I don't think the discussion "voluminous", the language, maybe...
Do you really want to take this on?
Not clear on what you mean here - need more specific info.
Structure new course curricula, with great specialization and a fast
rate-of-change (somewhat like the computer industry, what you teach is
almost already obsolete). so i am proposing courses in Education (rides on
social sciences) and Informatics (ride on IT, computer sciences, cognitive
sciences, biotech and social sciences); in other words, hitch our academic
horses on fast disciplines and get _speed_. at the same time, leave aside
the well-established issues in architecture by framing academics so (was
speaking to a planner the other day, she contends the boundary between
architecture and planning; and just _wouldn't_ grasp trans-urbanisms,
non-standard design protocols, architecture as human-technology
more later, got to consult lawyers. institutions, briefly, recognition
abroad where the HRD Min. has bilateral agreements; university courses...
I am arguing the "alternative spaces" already exist .....
one just needs to occupy them and then wait for challenges
from the institutional stakeholders (who tend to negatively defend their
I agree - what specific suggestions do you have here.
... see below ...
I find that very few practicing
architects are willing to take such a view, and cling firmly to the view
that vocationalising education is the 'practical' thing to do.
... and ...
I feel that a greater opportunity is to create alternative
spaces for students - particularly those who are in the first half of the
programme (as those in fourth and final year often begin to acquire the
blinkers of convention).
Show there is considerable infrastructure for teaching architecture as a
vocation (call it building-styling) in India, but not architecture _per se_.
seperate Architecture from Building-Styling, show that the present
architecture curricula deal with building styling; which is a profession at
par with product design, interior decoration, hand-painting, housing,
planning, home science etc., and at the same time; show that Architecture
_per se_ will deal with questions at another level. show also the CoA
operational definitions of architecture (infer from fee scales, schedule of
payments, model contracts, design competition norms) assume a
building-stylist; SPA and CEPT output over the last few years etc., tend to
fall in the same category.
i get some work applications from the aforementioned colleges, prefer to get
civil engineers or programmers instead ... The Profession (as Leon calls it)
i haven't seen for a while, rot, young and old i see plenty. someone's
welcome to keep it. now, when did i see something fresh and original from a
Young Indian architect! hmmm. let me see... i don't buy A+D and IA&B
anymore, prefer to get stuff straight from Architectural Record and Japan
Architect. maybe they printed something!
p.s., i am on admin-in duties this week, so let me know if the website can
be improved in some way.