Academic literature on the topic 'Colonial Architecture in Patna (India)'

This article identifies two main perspectives on flood control: the traditional and the modern hydrological. The objective here is to look at the contest between them from the point of view of the politics of knowledge. The traditional perspective views floods as a part of life and focuses on people’s wisdom or local knowledge of flood control. The hydrological approach, on the other hand, is mostly concerned with taming a river and views floods as a disaster that ought to be controlled and possibly eliminated. This perspective dominates the policy of the post-colonial state in India. There are five vantage points, such as historical context, state policy, political economy, collective action and epistemology, to understand the politics of knowledge around floods. In the first section, through history we discuss the transition from the colonial to post-colonial India on the issues of floods, dams and embankments. The second section of this article describes the flood policy and politics around it, from Patna Flood Conference (1937) to Disaster Management Act, 2005. In Political Economy section the article explores the link between land-holdings, tenancy and floods and also observes how agriculture has changed due to floods. The fourth section, Forms of Collective Action, explores the politics of collective action. Epistemology section presents the debate of lokvidyavs versus rajyavidya or living with floods versus hydrological knowledge.

Prison construction was among the most important infrastructural changes brought about by British rule in nineteenth-century India. Informed by the extension of liberal political philosophy into the colony, the development of the British colonial prison introduced India to a radically new system of punishment based on long-term incarceration. Unlike prisons in Europe and the United States, where moral reform was cited as the primary objective of incarceration, prisons in colonial India focused on confinement as a way of separating and classifying criminal types in order to stabilize colonial categories of difference. In Imperial Vision, Colonial Prisons: British Jails in Bengal, 1823–73, Mira Rai Waits explores nineteenth-century colonial jail plans from India's Bengal Presidency. Although colonial reformers eventually arrived at a model of prison architecture that resembled Euro-American precedents, the built form and functional arrangements of these places reflected a singularly colonial model of operation.

The colonial structures that still stand today in India are the product of careful fabrication of British thought. The British government was afraid of what kind of legacy they would leave behind when exiting India in 1947. Today, years after the independence of India, one is still able to see such a legacy in stone: the colonial architecture and cities that are still in existence. The styles of architecture employed by the British Raj were systematically chosen, dependent on the location and utilization of a given city. The British were trying to consecrate their power through architectural representation. Trying to legitimize British rule, architects wanted to tie the architecture of the British with former Indian rulers, yet still create an effect of British grandeur. The examples illustrate that location and utilization were indeed crucial determinants of colonial style.

India is well diverse with a variety of cultural and traditional practices. Impact of age-old practices redefined the idea of culture and tradition, not only as a hereditary system, but also as part of art and architecture. Factors such as the cultural changes between North and South India, impact of the British, changes in spatial organization and patriarchy and matrilineal system drew an impact on cultural impression of India through time. Palaces (04th —18th century) and the lifestyle of the heirs, being a soul example to exhibit the Indian uniqueness, gradually inclined towards British culture and morals. This influence brought a change in the architectural design of palaces, which is the core study area in the thesis. Comparing the architectural planning of palaces from the 13th to the 18th century showed a clear change on how British influenced Indian palace design. This became one of the finest reasons to identify cities with palaces based on their culture and tradition, and on art and architecture. In addition to finding how it has brought the influential change and what is the present scenario of the same palaces. The architectures that were adopted in India was a form of true traditional architecture which is been followed through a very long time and hence it was collaborated with Italian, French, Indo Sarcenic or European style.

“In the city,” says carl schorske, writing of Vienna at the turn of the twentieth century, “… the truth of industrial and commercial society had to be screened in the decent draperies of pre-industrial artistic styles. Science and law were modern truth, but beauty came from history” (1981, 45). Quotations from the past were equally the mark of architectural styles that were forged in colonial and postcolonial societies, as history became a resource for defining new ideals of beauty. If the retreat into (classical European) history was a striking feature of public architecture in colonial India (Evenson 1989, 99–109), an attempt to command a long and respectable lineage of authority equally marked the efforts of Indian nationalists in the early post-independence period.

The article examines the ways in which the British imperial context, ideologies relating to national heritage—both cultural and natural—were not just extended but developed in a colonial context, and how they have been subsequently redefined and reconstituted in the post-colonial era. From a nineteenth-century romantic antiquarianism drawn to the ruins of a lost civilization, we can see the growth in status of scientific disciplines of archaeology and palaeontology and natural history in the colonies, and an equivalent diffusion of heritage legislation from the Indian subcontinent to East and Southern Africa and even to metropolitan Britain by men like Lord Curzon, Viceroy of India, whose interest in monumental architecture led him to protect the Taj Mahal and later to take these interests to Britain where he was instrumental in helping to formulate the ancient monuments’ consolidation and amendment Act in 1913.

Critical Regionalism as expounded by Kenneth Frampton has found its use in many parts of the world as a reaction to the international architecture practised in the Western world. India, which was deprived of exposure to the advanced developments in architecture in the US and Europe was at one stroke brought into world contact after gaining independence. This paper traces the exposure of the Indian architects to Western training and philosophy and how they developed their works to suit the regional context. Important aspects of the paper are mentioned below: ‒ International exposure of the Indian architects after independence. ‒ Their designs and their approaches to the creation of an Indian flavour on their return to homeland. ‒ Examined the works of a few prominent architects and inferred on their special regional contributions.

New Zealand-born architect Joseph Fearis Munnings (1879-1937) is largely forgotten in the country of his birth. Considering the importance of his public works in Bihar and Orissa, India (1912-1919) and his prominence as a school architect in New South Wales, Australia (1923-1937), recognition of his architectural achievements is long overdue. This thesis takes as its premise the notion that early twentieth century architecture in colonial New Zealand, India and Australia was British, the rationale expounded by G. A. Bremner in Imperial Gothic– Religious Architecture and High Anglican Culture in the British Empire (2013). My thesis argues that, considering Munnings’ colonial upbringing and English training, the styles he employed reflected his and his clients’ identity as British. It explores the extent to which Munnings adapted British styles, by incorporating features appropriate for colonial conditions. Drawing upon the work of Ian Lochhead on the achievements of Samuel Hurst Seager, my thesis considers the role played by Seager in mentoring Munnings and guiding his philosophy of architecture. Peter Scriver’s papers, ‘Edge of empire or edge of Asia’ (2009) and ‘Complicity and Contradiction in the Office of the Consulting Architect to the Government of India, 1903-1921’ (1996), also inform my analysis of Munnings’ work in India. To enable an analysis of Munnings’ work, this study divides his career into chronological stages: Early experiences and training, Christchurch, New Zealand, 1879-1903 Architectural training, London, England, 1903-1906 Partnership with Hurst Seager and Cecil Wood, Christchurch, 1906-1909 Work with Leonard Stokes, London, 1909 Responsibilities and achievements, India, 1910-1918 Contributions and achievements, New Zealand, 1919-1923 Partnership with Power and Adam, Sydney, Australia, 1923-1937. This thesis, the first comprehensive study of Munnings’ career, illuminates the extent of his architectural legacy in India, his significant contribution to school architecture in New South Wales, and asserts his place as an architect of the British Empire.

Thesis (M.S.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Architecture, 1996.
Includes bibliographical references (p. 181-195).
All cultural production is a consequence of its context and is infused with meaning and identity. A preoccupation with the visual and symbolic aspects of architectural form and its cultural meaning has led to an increased autonomy of the architectural object. This thesis posits that architectural forms do not have fixed, unchanging and singular meanings, but that they acquire meaning in particular contexts- historical, social, cultural and political. Certain forms or stylistic motifs, acquire, embody or are perceived to represent the identity of a nation or cultural groups within a nation. The confluence of a search for 'Indianness' and the post-modern thought in architecture is a paradoxical aspect of the recognition of the autonomy of architecture. In the contemporary India, the search for a 'Tamil' identity, may be perceived as an attempt to create a distinct, regional identity as opposed to the homogenous and universal national identity. This is similar to the creation of a 'British-Indian' identity as opposed to the western one, by the British, in the last quarter of the 19th century. In this attempt to create a regional identity, the same or similar regional architectural forms and stylistic motifs were the source and precedent to represent both 'Tamil' and 'British-Indian' identity. This would imply that the forms do not have a singular meaning but that they are embodied with meaning and symbolism in particular contexts. This is exemplified by a trans-historical comparison between two colonial and contemporary buildings in Madras, South India. The Post and Telegraph Office, 1875-84 (Architect: Robert Chisholm) and the Law Court, 1889-92 (Architect: Henry Irwin) represent the two trends within 'Indo-Saracenic' architecture. The former draws precedents primarily from local, regional and classical Hindu temple architectural traditions while the latter from the 'Indo-Islamic' Mughal architectural tradition. The Valluvar Kottam Cultural Center, 1976-8 (Architect: P. K. Acharya) and the Kalakshetra Cultural Center, 1980-2 (Architects: Mis. C. R. Narayanarao & Sons) represent the search for an indigenous 'Tamil' architecture. The sources for the former are primarily from the Dravidian style classical Hindu temple architecture of the region while the latter is inspired by the local and regional traditions. Paradoxically, the same or similar forms manifest opposing ideals, and represent colonial and post-colonial identities, respectively.
by Aparna Datey.
M.S.

Calcutta of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century enjoyed global stature and connections as a consequence of its position within the British Empire as the capital of India. This study of Calcutta’s buildings aims to comprehend the architectural legacy of the period in terms of its construction history. The proposed thesis underlying the research is that Calcutta’s built environment bore witness to the intense traffic of ideas, people and goods characteristic of the era. The significance of the research is two-fold. It enjoys the distinction of being the first attempt to undertake a wide-ranging investigation into the construction history of a city in the Indian subcontinent, and indeed possibly anywhere in the world. Concurrently, the study endeavours to suggest a methodological approach for similar forthcoming studies in India and elsewhere, especially considering that the discipline of construction history is as yet at a nascent stage and such studies are only expected to multiply in number and scope in the coming years. The research effort trains its attention on two key aspects of construction history – human resource and material resource. The former is manifested in investigations into the training and work contexts of the professionals engaged in construction activity, i.e. the engineers and the architects. The latter takes the form of research into source and application of the commonly used construction materials. The methodology employed in the study encompasses a range of disciplines and related sources, especially drawing on architectural, urban, social and economic histories. Addressing the proposed thesis has necessitated directing research efforts towards situating developments in Calcutta in the context of and with reference to the metropolitan milieu. The analysis of the research findings and the conclusions thus drawn have served to corroborate the proposed thesis highlighting the incessant flux distinctive of the construction environment in Calcutta in the period of this study. The dissertation is expected to facilitate an enhanced understanding of Calcutta’s built environment for those entrusted with its care, especially those in the heritage and conservation sector, as well as contribute to the available pool of free knowledge furthering our understanding of human civilization.

Rabindranath Tagore, Nobel Prize winning Bengali poet and polymath, is an eminent figure in the history and culture of modern India. As the Indian Independence Movement grew in the early twentieth century, Tagore used his renown to establish a university in the rural community of Santiniketan: Visva-Bharati, “where the world meets in a single nest.” All of Tagore’s efforts — artistic, educational, and social — were informed by a universalist philosophy that he developed based on the Upanishads. Tagore’s philosophy facilitated unity between all creation, including harmony between the peoples of humanity and between humanity and the natural world. The architecture of Santiniketan is a tangible manifestation of Tagore’s philosophy. Designed under his direction by his associates Nandalal Bose, Rathindranath Tagore, and Surendranath Kar, Tagore’s residences at Santiniketan, in particular the houses Udayan and Shyamali, illustrate Tagore’s universalism in two primary ways. The designs unify a diverse set of traditions within a Modernist framework, and provide for maximum interaction between indoor and outdoor spaces. Udayan is a synthesis of Indian, Japanese, Javanese, and European designs, finding commonalities in the traditions through abstraction and modern materials. Shyamali also draws from a variety of influences and, in service to a connection between man and nature, the design blurs the boundaries between indoors and outdoors by using the natural material of mud. The architecture of Santiniketan, because it is a product of Tagore’s unique values, does not fit easily within the major trends of Modernist architecture in India or beyond. It is best evaluated as a single thread in the contrapuntal nature of Modernism.

The seaport of Bombay is often referred to as India's "Gothic City." Reminders of British colonial rule are seen throughout South Bombay in its Victorian architecture and sculpture. In the heart of Bombay lies the Victoria Terminus, a towering, hybrid railway station blending gothic and vernacular architectures. Built at the height of the British Empire, the terminus is evidence of the rapid modernization of Bombay through the philanthropy of the Parsis. This religious and ethnic minority became quick allies to the British Raj; their generous donations funded the construction of the "Gothic City." The British viewed the Parsis as their peers, not the colonized. However, Parsi-funded architectural ornament reveals that they saw themselves on equal footing with Bombay's indigenous populations. The Parsis sought to integrate Indian and British art, design, and culture. Through their arts patronage they created an artistic heritage unique to Bombay, as seen in the architectural crown of Bombay, the Victoria Terminus.The Parsi philanthropist, Sir Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy was the most influential in Bombay's modern art world. He was chosen with other Indian elites to serve on the selection committee for the Great Exhibition of 1851 in London. He selected India's finest works to demonstrate India's rich tradition of the decorative arts. In turn, these works were viewed within the Indian Pavilion by the Victorian public and design reformer Owen Jones. Jones used many of the objects at the India Pavilion in his design book, The Grammar of Ornament. This book went on to inspire the eclectic architectural ornament of Victorian Britain and eventually Bombay. Jeejeebhoy sold the majority of the works from the exhibition to the Victorian and Albert Museum and the Department of Sciences and Art in South Kensington. The objects were studied by design students in South Kensington who were later hired by Jeejeebhoy to be instructors at the Bombay School of Art. This school taught academic European art alongside traditional Indian design forthe purpose of creating public art works. Thus, the Parsis were important cultural mediators who funded British and Indian craftsmen to create symbols of "progress," such as the Victoria Terminus, for a modern India.

Tese de Doutoramento em Patrimónios de Influência Portuguesa, no ramo de Arquitetura e Urbanismo, apresentada ao Instituto de Investigação Interdisciplinar da Universidade de Coimbra
Como é a cidade colonial na Índia? O que é Diu, no contexto da cultura colonial europeia em geral, e da cultura colonial portuguesa em particular? Através do estudo da arquitetura, do urbanismo, de desenhos, da literatura, de textos e da análise feita através de um olhar informado pela história, esta dissertação estuda a cidade de Diu, desde a chegada do Portugueses até esta se tornar no artefacto que é na atualidade. No cerne da tese, encontra-se a questão da identidade de Diu, entendida como hermenêutica e como representação política dentro do contexto da cidade colonial europeia na Índia. A dissertação analisa a cidade durante o período colonial e tem em conta que esta nunca foi mentalmente colonizada no seu todo, nem se pode considerar plenamente urbana. Destaca a complexidade da relação entre a soberania portuguesa e o projeto imperial português, e examina culturas espaciais, políticas e práticas sociais em Diu desde início do XVI (1514) até meados do século XX (1961), através de narrativas ideológica, institucional, arquitetónica e urbana da sua história urbana. O trabalho descreve um cenário de soberanias que persistiram durante o período colonial em que ligações transnacionais formaram o ‘projecto de arquitetura’ e o ‘projecto de cidade’ num lugar de fronteira do império colonial, da Índia e do Oceano Índico. O que procuro trazer à luz nesta dissertação, torna evidente as múltiplas formas, propriedades e narrativas da cidade colonial. Esta dissertação tem como objetivos principais, primeiro, refletir sobre o progresso no estudo da cidade colonial e em segundo, servir de ponto de partida para um (re)pensar da cidade e do urbanismo coloniais que seja levado para além do Ocidente. Responde às preocupações interdisciplinares sobre as diferenças de conhecimento inerentes ao estudo da cidade, e reconhece a necessidade dessas diferenças para o estudo de Diu e da cidade colonial europeia no Oriente. Para isso, desafia os pressupostos fundamentais que enquadram a história da arquitetura e a história do urbanismo em culturas espaciais coloniais e investiga os modos e as razõas pelas quais o estudo das cidades coloniais tem sido dominado por agendas, perspetivas e hipóteses. Dessa forma, a dissertação pretende contribuir para a teoria do estudo da cidade colonial no Oriente que vá para além do cânone ocidental. Diu antecipou (mas não previu) em quase dois séculos a cultura colonial dos europeus na Índia em geral e, dos portugueses, em particular, bem mais complexa do que a simples transferência de uma cidade europeia para as categorias e os quadros binários ou de oposição entre assentamentos urbanos (nativo/branco, europeu/nativo, dominante/dependente, colonizador/colonizado, religioso/secular, tradicional/moderno) que simplificou nas últimas décadas a história do urbanismo europeu. Mostrou também, que as divisões espaciais e sociais em Diu não eram tão claras como as que têm sido apresentadas. Em lugar disso, a cultura espacial de Diu, materializada na sua arquitetura e urbanismo produziu transculturalidades intensas e difusas, celebradas e ocultas, aparentes e ausentes. Em lugar disso, contacto e influência entre portugueses e guzerates naquele lugar de fronteira que o pós-colonialismo vai recebendo, questionando e reformulando, produziu a partir de vários momentos da história de Diu uma nova arquitetura e um nova cidade(s). Sendo assim, argumenta que o estudo iniciou uma rutura na produção de conhecimento sobre a cidade colonial na India. Tal como a dissertação mostra que a ideia arquitetura de Diu claramente se tornou determinista e normativa, mostra também, na prática, que essa ideia continuou a ser negociada por forças que resistiram à homogeneidade e a uma codificação autoritária singular da cidade. Tendo como ponto de partida a análise de alguns edifícios, prosseguindo para a leitura de espaços domésticos e públicos relacionados e a terminando na cidade no seu sentido mais lato, de referencial mais ético e político, o estudo demonstra a natureza complexa da sobreposição entre categorias espaciais e funcionais no contexto colonial. A história colonial da cidade ofereceu aos seus habitantes a mobilidade entre culturas e espaços, construindo novas identidades, e produzindo modernidades indígenas. A tese demonstra que as mecânicas da mudança e influência da cidade colonial de Diu através do que foi, por necessidade, um processo de tentativa e erro, criaram efetivamente por culturas espaciais plurais e heterogêneas. Finalmente, a dissertação argumenta que Diu não tem paralelo na cultura europeia colonial urbana na Índia, singularidade demonstrada no seu discurso de identidade e na sua narrativa do ambiente construído. Diu replica a arquitetura do Renascimento europeu num território de expansão europeia no Oriente. Diu produziu a mais importante arquitetura religiosa católica do Oriente, existiu em antagonismo tolerante de etnia, raça e religião. Diu moldou o conceito cultural de hibridez no contexto da identidade arquitetónica do império português no Oriente. Diu introduz o conceito de ambivalência no estudo da cidade colonial europeu na Índia, em resultado do contacto, circulação e troca cultural entre civilizações. Alega, portanto, que a cultura espacial de Diu, calibrada por um lado através centro metropolitano e por outro através de um império, é singular e resultado de ‘tradução’ ao longo do tempo longo e através de um vasto espaço de estilos e práticas de arquitetura e de produção de cidade colonial.
How is the colonial city in India? What is Diu, in European spatial colonial culture in general and in Portuguese European spatial colonial culture in particular? By examining architecture, city plans, paintings, literature, and official reports through the lens of history and spatial theory, this dissertation explores the conditions of colonialism that produced the city as a modern artefact. At the core of this exploration resides the problem of “identity” of Diu, understood as description and narration, as well as political representation within the context of the European colonial city in India. This dissertation examines Diu during the colonial period from the vantage-point of an urban polity that was never entirely colonized. It highlights the complexity of the relationship between Portuguese sovereignty and the colonial project, and reexamines spatial cultures, statecraft and social practice from the early sixteenth (1514) until the mid-twentieth century (1961) India through the lens of ideological, institutional, architectural and urban histories. Overall, the dissertation describes a scenario of layered sovereignty persisting throughout the colonial period in which transnational connections informed architectural and urban projects that were underway in a state situated on the frontier of colonial empire and India. The vantage point of Diu that I have sought to bring to light in this dissertation renders apparent the multiple faces of the city in the colonial world. This dissertation has main aims, such as, to reflect on the progress made in studying colonial cities throughout the world; and to act as point of departure in a re-imagining of colonial cities that takes seriously urban theory beyond ‘the West’. We respond to interdisciplinary concerns over the global disparities of academic knowledge and growing recognition by urban historians of the need to appreciate the diversity of colonial cities and the exceptionality of Diu. To this end, we try in this thesis to challenge core assumptions which frame for decades architectural and urban history of colonial spatial cultures and investigate the ways in which the study of colonial cities has been dominated by parochial agendas, perspectives and assumptions. Accordingly, we contribute to broader theoretical agendas which highlight how making sense of urban life does not have to depend on the ‘Western’ academy. Diu anticipated (but not predicted) in almost two centuries that colonial spatial landscapes of the Europeans in India in general and, accordingly, of the Portuguese in particular were far more complex than the mere transfer of a ‘European city’ to the simple binary frameworks centred on categories such as to black-town/white-town, European/native, dominant/dependant, ruler/ruled, colonizer/colonized, religious/secular, traditional/modern, and shown that social and spatial divisions in the city were not nearly so clear cut as has been represented and that much of post-colonial studies have postulated. Instead, there were charged interconnections between the two spaces. Therefore, Diu initiates a rupture in knowledge production of the colonial city. While the thesis shows that architectural conceptions in Diu clearly became increasingly deterministic and normative, it also shows how, in practice, that these ideas continued to be tempered by forces that resisted homogeneity and singular authoritarian encoding of space. Analysing buildings as the core, but extending this to the reading of related public and domestic spaces and the overall urban form, the study also demonstrates the complex nature of overlap between spatial and functional categories in the colonial context. The colonial history of the settlement offered breaks for residents to move between cultures and spaces, constructing new identities, identifying with the new by rejecting the old, and creating indigenous modernities. The thesis demonstrates that the very mechanics of change/evolution/influence of Diu’s colonial city through what was, by necessity, a trial and error process, in effect created by pluralistic and heterogeneous spatial cultures. We also argue that there never was a place like Diu in European colonial urban culture in India, due to its singularity, on the identity discourse and the built environment. It was where the most important European Renaissance imperial expansion architecture was replicated in the East. It was where the most important religious architecture of the Orient was produced dealing with factors as ethnicity, race and religion. It was where the cultural concept of hybridity was made a shaper of architectural identity in the Portuguese Empire. It was always on the edge of European spatial culture production in colonial India and its hybrid environment accommodates pluralistic tendencies or multicultural practices. In contrast to the standard position results from the merger of two or more cultures Diu introduces a concept of ambivalence in the study of the European colonial city in India. It argues therefore that it is these various aspects that made the spatial culture of Diu a fluid one, which was distinct from all other European colonial cities in India, but also calibrated between metropolitan centre on the one hand and a vast Empire on the other in an architecture and city of translation, bi-and multilateral international transportation of people, ideas, technology, information, and images generates processes of change.

An unprecedented production of discourses on contemporary Indian architects and architecture occurred in the 1980s. Published in a period of political transition and conspicuous new cultural production and debate in many fields, four decades after India’s independence from colonial rule in 1947, these architectural discourses have become privileged references that have shaped but also limited perception of late-twentieth century architectural production in India. While subsequent writers have addressed some of these limitations, the small but growing critical literature in this field still exhibits many of the same problems of representation. Despite problematising the construction of ‘Indian architecture’ in colonial and postcolonial discourse, these critiques have nevertheless taken for granted (as in the more popular and professionally oriented discourses of the 1980s) the existence of a pan-Indian community of architects, united in their search for a collective identity. Such monolithic perceptions of contemporary ‘Indian architecture’ have yet to be interpreted with regard to the conspicuous contexts in which they were produced — that is, from an ‘Indian’ point of view. Through a selective focus on a particularly productive site of discourse in 1980s India, I investigate complexities that have not yet been examined in the formation and reproduction of a dominant consensus on the identity of contemporary Indian architecture. The argument draws attention not only to the agency of particular contemporary Indian architects in the construction of this identity, but also the relativity of region in the architectural production of India during the 1980s. Specifically, I focus on an influential architectural magazine, Architecture + Design (A+D) that began publishing in 1984 from a dominant region of architectural production, Delhi. I provide an account of the manner in which history, context, agency and agents, came together at a point in time, within this architectural magazine, as a complex set of historically constituted social relations, to authorise and sustain particular viewpoints about contemporary Indian architecture. Using the French sociologist, Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of the field of cultural production, I relate issues of dominance and marginalisation observable in the production of this particular discourse on contemporary Indian architecture to the space of the positions held by its producers. Despite its avowed agenda of viewing contemporary Indian architecture differently in the 1980s, I argue, the selection and judgement of exemplary contemporary work deemed worthy of discussion in A+D as ‘Indian Architecture’ functioned (and continues to function) through established categories of perception and appreciation.
http://proxy.library.adelaide.edu.au/login?url= http://library.adelaide.edu.au/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=1331621
Thesis (Ph.D.) - University of Adelaide, School of Architecture, 2008

This chapter focuses on the use of Tudoresque architecture overseas, where it began as an expression of Britishness, but since then has come to have other connotations along the way. It describes examples from 1920s America which show that Tudoresque architecture can flourish without the support of a British expatriate community; and Tudoresque buildings at Shimla in the northwest Himalayas, India, which from 1864 became a seasonal capital that served as the seat of government from March to November. Tudoresque architecture has become emblematic of Britishness and can be found around the world wherever quality is valued. It is also found in a less explicitly ‘Tudor’ mode, where the black-and-white colouring of the style is used for the sake of its connection with earlier, more colonial buildings that have come to be seen as smart and authoritative, but where specific evocation of Britishness does not seem to be the point.

Explicitly artificial “nature” (animals, trees, mountains, the colour green) proliferates intensely in contemporary India, notably in peri-urban theme parks. While this could be seen as post-liberalization “Disneyfication” or as a symptom of modernity more broadly, this chapter argues that there are other aesthetico-moral economies at work alongside such universalizing formulations of a hegemonic capitalist modernity and its “nature-culture.” It does so through a focus on the Lakshminarayan Temple or Birla Mandir, built in the 1930s as a “native” addendum to colonial New Delhi. The temple’s innovative architecture, and particularly its theme park-like garden, inaugurated a new, inclusive public (sarvajanik) religious space at the nexus of colonial planning, momentous debates on caste, religious patronage in the late colonial economy, and resignifications of nature and the sacred through new visual forms. This genealogy of the post-reform theme park illuminates the nature of “nature” on an uneven postcolonial terrain that both discursively negotiates and performatively refutes the separation of culture, religion and the social from “nature” and from political economy.

19th century British historians, while glorifying ancient Indian architecture, legitimized Imperialism by portraying a decline. To deny vitality of native architecture, it was essential to marginalize the prevailing masons and craftsmen – a strain that later enabled portrayal of architects as cognoscenti in the modern world. Now, following economic liberalization, rural India is witnessing a new hasty urbanization, compliant of Globalization. However, agrarian protests and tribal insurgencies evidence the resistance, evocative of that dislocation in the 19th century; the colonial legacy giving way to concerns of internal neo-colonialism.