Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sydney and New York: The day after tomorrow Promotional stills from the movie “The Day After Tomorrow”
This elective is about learning how we can do our bit to stop – or at least delay – our world becoming
nothing more a kitschy disaster movie. This elective is about understanding the relationships between
individuals (their attitude or expectation informed by personal and social constructs)
the built environment they inhabit (their experience or perception of it)
and the energy they consume to attain & maintain their thermal comfort (modified by
environmental design)
Outside and inside, desert and coast, routine and ceremonial - A village in Rajasthan, and a wedding reception in
Chennai (Photographs by Mansi Gupta and Arjun Vijay Kumar)
“The space within and without, the shelter within and environment,
what is within, how far, what is without, how far?
That is the question.
Here in lies the difference, between the East and the West.
In the East, within is real within,
towards the soul.
In the West, within is corporeal,
Body temperature, health, comfort, and convenience dominate.
Experiences… our perception of the spaces we inhabit. Which brings us back full circle to attitude,
experience and energy. In India there is a constant struggle between the old and the new, which I
suppose would be true for any nation going through the Throes of Development. Building types and
technologies are imported wholesale, with the resultant Manhattanization of Indian cities indifferent to
the realities of
a) designing for the Indian (read Eastern) psyche and
b) designing for comfort in a logical and scientific (read Western) way in the hot and dry (for
example Delhi) climate.
So our experiences of builtspace are changing, and perhaps not in sync with our attitude or
expectations. And why should it? I believe in Modern Architecture, while understanding its weaknesses,
but I also believe in levels of architecture where the person (and the family, and the community)
interacts with nature. One: the transition space between inside and outside, such as verandas and
courtyards, where people gather to have a cup of tea and look at passers-by. Two: the transition
between Building and “Outside”, mediated by shadow, water and trees.
Inside the Delhi Red Fort A Modernist reinterpretation of the protected perimeter
Photographs from Architecture + Design magazine
One clarification here – most of the pictures I have of India match the typical Westerner’s stereotypical image
of India: villages, ‘poor’ people, courtyards and cows. This is only one facet of life in India, one that I’d like to
highlight because our vernacular architecture has evolved over the centuries to ‘fit’ the requirements of
society and climate. Yes we have multiplexes and glassbox shopping malls (hurrah!) but as I said before,
these are Western exports to India. We are still struggling to bridge the gap between an ‘Indian’ architecture
in a globalized world. If this sounds a bit apologist I apologize. And so far as Sydney goes, I think the city
as a whole is a lot more exciting than the individual buildings that make it. In other words, the architecture is
nothing much to write home about (or journal entries for that matter) – a queer mix of English looking
suburbs and a Manhattan CBD. It’s the people and how they interact within the built environment that makes
Sydney such a great place, so I’ll talk about it when I get to Sustainability and Habitability in the City.
So, speaking as an architect, what I design should take into account optimizing building efficiency vis-à-
vis user comfort and energy expenditure (embodied in construction, & expended in maintenance and
operation). This is, of course, speaking from Doshi’s “Western” viewpoint. It should also take into
account what the people going to inhabit the building expect from it – expectations based on their
culture, environmental background, genetic inheritance and social upbringing.
For example
A European couple would have difficulty coping with a
situation like the one on the left, while a Japanese one
would rely on their powers of concentration (developed by
having been brought up in houses with paper screens as
walls) to go ahead with whatever they have to do.
Different attitudes.
(Mikellides, 1980)
Fanger's basic assumption--thermal comfort is defined in terms of the physical state of the body rather than that of
the environment i.e. what we actually sense is skin temperature and not air temperature. For thermal comfort need:
• Mean skin temperature -- should be at appropriate level for comfort. (NB Skin temperature for comfort
decreases with increased activity)
• Sweating -- comfort is a function of a preferred sweating rate, which is also a function of activity and
metabolic rate. (www.ergo.human.cornell.edu)
‘Standard’ steady-state models like the ASHRAE standards ignore realities of culture, genetic
inheritance and personal preferences/ level of activity.
We as human beings may in fact desire variations in our thermal environment. McIntyre discusses the need for
sensory and physical stimulation and makes a case for fluctuating interior temperatures to counteract thermal
boredom . . . It can be argued that achieving a steady optimum temperature is akin to finding the most
popular meal at the canteen and then serving it every day. (Kwok, 2000)
Consider these anecdotes collected by Alison G. Kwok from the Internet:
• Roasting your backside in front of a fire (dramatic radiant asymmetry)
• Opening a window to get ‘fresh air’ which is really just a blast of cold air (change a stuffy room state)
• Having a bedroom cold enough that you really want to cuddle next to your sleeping partner (the comfort of
human, or other, touch)
Comfort is subjective. Here are photographs from a trip I took to Jaipur (India) at the peak of the
desert summer. The first two are inside the Jaipur Fort: they show how the need to seek shelter from
the sun is met by design elements like jharokhas (semi-covered terraces) with jaali (sun breaks), thick
masonry walls for insulation, protected open spaces and stone chajjas (large overhangs running all
around the building parapet). Besides the climate factors, the building complex also allows for different
levels of contemplation and sociability – friends gathering in pockets off the main circulation, and moi
sitting alone, daydreaming.
So this journal entry has been about understanding how people, built environment and the natural
environment interact at a micro level – the expectations people have from their buildings and to what
extent these expectations are fulfilled.
Vernacular architecture, India Uttam C. Jain Charles Correa’s Jawahar Kala Kendra
We talk about thresholds where things transform and emerge into something else – event horizons at
planetary scales. What about considering the thresholds at the level of our houses as mediators
between public and private, inside and outside, Man and Environment? Anything I do may not have
immediate visible results on the Earth, but it sure will impact on how I live and what I expect from my
life… and maybe that’s good enough. Change begins at home. As an architect I can conscientiously
design for climate and comfort and the expectations of my client. The question that arises is this – as a
human being do I follow those same sensibilities, practising what I preach. I have the sneaking
suspicion that despite my best intentions, I do not. It’s all talk. Or, to be fair to My Self, it’s mostly talk.
Before joining UNSW I worked three years in the architectural field. In the course of this work I
explored the idea of sustainability and habitability in architecture in various projects. I don’t know if I
want to go into those in detail right now, but I will describe some images I created that sort of chart a
course – a ready reckoner of sorts.
The diagram above shows the life cycle of a building and how we as architects make decisions at
different stages.
Starting from 12 o clock, the building is at the raw material stage. At the design stage we factor in
variables of function and climatic factors like ideal and possible building orientations. As construction
commences and proceeds, energy is used to
a) transport raw material directly to site and
b) process raw materials and transport the finished product to site.
This means we have to consider things like how far the material is from the site – is the quarry nearby?
The embodied energy of the building thus increases (shown in orange), as does the environmental
impact (yellow) caused by the production, transport and assembly of materials and products. By the
time the building is operational at 4:30 p.m. the embodied energy is already quite high. Our job is to
minimise the embodied energy of construction, and of the maintenance and decomposition of the
building once it is operational.
Most importantly, throughout the life cycle all our decisions are judged against the criteria of health
and safety (in blue), and of equity. These are constants – no compromises.
Health and safety: I might save on energy by using asbestos that is readily available from a factory
near my site, but then I end up with a Sick Building. Or I could go for single glazing for all my windows
to reduce embodied energy at the construction stage, but then the building is poorly insulated and I
rely more on mechanical conditioning so my operational energy costs go up, and the users are not
comfortable.
Equity: This means an equitable distribution of wealth and knowledge across the board. From the
villagers manufacturing bricks to the CEO of the construction company, I
a) learn and teach in a give and take relationship, where we understand new or unfamiliar
technologies, systems and materials from each other, and
b) the construction costs are distributed fairly so that the labourers who actually do the hard work
while we sit in our (hopefully not air-conditioned) offices are not short-changed.
Based on these criteria, the following diagrams indicate ideas regarding different parts of the life cycle –
‘internalization of the precautionary principle and intergenerational equity’.
Solar pioneers www.solarpioneers.com The CGO complex: the rich/ poor divide Demis B
Once the building is up, the next step would be Post Occupancy Evaluation – are the users satisfied with
the building? what suggestions do they have? What’s the energy performance like? If my buildings and
designs embody these principles only then can I consider myself to be environmentally conscientious.
Otherwise it’s all talk. By monitoring myself as a person and as an architect, I can become more ‘eco-
centred. If I, and other architects, succeed in balancing expectations, costs and energy performance,
then people have more options open to them. If we don’t, then why would they? Awareness of the
possibilities is the key.
References
Baxter, A., 1980. The Wall Game. Studio Vista
Craig and Aldington, 1980. Understanding People and Developing a Brief. Studio Vista
Doshi, B.V., 1993. The Inner Threshold. Architecture + Design Magazine
Mikellides, B., 1980. Architectural Psychology and the Unavoidable Art. Studio Vista