Studio Mentors: Rupali Gupte, Dushyant Asher, Dipti Bhandarkar
-Gargi Somani, Prarthna Shah
The studio takes up one contemporary institutional programme that has emerged historically over the years and traces its genealogy. It traces different spatial configurations that have developed across history under the same programme through case studies. On the basis of these, relationships are speculated between societal structures, institutional programme and spatial configurations. For this studio, it takes up the provocative question of What is a market?
In the first 2 weeks of the studio, 22 markets across the world and across different timelines were studied in pairs. Markets dating from BCE to diverse current forms of markets. The case studies were analysed through three operatives – Infrastructural datum, Transactional datum and Transitional datum. The process started by constructing architectural drawings – Plans, sections and isometric drawings of the market from the available archival material like photographs, studies, videos, texts, etc. These drawings helped us understand spatial configuration of spaces and how activities of people have shaped spaces over time. It was inferred that a market was a collective hub of services and systems, and not a mere space for buying or selling commodities. It was interesting to see how markets have changed and evolved and then traced back in the genealogy. Drawing diagrams of the various operatives also helped understand how mobility was facilitated in these spaces.
This study was put in motion with the help of a swatch of Borivali Market, in Mumbai, stretching from Dattani Trade Centre to Moksh Plaza. In this stretch, five different major marketscapes, with varied typologies could be observed, which were assigned as the sites for intervention — Dattani Trade Center, BMC Market, Goyal Shopping Center, Indraprastha Shopping Centre, Moksh Plaza.
The main intent of the course was to question the existing typology of the market program and from the understandings of the case studies of various timelines, generate a new type pertaining to the given site and its needs. This rethinking of the market was initiated by observations and then questioning the existing site conditions through diagrams. Problems and opportunities diagrams expressing the three main operatives (as mentioned earlier) were generated. Collectively, the major common drawbacks observed in each market was they had ill natural light and ventilation systems, lacked open spaces and were not very porous towards the city.
This further led each one of us to form their design ideas and arguments. New design diagrams catering the ideas and needs of each project were made. These diagrams focused on establishing the overall form of the structure and gave a schematic understanding of the space. The speculation diagrams were made to understand the emerging shop type, people, and how the building would respond to the surroundings, etc. These were strategies implemented to help maximize the transactional capacities related to livelihood, relationships, safety, security. The material phenomenologies and their spatial experiences, building systems were also discussed during sessions.
A major challenge in designing the spaces was to make sure the existing built-up area was covered along with upcoming programme spaces, and how do we increase the transactional capacities in the space. Drawings were used as a tool to show the ideas of porosity, transactions, spatial arrangement of goods, mobility of people, etc.
This meticulous process of developing diagrams made us learn how to decipher a building through its diagrams. Who are the different stakeholders, in the context of a market, what are the different systems present and their interdependencies.
Comentários