lower pitched varieties.

IMG_20180316_162427:

By the end of the nineteenth century, a permanent form of bungalow was used by British
military personnel, civil servants and business people to recreate a familiar order in what was
for them an impersonal alien land. The standard hipped roof form gave way to an articulated
form affording clerestory windows and ventilators in the upper walls. The basic model also took
on a more European classical form in its outward appearance. The huge hipped roofs were
often replaced by flat roofs and classical columned verandahs. When flat, the roof was extra
thick, measuring up to 15 inches (about 38 centimeters), and was made of brick-bat lime
concrete. This thickness was in response to the heat absorbed during the summer days. These
flat roofed bungalows (even where they were climatically unsuitable) thus had long, low
classical lines and details rather like the model that Kipling suggested was typical of PWD
architecture in 1884. This form

IMG_20180316_162312:
By the nineteenth century, the Anglo-Indian bungalow had walls of whitewashed sun-dried
bricks. The room form did not follow the Bengali bangaldar antecedent but was pyramidal or
hipped-gabled.

IMG_20180316_162301:

At the beginning of the twentieth century the major European inhabited areas of major Indian
cities were located in the cantonment and Civil Lines. The cantonments were strictly military
with their magazines, parade grounds and housing for troops and their families, while the Civil
Lines were for European, predominantly British, and civilians. Both areas were spacious, with
much open space between the buildings. The main architects of both the cantonment and the
Civil Lines were men of military training and thinking. The cantonments and Civil Lines were not,
however, the only European areas in cities.

Separateness and individualism were the themes of the British, expressing the political and
social divide between the rulers and ruled. The bungalow was its manifestation in built form.
Opposed to a densely-packed traditional Indian house, the bungalow was built inside a plotted
land area where the site was clearly defined.

IMG_20180316_162254:

Areas of single family detached houses, each with its servants' quarters and kitchen in a
separate block behind it all set within a compound were not typical of India at the beginning of
the twentieth century. The detached home in its own compound was a feature of some places
such as in Bengal, the settlements of the north eastern states and of the Kerala rural home, but
these houses were really homesteads and never agglomerated into villages. The detached form
did, however, exist in low-income areas but these were mixed use areas rather than single use
areas of the British settlements in India. Many of the new areas that we see today in Indian
cities are a product of government town planning requirements instituted during the twentieth
century. They are also a product of market forces that reflect the aspirations of many of the
Indian middle-class.

IMG_20180316_162243:

The affluence of the Chettiars was reflected in the ornamentation and grandeur of their
residences and the use of expensive materials, craftsmanship and finishes. Bulbous teak
columns resting on a polished granite floor were the hallmark of the semi-covered areas.
Expensive and intricate Athangudi and Belgian tiles and Italian marble were used lavishly in the
thinnai. Wood was the primary structural material, being used excessively as heavy beams,
columns and carved brackets.

The entrance door was given special importance, being richly carved with religious icons and set
on a carved granite plinth. Brick walls were recessed to form storage niches. The flooring in
ancillary areas such as the kitchen was of red oxide, being similar to the 'Madras floor' while the
roof used country tiles. As colonial influences percolated in, ornamentation on ceilings, colorful
relief work on walls and elaborate wooden furniture began to characterize the interior spaces
of the house in an almost European neo-classical manner. Molded cement plaster balustrades,
lime plaster arches and frieze moldings dominated. In the 1930s, an addition called a
'bungalow' was often added to the main house as the family expanded.

IMG_20180316_162157:

In 1900 an extraordinary range of house types existed in India. Some (for example, the bahajs
and dunga boat dwellings of the poor in Kashmir) were not houses in the conventional sense (K.
Shah 1972). In the rural areas, the detached house was the most prevalent type while in the
urban areas the predominant form was the shared-wall house except in certain hot-humid
geographical zones. Numerous examples of row houses, nevertheless, existed in both rural and
urban areas. In 1900, all these houses had characteristics that were clear responses to the
Inter-relationships among local climatic, material availability and cultural conditions.

IMG_20180316_162140:

Although much housing development, particularly in rural areas was untouched by the colonial
experience, throughout the twentieth century the intertwining of indigenous histories and the
British influence, for better or worse, affected much of the social and institutional structure of
India. The impact included attitudes towards housing design and settlement patterns of which
the bungalow as a desirable house type was the most obvious. In cities, indigenous ideas about
neighborhoods and houses often became mixed with those of the colonial power. The attitudes
of colonial officials were, in turn, much molded by indigenous values and norms of behavior.
While architects designed only a miniscule part of the total housing production of India, their
ideas had a significant impact on the work of local contractor-builders, the mistris.

IMG_20180316_162125:

The bungalow was originally a dwelling conforming more to a colonial 'Indo- European' than the
traditional Indian model. In India, and in Southeast Asia, 'bungalow' implies a freestanding, ex-
urban dwelling. In the nineteenth century it was usually considered to be of one storey.
Increasingly in India in the twentieth century, houses of two or more storeys were still
considered to be bungalows. The bungalow form was adopted and adapted by the indigenous
populations in India to suit their needs and taken by British business people and officials to
other parts of the world. The word bungalow is, however, now used to describe a variety' of
residential building types both in India and elsewhere in the world.

The bungalow in the second half of the twentieth century in India meant an 'independent or an
isolated dwelling unit'. Examples of bungalows in their historic context are shown in Figure 1.2.
All the houses shown in the figure are known in India as bungalows except by the most
pedantic. The defining meaning of bungalow was and is a dwelling built within a plot of land
that is clearly defined by boundaries. As such it stands in strong contrast to the densely-packed
urban houses of traditional Indian cities.

IMG_20180316_162120:

Bungalows are the buildings in India, generally raised from the ground, and consist only of one
storey: the plan of them usually is a large room in the centre for an eating and sitting room and
the rooms at the corner for sleeping; the whole is covered with one general thatch, which
comes down low to one side; the spaces between the angle rooms are viranders or open
portices ... sometimes the center viranders at each end are converted to rooms.

IMG_20180316_162051:

A broad range of studies have been conducted on housing types in India. That is not surprising
because there is an extraordinary variety and complexity to the housing stock in the country.

Analyze how one type- the bungalow – has shaped and been shaped to meet the needs and
aspirations of middle class people. Indeed the very label “bungalow” is now applied in India to a
variety of single family homes that hardly resemble what is generally understood to be a
bungalow in the outside world. The objective here is to describe the assortment of house forms
and their regional variants that were derived from the bungalow as a much favored house type
for those who could afford it.