Rahul Mehrotra is principal founder of RMA Architects, and professor of Urban Design and Planning at the Graduate School of Design, Harvard University. His practice, in Mumbai and Boston, works on conservation, new buildings, social development projects, as well as international exhibitions such as the Venice Biennale. Mehrotra’s latest book, Working in Mumbai , reflects on his praxis of the past three decades through the lens and context of Mumbai. Excerpts from a conversation:
Why is conservation important in a country where we are happy to demolish built history?
Conservation is a planning tool that allows society to modulate the rate of change. If change is not modulated, the impact can range from effects on built environments to the loss of memory and identity. Identity formation is an evolutionary process and architecture and its modulations must be in sync with the rate at which every generation makes that change or shifts in its own identity construction as a society. It’s unfortunate that this process of conservation has now become a silo in itself. Our work has really focused on re-making this connection. We are asking how this impulse to conserve can be embedded in the broader planning process.
You use the phrase ‘impatient capital’ in your book. How is this playing out in Indian cities?
Capital is intrinsically impatient, as it must continuously realise and expand its own value. Most often, it’s self-referential and not invested in the locality it lands on to realise its worth. Cities that privilege this process and make this process frictionless become attractive for capital. There seems to be a neurosis today among governments to facilitate this as the silver bullet for all the wicked problems that plague our cities. The result is massive disruptions, destruction of the existing social and physical fabric, as well as displacement. Finally, impatient capital creates brittle architecture and urban form — totally unsustainable. Classic examples of this are: GIFT City in Gujarat, Gurugram in Haryana, and the many financial centres realised in the image of world-class cites that our politicians fantasise about. Dreams for them, nightmares for us.
Is writing and publishing books a form of long-term advocacy?
I call them instruments of advocacy. I realised early on that I was not leveraging my skills adequately, and there were many more people capable of engaging with advocacy in more savvy ways. I felt that building an archive or a shelf of these instruments of advocacy could be deployed to make their cases stronger when working on policy issues related to the built environment — this is what led to the books. Also, to document projects. I am interested in the idea of an archive on a city. I think this also becomes something that can be passed down generations.
- Executive Director (1994-2004) of the Urban Design Research Institute
- Taught at the School of Architecture and Urban Planning, MIT
- Based on his co-authored study, ‘Conserving an Image Center — The Fort Precinct in Bombay’, the historic Fort area in Mumbai was declared a conservation precinct in 1995
- Wrote ‘Architecture in India – Since 1990’ in 2011
‘Ephemeral urbanism’ as something architects should rethink about in their work. Can you elaborate?
I have been interested in how we bring the notion of time into our imagination of the built environment. This led to the question: as architects, are we often making permanent solutions for temporary problems? And what are the consequences of these decisions? Thus, to engage in this discussion, the exploration of ephemeral landscapes opens a potential space for questioning the idea of permanence as a univocal solution to various urban conditions. One could instead argue that the future of cities depends less on the rearrangement of buildings and infrastructure, and more on our ability to openly imagine more malleable technological, material, social, and economic landscapes. Then the question becomes — how can we imagine an urbanism that recognises and more deftly handles the temporary and elastic nature of contemporary and emerging built environments? I think this will help us re-imagine how we occupy this planet!
How do you address architecture of indulgence versus affordable housing in your work?
By trying to make a balance and creating cross subsidies whereby we can also contribute towards projects where society is more broadly benefited. Otherwise, our work is meaningless if it’s for the 1% and to respond to the impulse of their indulgences. Housing is an area that architects have to urgently re-engage with, as this is the fundamental building block of cities and settlements. If you think about it, 80% or more of any city’s fabric is housing. And yet, we simply leave that to market forces?
How important is collaboration to you?
Extremely critical. It is important as the complexity within projects expands. But more importantly, a sense of joint ownership as well as co-production of ideas is crucial for anything to sustain. The necessity of this approach goes beyond architecture, and is it not how we should lead our lives too?
Social empathy seems like a motif in most of your projects. How do you do it?
By very critically identifying what the client means and the dimensions of that entity. Often, the client is many entities, but we tend to focus only on the ones paying the bills. This limits our imaginations as well as ambitions. For every project, besides the immediate actors, we should also look at the neighbourhood, city, hinterlands, and, perhaps, also the planet as our client, and ask how every act or decision impacts that entire spectrum. Of course, maybe I am being fastidious, but I think it’s worth thinking about how we can be more expansive in how we discern our impact as well as define our responsibility.
What larger role do exhibitions play according to you?
Exhibitions become a wonderful platform to communicate ideas using a spectrum of media. You learn from this process, as it also becomes about reflection — both of what one does as an individual architect and the context we work in. Exhibitions also expand our constituencies, as they have the ability to engage a much broader spectrum of society than, for instance, something in an architecture magazine. The most recent exhibition of mine is an installation in the Venice Biennale. It’s called ‘Becoming Urban’ and is about India’s urbanisation trajectory.
What are some challenges of teaching and practice? Any dichotomies? How do you engage with students who challenge your notions?
I see no dichotomy. They are both forms of practice. The gift of teaching is that you get feedback in real time from another generation. This gives you a good sense of the relevance of your ideas. I think I most often learn more from my students than I can offer them as a teacher.
The interviewer is cultural activist, philanthropist, businessman, and founder of Prakriti Foundation.
