2 minute read
Ill.2.2.a Shift of Origin
As it becomes quite evident through the government definitions as well, also where the roots of misconceptions are, that the role of portrayal of a material plays an integral part in how the population perceives it.
Kutcha & Pucca are terms that are used in layman language across the country, that carry a literal meaning of an object being temporary & permanent, respectively. Local construction techniques that have lasted for thousands of years are generalized as temporary. In the recent decades, a drastic change is seen in the rural context of India, where people opt to build using the modern materials since they are termed as Pucca. Irrespective of what the local climate demands, to overcome the tag of Kutcha, which has become a societal taboo, the rural population has drifted off from their original construction methods to build using the new conventional methods of construction.
Advertisement
Ill.2.2.aShift of Origin | Author
2.3 |
RESULTANT THEORY
To summarize in singular statements, Argument 01 talks about the current economic pattern in the nation that indicates evident prevailment of the sense of deprivation, in the population of rural as well as the emerging urban contexts of India, whereas, Argument 02 talks about the rural population, to be precise, drifting apart from the age old local construction methodologies due to the rising misconceptions of their households & methods being generalized as temporary solutions for a shelter.
Merging the two arguments, it can be concluded that the ill effects of the existing economic pattern directly has an impact on the rural population & their local & traditional architectural practices. The rural population in the present day is quite efficiently targeted, influenced & manipulated by the commercialization agendas. Misconceptions rise up within the rural population, wherein owning commercialized goods & living an urban life are seen as measures of development. This gives rise to large scale migration of the rural population to the neighboring urban centres. Eventually this gives rise to mass Brain Drain in the rural contexts of the nation. As per the theory, Brain Drain at one end results in Brain Gain at the opposite end, thus maintaining an equilibrium. But, the mass migration is destined to urban centres of Tier 1 or 2, where the market is dominantly run & based on mass production, hence resulting in exploitation of the rural population. The existence & domination of mass producing industries negates the theory which hampers the equilibrium.
Fragmenting down to rural architecture & rural economy, they function parallely. If the economy revolves within the community or the village under consideration, based on the principles of self-sufficiency, a decentralized economic pattern can be achieved. The local governing bodies can ensure, through the government policies that are drafted in favor of rural development, the issues to be resolved on a grass root level, with the community, by the community & for the community.