A SEARCH FOR SELF-EXPRESSION India did not include settling Europeans en
masse, as was the case in the Americas or
Architecture, Aesthetics and Empire
South Africa, but rather treating the natives
Harshvardhan Singh as full subjects. Even back in England,
Gothic architecture had been considered
symbolic of the nation, with classical and
Introduction Roman styles reserved for the empire as a
British Raj represented an interaction of whole. Couldn’t the administration in India
two cultures very distinct in character, then not be represented by a different style?
customs and even in a sense of aesthetics. As Indeed, the nature of British rule in India,
the colonial administration further where the empire had to deal with natives
entrenched itself in India from 1857 and rival polities, differed from, say
onwards, it became necessary for the empire Australia, where it encountered no
to adapt to Indian sensibilities, while at the challenges from the indigenous. The British
same time westernising the land in many Raj had yet to take the shape we associate it
arenas, one being architecture. What with today, and as such there was a need for
followed, as Thomas R. Metcalf proposes, the new power to make its presence and
were a set of mutual exchanges, rivalries supremacy known. Early buildings in the
among architects, a convoluted search for Presidencies therefore emphasised classical
synthesis, and above all, a self-conscious architecture, such as the Greek style
empire’s search for an identity in India. Banqueting Hall in Madras, the neoclassical-
Baroque Government House in Calcutta,
and the Italian-Gothic inspired Victoria
Fidelity and Synthesis
Terminus in Bombay. However, a section of
During the initial discussion in Britain on British society soon emerged which found
the nature of new architecture to be built in beauty in Indian landscape and architecture,
India, many preferred to emulate the admiring the Elephanta Caves and Mughal
Romans, who showed fidelity to their architecture alike. Similarly, a new Indian
architectural style and aesthetics wherever elite had emerged with British tastes, eager
they constructed buildings, be it Gaul, to adopt foreign customs and aesthetics.
Britannia, North Africa or Asia. Such an What resulted was a unique situation where
approach would leave such a lasting mark Indian nawabs built their residences in the
on Indian soil as Rome had on Europe, Palladian fashion, while many new buildings
express imperial authority, and inspire awe in England itself began adopting Indian
from the Indians. Dissenting voices, elements, such as the Sezincote House in
however, pointed towards the unique Gloucestershire, built in the Mughal style, or
climate of India and the need to preserve at least a western interpretation of it.
Hindu and Mughal traditions, opining that
western sensibilities might not work in the
east. They instead proposed synthesis, A New Beginning, and Eventual End
through which Indians might find As British rule eventually grew more
familiarity in the new buildings, while at the assertive and knowledgeable of India, the
same time feeling the overarching land ceased to be viewed with the earlier
supremacy of Britain, since it’s rule over
exotic lens, as a civilisation to be emulated, Edwin Lutyens was far more critical,
and became an inferior entity to be reshaped denouncing Indian architecture as
by European ideals. However, the regime impractical and nonsensical, as well as the
also required legitimacy as a new “Indian architects who emulated it, such as Swinton
Empire” in continuity with the previous Jacob. In his opinion, the architectural
ones, and one method to express this was to knowledge of Europe should not be
find a way to synthesise Indian and compromised for political reasons, but
European aesthetics. ought to evolve naturally in India. While an
interesting notion, he struggled with how to
When the Indian capital was relocated
achieve such an evolution.
from Calcutta to Delhi on 12th December
1911, the empire’s rule over India was Baker and Lutyens, though collaborating
wavering, in the backdrop of a strong on the Secretariat Building and Parliament
nationalist movement, and the revocation of House, had their fair share of conflicts.
the Bengal Partition of 1905, which in many While Baker designed for the service of
ways amounted to a defeat. This empire, Lutyens struggled in his search for a
announcement, therefore, provided a much- new form, disagreeing with Baker’s use of
needed avenue for the empire to reassert its Indian elements as mere superficial
claim of legitimacy, through the act of imitation. Eventually, after a change of heart
building a new capital. Already, this decision during his later years in India, he showed a
was a step to reconcile with India’s past, as more favourable view of Indian styles.
Delhi had been the capital of the Mughals, Admiring the Moorish and colonial
and King George V was willing to continue Spanish-American buildings, he aimed to
its legacy. Many British personalities, as well follow their logic, which was, going back to
as officers and academics who had served in the essence of classical style and then
India, such as E.B. Havell, called for a return melding it naturally to that of a different
to Indian styles of architecture, and the region. With that he designed the Viceroy’s
employment of Indian craftsmen for the House, reinterpreting Buddhist stupas and
task. The Indian Viceroy at the time, Lord Indian chajjas, and incorporating them into
Hardinge too supported this sentiment, a European style.
employing architects Herbert Baker and
However, all of this architecture was
Edwin Lutyens for the task, though these
conceived within the backdrop of the
men differed from him in opinion.
empire’s frail condition in the 20th century.
Herbert Baker, having made a name Baker and Lutyens’ adoption of Indian
designing infrastructure in South Africa, elements represented an empire lacking in
was concerned only with the political aspect self-confidence, while the proudly European
of architecture, often downplaying Indian buildings of the Presidencies represented it
aesthetic as unoriginal, and promoting at its peak. Lutyens’ designs had no
classical architecture as suitable for India’s relevance for the modern Indian, and his
climate as well as for imperial reasons. Only success at finding a new style was purely
three Indian features- the chajja, chatri and personal, unlikely to endure beyond his time.
jaali, were considered appropriate for Initially predicted to be a great architect of
incorporation. the empire, whose innovations and
aesthetics would become norms and inspire
future Indian architects, Lutyens’ work was
inevitably contained within a failing
imperial order, and ended at its demise.
REFERENCES
Metcalfe, Thomas (1989), An
Imperial Vision: Indian
Architecture and Britain’s Raj,
Berkeley: University of
California Press
