Architectural ambiguities

By Noman Ahmed

Like in many other fields, Pakistan is lagging behind in the realm of architecture. And it
has its reasons

IN the third week of January 2006, the results of the CDA Headquarters design
competition in Islamabad were announced by a jury that included eminent architects of
the Pakistan Council of Architects and Town Planners (PCATP). The design proposal by
architect Ejaz Ahmed and his team was found to be the best entry. Doing adequate justice
to the staggering 5.14-acre site, the winning entry laid down a functionally viable and
aesthetically appropriate solution to the given problem. The disappointing aspect was the
fact that other entries were fairly low in quality. The declining interest of architects in
producing quality output was probably one of the reasons for the poor quality entries.

A few months ago, a large scale housing industry exhibition in Karachi attempted to
display several facets of our emerging architectural environment. On the one hand, the
event painted a picture of an all blooming and cosy neighbourhoods that shall soon spring
up along the new corridors of the Lyari Expressway and the Karachi Northern Bypass.
On the other hand, developers and builders were fiercely competing to sell the images of
the prospective abodes for the masses. The designs and details of most of these options
were as gaudy and chaotic as our society. Onlookers were completely bewildered by this
poor show of over-powering images, colours and locations. If this is going to become the
future architecture of our city, the situation may not be any different from the present-day
environmental situation. The review of some of the related issues shall be useful to
comprehend this scenario.

It is an established fact that architectural heritage is the most prominent feature of all the
environmental ingredients, mainly due to its dimensional magnitude and the instant
impact that it has on the human mind. Not only does it delineate the intricacy of its own
compositions, but also the prolific features of the entire socio-cultural milieu. Bearing
this in mind, when one glances at building units, many flavours of innovative design
inputs appear overlapping their transition to excellence. However, the degree of
excellence is directly dependent on a number of factors that affect the architectural
development during the entire process. Serene and balanced aesthetics, functional
usefulness, the relationship with the surrounding environment, the suitability to climatic
conditions, economy in performance and operations and the balance of composition are a
few basic parameters that can help judge the quality of architectural outputs. It requires
certain acumen to develop a built environment that has a balance of design finesse and
utilitarian merit. These are a common set of considerations that have been historically
persisting in different parts of the world.
Ironically, some of the best edifices developed in Pakistan belong to the pre-
independence era. The Sindh High Court building, Mohatta Palace, the Sindh Assembly
building, the Old KMC Head Office, the Karachi Port Trust Head Office, the Punjab
Assembly building, the GPO building and Lahore Museum are a reminder of the
excellence and functional quality acquired many decades ago. Critics find it difficult to
identify a similar level of aesthetics in many of the most prominent building examples in
contemporary times. The Convention Centre, the Parliament House, the Supreme Court
building, the Prime Minister House and many other buildings have been severally
criticised for their outlandish features, poor functional outputs and astronomically high
costs.

One of the criticisms that are levelled against architectural practice in Pakistan is that
local architects have not been able to produce any worthwhile edifice. To a certain extent
this point appears fairly valid. But many excuses have been given in its defence. It is
argued that architectural practice is a recent phenomenon in the country.

Therefore, it may not be appropriate to compare the local architectural units with those in
the industrialised countries. It is a weak argument. It has been almost 50 years since we
gained independence. Our local professionals have received ample opportunities to show
their calibre.

Hundreds of thousands of buildings have been built under the supervision of qualified
architects. But the standard of these examples compared with buildings all over the world
is absolutely dismal. It is proved by the fact that only one building, the Al-Hamra Arts
Council,Lahore, has been able to win an international design excellence award. On the
other hand, users of designed buildings can be found complaining about substandard
performance levels.

Even high profile buildings like that of the Parliament House developed many faults in its
building system a few years ago. Some buildings have been built with such prohibitive
costs that one wonders about the reasons for their existence. For example, the Convention
Centre Islamabad cost the nation more than half a billion rupees.

At best, that building is used for ceremonial purposes or for uttering official rhetoric to a
disinterested audience.

Thus, when the traditional evaluator discovers that the architects in Pakistan have failed
to reach the conceptual vigour of Le Corbusier; the resolution and detailing of Mies van
der Rohe; the natural strength of forms done by Frank Lloyd Wright; the eclecticism of
Kenzo Tange; or the bold physical impressions created by Louis Khan, he simply doesn’t
appreciate them.

Architecture in Pakistan is governed by numerous factors which have a direct bearing on

The attitudes and the working relationships that exist between architects and their clients
are fairly amorphous in nature. With the exception of established multi-national
corporations, enterprises and individuals of repute, the general clientele has not yet
understood the material value of the design and execution service that an architect
provides under a contractual agreement.

A myopic perception remains that architects charge ultra high for a few scribbles and
doodles. Such a conception develops misunderstandings and skewed performances from
both sides, ultimately resulting in the qualitative decline of architectural products.

Internally, the profession of architecture has yet to come up with its basic codes of work
ethic. Bypassing the applicable standards, under-quoting consultancy charges, building
with the authorities, and violating building codes for better rewards are a few common
social ingresses that the architects have adopted from the rest of society. On a horizontal
level, the architect-employers consider it their right to milk their young colleagues
despite the honest services they render.

Some young architects, on the other hand, move from office to office in search of better
remunerations and even leave their jobs in the middle of an important assignment.
Stealthily running side consultancies while being employed in a firm is another common
practice. It is said that an architectural design is never complete unless completely
executed. A vacuum exists between various actors in many cases of design
implementation. This factor has several reasons.

The construction services that are available at present are quite obsolete and at times do
not correspond with the nature of their design. Besides a weak tradition of appropriate
communication of design to the executors also lead to deviations.

Many important decisions are left to the contractors to be taken according to ‘site
conditions‘. Ironically, quite a few well reputed practices have resorted to such
callousness. A perpetually declining capacity and willingness of civic authorities
concerned to monitor architectural development is one reason for this rather gloomy
scenario.