After a long day of hustle and bustle, when someone looks out of their window and sees a concrete jungle that is covered in trees to make themselves feel like they are a part of nature, they may remember an Instagram-worthy shot of nature and write, “Man saw this view and came up with work schedules.” regretting the centuries-long development of architecture and human civilization.
The chicken-and-egg contradiction, which came first, has been studied for eons, much like the concept of architecture and human existence. The word ‘architecture’ originated from the Greek word “arkhitekton,” meaning master builder. Ever since its origination, it has been about the building and its construction. However, architecture has always been about the way of life and how a society responds to its economy, culture, and social aspects. Put it, the absence of architecture would be the absence of socioeconomic bonds rather than the absence of buildings.
Beginning of architecture
“Architecture began when man started to think about future”
Architecture began when man had an opportunity to stay where he could get resources such as food, water, and adaptable climatic conditions rather than being a nomad. Hence, when a group of people decided to stay, help, and prosper together, a society began to grow. To address the ever-changing climatic conditions, the use of natural caves, material manipulation, clothing, and construction of shelter through various natural resources evolved. Through the invention of the wheel and fire, the evolution of human life started taking pace. Thus, developed agriculture and urban planning. Until then, man needed shelter, food, and clothing. As a result of collaborative growth and uncertainty, the demand for store and use led to the typology of granary; social hierarchy was established, leading to territorial planning; and with power, interrelationships between societies led to fortification and involvement in warfare. Thus, a culture and a civilization began to grow with the need for urban planning and spaces for specific functions.
The identity and prosperity of a settlement were perceived to be derived from effective spatial and urban planning, given the escalating demand for space and numerous facets such as safety, transportation, trade, cultural and conventional activities, warfare, and the emergence of socio-cultural place typologies. The ability of individuals to communicate and share knowledge in both open and closed social contexts contributed to the advancement of engineering. So began the man’s insatiable hunger for information and desire to gain fortune. The outbreak of disease and other health concerns brought about sanitation planning, the concept of sewage disposal, and the need for fresh resources at the doorstep. Urban and planning and social architecture have always been the start or inducer of revolution or a change in the norms of a society, For example, the great bath of Mohenjo-Daro, the Roman communal toilets.
Archaeological discoveries have documented the rise and fall of ancient civilizations such as the Mesopotamian, Indus, and Harappan civilizations. The people’s way of life was reflected in their architecture, which helped us comprehend the sociocultural, economic, and historical significance of the thriving settlement at the time. The built remains, which served as the settlement’s base, are proof of its existence and way of life.
Every settlement has its figure-ground differentiating it from one another. For a healthy settlement to prosper, the proportionality of open and closed communal and personal space contributes the most. Improved people’s mental health and economy were contributed by a city with squares, plazas, and entertainment areas. As engineering developments advanced, the man had to accommodate and design the products and pave the way for consumers. That is when the survival need became an economic need for survival. It caused architecture and urban planning to become less human-centric.
Duality of refuge and prospects
As a hierarchical structure prevailed, buildings and city planning were organised based on class and occupation. As a result, classifications of rich and poor, privileged and underprivileged, emerged. To demonstrate their economic strength, the wealthy built large structures with a magnificent, spacious character. Luxury and need became words associated with specific classes. When economic display through infrastructure led to jealousy and avarice, resulting in internal and external conflicts. Law and order were enforced and regulated. Resource management was used to ensure that there was enough money flowing into the economy to support and maintain the infrastructure. When it failed for political and climatic reasons, invasion and conflict ensued. Man’s thirst for control led to the opponent’s desolation. For one to succeed, another must be a refugee, hence refuge architecture evolved alongside creative and majestic architecture.
In today’s scenario, the homeless want shelter; the poor want a resilient house; the middle-class men wish for a decent home; the upper class wants a luxurious life: while the rich try hard not to lose power. The new concepts and ever-evolving building techniques and material creates the next new dream space, while not ensuring economic and sustainability, Leading to the decline of climate and resource-responsive vernacular architecture. Thus, mechanising the process of architecture. Migration and identity loss are the consequences of non-proportionate societal growth and decline. To succeed, the migrants seek safety and protection from others. Natural disasters, caused by attempts to change nature, add to the state of refuge in addition to man-made events.
Architecture thus became finding solutions to the problems created through architecture.
Architecture and the arts have always had a significant influence on how human thought has evolved and how the body is physically constructed. These days, the “who, what, and why are we designing for” criteria have come to define the purpose of architecture. Concepts like sustainability, biotecture should have been a practice from the start rather than an evolving concept while the damage has already been done. There has to have been at least a human or humanity focus. The essential idea has been lost in the transition from developing cities with development as the centre of attention, to vehicles, and finally to cities for people. As,
First life, then spaces, then buildings – the other way around never works.
States, the essence of life of co- existence with nature, other species and with people is lost as the order of development goes accordingly. Being the dominant species, we have taken liberty of nature, thus now fear for its reclaim. With emerging technologies, typologies such as libraries, cinemas, and entertainment halls, social spaces have been replaced by gadgets. The social construct and decline in communal growth have led to several duplicates of personal spaces, where most of the social spaces have become irrelevant or cumbersome to maintain.
Without architecture and understanding how it helped to create the modern world, human existence would have been centred around nature and living in harmony with it. However, civilization and the evolution of the species would not have occurred in the absence of architecture. Furthermore, there would be no such thing as a territory, boundary, or class distinction. Additionally, they want to live in harmony and as human beings. It would not have been feasible for the practice of pretending or imitating nature to fit one’s own needs. In conclusion, without architecture, humans would not have been a dominant species on Earth, but rather one of the intelligent species.
