[Reader-list] Excavating Site, Searching Community

[kaiwan mehta]

Hi
This fifth posting continues from my last one.
Below is the essay compiled about another complex studied by the third
group of students, for the Humanities and History of Architecture
studio. After this essay there is a note on the pedagogy of the
exercise, where we combined research and teaching and also the
extensive use and trust of 'observation' as a learning tool as
compared to library and studio. The capacity to 'observe' and
'negotiate' the subject of study was very crucial to working, with
this exercise.

Some of these studies have now become more important in light of the
SC judgment on allowing community housing to select its residents and
hence defining particular zones. However the conditions for ancestral
migrant communities are different from situations like – Walkeshwar
(where the existence of a Jain temple and a sizable Jain population
does not allow any 'public' non-vegetarian activities) or the case of
Hiranandani (where a interview and references precedes your chances of
getting a flat in the complex). There is much more negotiations in
areas like Girgaum and Bhuleshwar than dictated regulations. So
studies of communities in areas like Bhuleshwar have different notions
and it will be important to dwell over it, which I am looking forward
to work with. I have to still read the context of the judgment and its
media coverage.

The negotiation I mentioned above, was well brought out in a workshop
I recently conducted with a group students again for this particular
project – where a map making exercise develops into designing a game.
My next posting will discuss this workshop, I am still writing it.

 For now read  on….. 

KRISHNA-BAUG

Bhuleshwar has been the main industrial and commercial center of
Mumbai since a very long time. Its existence is dated back to the days
of the British rule when Mumbai mainly consisted of two main regions-
the fort area and the Girgaum - Bhuleshwar area.

 The area houses a large number of small scale industrial units and
shops which were set up by the migrants in the late nineteenth and
early twentieth century who came to the city in search of work. A
major chunk of these migrants include gujratis and marwaris. For
housing these migrant workers a large number of chawls were built.
Some of these chawls are built on the lines similar to those of
traditional Indian houses having temple, well etc.
 
The site we selected for study is Krishna-Baug at the C.P. tank
junction. From the road we can see two long narrow chawls placed at an
angle to each other and shikhar of the temple of a large compound
wall. The building is called Krishna baug. There is a huge gate
present which leads us into a small courtyard, which is shaped like an
L. Towards the right was positioned the temple whereas towards the
left there was a g+3 size chawl. The two-chawl buildings were 100
years old and the temple was 114 years old. The land belonged to a
landlady shree matoshri kanbai who built the building and the temple,
and as she did not have any heir the land and building was taken over
to a trust in her name when she passed away. The residents of the two
chawls pay rents between Rs.142 to Rs.188 per month.

 In the front our vision is cut off by a cowshed, which divides the
otherwise large courtyard into two smaller spaces. This courtyard is
used for the function of the temple, for kids to play and during
festivals. It also acts as a gathering space in the evening for the
women and the aged who come to the temple and sit there chatting after
the puja. The plinth of the chawl building creates an ideal seating
space for the courtyard.
  
The rooms of the chawls vary from 10'X10' to 15'X10'. Mainly Gujaratis
and Marwaris occupy the chawl; a majority of this Gujarati community
is Lohana. There is toilet block at the end the corner where the two
angular chawls come closest. The chawls are refurbished with steel
being originally load bearing, the floors and walls were strengthened
by steel I-beams and steel columns. The flooring was made of timber
with a layer of PCC bed on it. Both the chawls have a sloping roof.
The temple is made up of stone with a lot of relief work. The plan is
largely rectangular. The temple was dedicated to Radha Krishna. There
was a well situated behind the temple. Beyond the cowshed the children
generally use the second narrow courtyard created to play cricket.

At the other end of the L-shaped courtyard (The courtyard ends with
the temple.) begins a long narrow lane that leads to the rest of the
area that is not visible from outside. On the right side of the lane
there are shops which face the main road while on the other side (left
side) has small paper and printing industries. In the middle of the
lane there is an opening to the road whereas, the other side of the
building opens into another courtyard. This courtyard is the largest
among all the courtyards. This courtyard is flanked by a G+1 structure
on the left and G+2 structures on all the other three sides. The entry
into this courtyard is an opening cut into the G+3 structure. The
entry into the courtyard is connected to the main road by a road
cutting across this narrow lane and terminating at an opening in the
shop front. This entry into the courtyard and to the complex is
visible from outside but a passerby is not able to establish a direct
relationship between the courtyard and temple or with the entire
complex.

All the ground floor rooms in the buildings surrounding the second
courtyard are occupied by industries (paper industries) or wholesale
shops selling paper. The G+1 rooms are residential. The G+2 structure
is the back of a boarding hostel for boys. The courtyard is filled
with carts and crates. The shops had in fact spilled out in to the
courtyard because of the unavailability of space within those tiny
rooms. The entire layout of the courtyard was quite similar to a
typical chawl where a central courtyard or a community space was
surrounded by buildings on three/four sides. The function of the
courtyard in such a case becomes a community space or a gathering
space but here the function is changed to a commercial one.

If we were to continue straight through the narrow lane it would lead
you directly in front of a small shrine placed below a huge tree. (The
tree was either banyan or peepul) The lane takes a left and leads one
directly into the third and final courtyard. This courtyard is larger
than a temple courtyard but smaller than the industrial one. There was
another residential chawl situated at the extreme right of the
courtyard. The boarding hostel was on the left. This hostel provides
boarding only to Gujrati boys who come to the city to study. In the
center of the courtyard there is a bird feeder. Residents popularly
believe that if the bird feeder was to get damaged the building and
the residents would also begin to get problems. According to them it
brings good luck and good days. They take care to ensure that it is
not damaged. The chawl on the right was meant to be residence for only
old ladies but as time passed their families moved in with them.
Beside the tree temple a small G+1 structure houses North Indians and
their families who provide service to the temple. They are not charged
any rent and they are provided with free power because of their
service. Similarly the Maharashtrian community that resides in a small
ground storey block also receives free accommodation and power. This
block is situated at the end of the courtyard from where begins a
narrow lane leading to the toilets. The ground floor of the boarding
hostel is a paper industry while the upper storeys constitute the
boarding rooms. The rent for the chawl has been Re.1 since the
beginning and hasn't changed yet. Some illegal construction has
happened in the recent years, where two rooms were built on the top
floor.

	This is the main social & cultural courtyard. The courtyard remains
functional as a gathering space for the residents, mainly ladies who
meet in the courtyard in the evenings and chat. Many festivals are
celebrated in this courtyard. The courtyard forms an important space
as the space that acts as an interactive space.

	The main communities residing in the complex are the Thakurs. The
first residents worked in industries and shops around the region. As
times changed began to change people began to take up employment as
government servants, stock brokers etc. Large parts of the population
still work in industries and shops. There is a Modern High School
nearby where nearly all the kids from the community go to but now
other better schools also teach the kids from the community. The
community does not allow the procurement of rooms for outsiders. The
community is pretty strong in its decision in not allowing outsiders
to purchase rooms. It is done so that the ownership of the land
remains in the hands of one community.


Discussion Summary 

At the end of the studio exercise a discussion with all the groups was
conducted. I focused on two issues during the discussion. One, since
the students had already been through lectures on colonialism and
industrialisation in a world context – about the experience of
learning from a specific site. The important aim in the exercise was
to use 'observation' as a learning tool to understand architecture or
places. Then, the ability to evaluate, activity in relation to a
reading of architecture. Two, we focused on the word 'community'.

The students felt that the site had more than enough for material of
study. They did not refer to any books before going to site, but a
very brief skeletal talk given by me was good enough. However since
they had now already worked on site, going to books maybe interesting
and maybe helpful if the study was to be deepened and widened in its
scope.

However it was clear that connecting events from stories they heard on
site and making a mental map of the site's history and urban geography
was possible by plain site work. What they enjoyed and also had
problems at some time was with varied notions or answers they often
received. They continuously got a variety of view points and had to
make choices or argue as to which view points held more ground or what
was the context to the variety of opinions. They felt that a book
gives clarity as compared to building your own text from a site. They
realized that a lot of personal choice was being exercised by them.
They had the freedom to probe issues that interested them more. In
this context they said a book can be limiting but here there was also
the question of 'freedom' and 'choice' to deal with.

On the notion of 'community' they felt there was an expected 'sight'
they were looking for. On probing further they felt public religious
activities would define community and community spaces. However their
interviews showed that the feeling of belonging to a community was
difficult to define and quite context based.
Some observations and points of discussion are listed below.

Largely residential clusters appeared insular and inward looking.
However within most clusters – there was not the 'interaction' that
would be expected from a community or community space.
What is an 'expected interaction'? (That would help the observer
define the 'community' or 'community space')
When and how would you expect to see it?
Where most students answered that religious festivals would define
'community interaction'.
However, most of the time people express a feeling of belonging to one
and the same community.
It appears from discussion and samples that buildings or clusters
connected under the same landlord were more connected as a community.
If the same community lived in two buildings in the same cluster or
wadi, where the two buildings are owned by two separate owners or
trusts, then the interaction within the community there (ie within
residents of the two buildings) was not much.
Property seems to be the defining criteria for community.
If people marry outside the community, their property rights are
nullified by the trust.
Very rarely do you have instances of few members/residents of cluster
belonging to a community other than the one who own the property.
Hence the sense of one-ness between two communities can be very less.
Here largely the communities right now are caste based.
Often people in the same building having varying perceptions and ideas
about the same issue. Where as some ideas seem to be typified and
expected as obvious.
On interviewing residents of the same building on specific issues –
some issues showed a consensus, others did not.
e.g on an issue like people migrating abroad from the community – some
felt many did so others replied there was no particular trend.
However most agreed about how the area of their residence was
undergoing a change (and obviously) for the bad!
Often consensus existed generation wise.

Community largely seems to be conscious of keeping the self together – 
Education – scholarships; are an important means that people identify
with trusts which are community organizations.
Marriage – providing free or cheap hall, catering to residents (if
marriage contained within the community)
Taking care of old residents, by neighbours

How does the architecture of the gate work here?!

When people are migrating out of this area, within the city itself
there are again specific localities they seem to flock to.
Economy, geography of city …. ???
Malad, Borivali, Kandivali, Ghatkopar,

Reasons for moving out – space crunch, economical alleviation and the
choice of earning more by subletting a place in south Bombay and
living in the north.
However the reference to new areas is, Borivali – concrete jungle,
where as this area seems to be privileged by its closeness to the sea
and spaces like Chowpatty.

Feeling of family / ancestry 
-	Name plate on door acknowledges lineage 
-	Portraits and head gear
-	Portrait photographs displayed in houses
Some generalized impressions…
Migrated abroad / suburbs – Bhatias – traders and cloth merchants who
pride themselves on kicking off Bombay's economic wheel.
Lohanas – rate of shifting out is low

I must confess there is an absolutely new stream of migrants from UP
or Bangladeshis in this area which is not accounted for in this study.
Hopefully I may be able to work with them sometime later.

Thanks and regards,

Kaiwan


-- 
Kaiwan Mehta
Architect and Urban Reseracher

11/4, Kassinath Bldg. No. 2, Kassinath St., Tardeo, Mumbai 400034
022-2-494 3259 / 91-98205 56436