Feminism in architecture by Ridhima Mehrotra

THE F WORD IN ARCHITECTURE FEMINISM AND THE PRESENT CRISIS OF ARCHITECTURE Seminar held on November 2, 2011 Presented by: Aditya Wallabh Anupama Saha Asim B. Mandal Ridhima Mehrotra Sneha K. Seminar Guide: Mr. Sudipto Ghosh Director, S Ghosh Architects

Chairperson: Ms. Meena Mani Principal Mani Chowfla architects, New Delhi

Resource Persons: Mrs. Anupama Kundoo Sustainable Design Consultant to ICAEN,Spain

Mr. Badri Narayan Director, Studio Renaissance, Delhi

Ms. Chitra Vishwanath Managing Director, Biome Environmental solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

Ms. Hirante Welandawe Managing Director, H W Architects PL, Newport, KY, US

Mr. K. T. Ravindran Professor and Head of the Department of Urban Design, SPA, New Delhi

Ms. Katherine Guyot Director, ARVHA,France

Ms. Madhavi Desai Patner, Archicrafts, Ahmedabad

Ms. Manjari Sharma Artist, Faculty at SPA, New Delhi

Mr. Manoj Mathur Head of the department of Industrial Design at SPA, New Delhi

Ms. Mona Chandra Principal, Archiden, New Delhi

Mr. Riyaz Tayyibji Asst. professor at CEPT, Ahmedabad, partner Anthill Designs

Ms. Wendy De Silva Partner, Chance De Silva, Srilanka

Table of Contents

1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 History of Feminine Freedom ........................................................................................ 4 1.3 Modernism .................................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Modernism in India ...................................................................................................... 11 1.5 Feedback .................................................................................................................... 14 1.6 Who is an Architect? ................................................................................................... 17 1.7 Examining physiological differences ........................................................................... 19 1.8 The present crisis and conclusion ............................................................................... 21 Acknowledgement ................................................................................................................. 23 List of Figures ....................................................................................................................... 24 Works Cited .......................................................................................................................... 25 Bibliography .......................................................................................................................... 27 Appendix ............................................................................................................................... 31

1.1 Introduction Architecture is a subject which demands to be understood in context: that is, within the context of its production (society, economics, politics, culture) and the context of its consumption, representation and interpretation (different academic disciplines, interest groups, institutions, users). In the light of enormous and rapid shifts in theoretical, historical and critical debates, particularly with respect to feminism, understanding architecture in relation to gender demands an urgent contextualisation. This is specifically relevant in a fast shrinking and a seemingly egalitarian environment with men and women enjoying equal rights. A major change in thinking about gender, feminism, space and architecture has occurred in the last few years and it has become vital to place current discussions within an intellectual history, enabling some understanding to be gained on the basis and development of these contemporary ideas. The purpose of the paper is to provide an introduction to issues of gender as they pertain to architectural studies and to see how such an issue may impact the current practice and the trends in architectural education. Today, many would argue, and correctly so, that the situation for women within many professions, architecture included, needs improving. Education has indeed expanded and diversified and become less sexist. However, the presence of very few female architect icons, confirms that the profession has managed to sustain its chauvinistic image. Statistics nothing but reinstate the point. Even though the ratio in architecture colleges is split even, there are less than half registered female architects in India as male. Further, more than 30% of these do not end up practicing architecture full time or part time. Throughout history women have not been thought of as doing „real‟ work. When they were paid for their work, it was little as compared to their male counterparts. They were employed “in the lowest paid, least stable and most unrewarding occupations” (Honeyman & Goodman, 2002). Women were forced out of the public work arena by men who felt

threatened. The type of work that women could find was that of “unskilled, low status, poorly paid, seasonal, and irregular.” (Honeyman & Goodman, 2002) Why has this neglect of women and a clear chauvinistic approach in the practice of architecture not been discussed enough in the professional circles or our classrooms? Certainly the male-dominated canon and population has much to do with it. But ignorance and naiveté will be architecture's loss as the practice and concept of feminism becomes one of the more transformative movements of this century, paving new directions for the twentyfirst. (Azherton, 1996) This study also focuses on Modernity in architecture as a masculine construct.. Foregrounding rationality, truth and transparency from the irrational, false and mysterious, male modernist architects surreptitiously denoted such values as masculine by words such „heroic‟, „brutal‟ and „the noble savage‟. Understanding the works of forgotten women architects like Eileen Gray, who were able to demonstrate Le Corbusier‟s “Five Points of Architecture”, much before Le Corbusier himself could in Villa Savoye, allows us an insight into the movement and challenge the preconceptions surrounding it. The purpose of this paper is to provide an introduction to the issues of gender difference as they pertain to the discipline of architecture. This paper also aims at understanding the modern space represented as pure, mathematical and benign as gendered, complex and violent, and thereby hopes to present modernism and the subsequent architectural practice in a different light. Finally the study looks at the current crisis in architecture brought about by a form-centric and visual predilection and suggests that a different paradigm of thinking about architecture is required that might require a less masculine worldview.

1.2 History of Feminine Freedom The period of Enlightenment of the 16th and 17th-centuries gave us the concepts of logic and reason and provided the stimuli to challenge the conservative dogmas of NeoCatholicism. The „truth‟ discovered through reason, freed women from the shackles of corrupt institutions, such as the Church and the monarchy, which misguided and subjugated them - bound them to the household. The concept of “feminine freedom” also became central to the newly independent United States, and in Europe under the French Revolution. (Stoneburner, 2005) The Industrial Revolution (1700 A.D. onwards) further changed social structures dramatically (Stoneburner, 2005) and capital came to the forefront of discourse, such as in the communist manifesto of 1948 that speaks of the repercussions of replacement of human labor by machines. It stated “the more the modern industry becomes developed, the more is the labor of men superseded by that of women.” (Seymour-Smith, 1998) In 1848 AD, Karl Marx pioneered Marxism, a socio economic theory, which emphasized equality for all through a classless, stateless social system. Through the 1950s, rise of departmental stores all over England and France made women, participants of the urban space, making it, as elucidated by Theresa McBride in 1976, “morally and socially acceptable for women to be seen in public on their own”. (McBride, 1976) Thus tracing a timeline of women empowerment, we find: 1873: Mary L. Page becomes the first woman to earn an architecture degree in the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, U.S. 1888: Louise Blanchard Bethune became the first American woman to work as a professional architect.

1897: Julia Morgan becomes the first woman architecture student

to be enrolled in the École des Beaux-Arts, in Paris. 1910 AD onwards, Modernism.

1.3 Modernism Modernity was based on the immutable principle which in reality governs all things. Modernity accepted these principles in their most universal sense. It was this notion of universality that contrasted it with tradition. It refused to blindly accept the superstitious dogmas of the past and aimed to redefine the socio-economical and political structure of the society. (Armstrong & Zegher, 2006) Hence Modernity was based on the virtues of: 

Rationality



Transparency



Liberation from the shackles of the society.



Universality between class, culture and gender.

The pioneers of modernism are considered to be the likes of Gerrit Rietveld, Le Corbusier, Mies Van de Rohe, Walter Gropius, Frank Lloyd Wright and Adolf Loos. What is worthy of notice here, despite the hope of a greater equality of women in modernism, there are almost no female modernist architects that we know of whose works have been well documented or even taught in our history lectures. Even after formal education and professional acceptance in groups became available to a large number of women, how has history produced this continual marginalization of women architects? Today Le Corbusier is regarded as one of the persons to have outlined the characteristics of the modern movement. Broadly these can be listed as namely: (1) The pilotis elevating the mass off the ground, (see figure 1.1) (2) The free plan, achieved through the separation of the load-bearing columns from the walls subdividing the space, (see figure 1.2) (3) The free facade, the corollary of the free plan in the vertical plane, (see figure 1.3) (4) The long horizontal slit windows, (see figure 1.4)

(5) The roof garden, restoring, supposedly, the area of ground covered by the house. (see figure 1.5)

Figure 1.1: Pilotis, Le Corbusier- Villa Savoye

Figure 1.2: The free plan, Corbusier- Villa Savoye

Figure 1.3: The free facade, Corbusier- Villa Savoye

Figure 1.4: Slit Window, Corbusier- Villa Savoye

Figure 1.5: Roof Garden: Le Corbusier- Villa Savoye Source: Howe, Jeffery. LeCorbusier -- Villa Savoye. Retrieved October 8, 2011 from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/Corbu.html

It is surprising to note that even though Le Corbusier established these principles in 1927, it was a women architect by the name of “Eileen Gray”, who began work in 1924 on her vacation house called E1027in Southern France, who demonstrated these principles first. In other words, it may be argued that the father of Modernism, Le Corbusier, founded the principles of Modernism on the basis of Eileen Gray‟s E1027 house. This argument is supported by the geographic proximity of E1027 and Villa Savoye (heralded as the convoy of modernist principles as we know of them today) and the fact that Eileen Gray and Le Corbusier were friends until Le Corbusier‟s mutilation (in a fit of jealousy perhaps) of E1027 through murals that infuriated Gray, who considered the murals outright vandalism. “Whether he painted this mural out of admiration for her work or jealousy for her accomplishments, Le Corbusier became intricately tied with the future of house. Failing to purchase it himself, he eventually bought a piece of property just east of E.1027, where he built a small, rustic cabin, "Le Cabanon." After he died, the whole area was declared a "Site Moderne," or "Modern Site," and deemed an area of cultural and historical importance and international interest, with E-1027 as the founding element of this site.” (Schilling, 2004) This argument alone underscores the marginalization of women throughout history not only in professional circle but also in academia.

Figure 1.6: Pilotis by Eileen

Figure 1.7: Slit Window by Eileen

Source: Design Blog(September 28, 2009). Eileen Gray's Classic Modernist Villa E-1027 Restored. Retrieved October 4, 2011 from http://www.housing.com/blogs/designblog/eileen-grays-classicmodernist-villa-e-1027-restored.html

Figure 1.8: Free Facade Axonometric drawing of E.1027 by Eileen

Figure 1.9: Roof Garden by Eileen

Figure 1.10: Free Plan by Eileen

Source: Schilling, A.A.( 2004). Hinged Things: Concerning The Interior(s) Of Eileen Gray.Cincinnati:University of Cincinnati and Ohio LINK

Kathleen Eileen Moray Gray (August 9, 1878 – October 31, 1976) was an Irish architect and furniture designer. Living and practicing from Paris, she built buildings which decided the initial direction of modern movement. Her style and design philosophy was way ahead of her contemporaries, but due to the private character of her life, could build only a few buildings and gained little popularity and was soon lost in the shadows of the greats of architecture. (Schilling, 2004) Eileen Gray built few buildings yet numerous critics drew her work into their concerns. She began her creative career nearly a century ago and though she remained active until her death in 1978, she was virtually ignored for almost her entire creative life. In the last ten years of her life she saw some of her work, drawings of projects thirty years old, and gain popularity. Her furniture, rugs, interiors and architecture, appear at once with clarity and with an unsettled complexity. This condition reflects her knack for finding and exposing cracks in an aesthetic ethical idea, especially the Modernism of the 1920‟s and 30‟s, without setting another complete and stable idea in its place. (Schilling, 2004)

Grayâ&#x20AC;&#x;s work works to unsettle. She chose to build on steep, isolated and visually inaccessible sites. Her furnitureâ&#x20AC;&#x;s exhibit opening up of concealed parts, and her residences have the hinge plan, which depict vague notion of symmetry alongside a spatial maze.

Figure 1.11: Eileen Gray

Figure 1.12: Eileen Gray works

Source: Schilling, A.A.( 2004). Hinged Things: Concerning The Interior(s) Of Eileen Gray.Cincinnati:University of Cincinnati and Ohio LINK

Unfortunately, Eileen is not the only one to be a victim of marginalization. Lilly Reich was born in Berlin, Germany in the year 1885. She joined the Deutscher Werkbund, or German Work Federation, a group similar to the Vienna Workshop whose purpose was to help improve competitiveness of German companies in the global market. She contributed work to the Werkbund exhibition in Cologne in 1914. In 1920 Lilly became the first woman elected to the governing board of the Deutscher Werkbund. From 1924 to 1926 she worked at the Messeamt, or Trade Fair Office, in Frankfurt. Here, she was in charge of organizing and

designing trade fairs. Lily Reich is only known today as a personal and professional partner of Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe. (Pfeiffer) "It is interesting to note that Mies did not fully develop any contemporary furniture successfully before or after his collaboration with Reich". - Albert Pfeiffer Denise Scott Brown is an architect, planner, writer, educator, and principal of the firm Venturi, Scott Brown and Associates in Philadelphia. Scott Brown has remained a prolific writer on architecture and urban planning (Brown, 1977). Although Denise Scott Brown, along with her husband partner Robert Venturi are together termed as one of the most influential figures of modern day architecture, the Pritzker Prize of Architecture in 1991 went to Venturi alone. Marion Griffin (February 14, 1871 – August 10, 1961) was an American architect and artist. She was one of the first licensed female architects in the world, and is considered an original member of the Prairie School. Mahoney and Walter Burley Griffin had a partnership that lasted 28 years. They pioneered the Knit lock construction method. Marion's watercolor perspectives of Walter's design for Canberra, the new Australian capital, were instrumental in securing first prize in the international competition for the plan of the city. Marion managed the Sydney office and was responsible for the design of their private commissions. Marion Mahoney Griffin was lost in history just as the first employee and a contributor to the career of Frank Lloyd Wright. (Craven) Allison Smithson and her husband, Peter Smithson are arguably among the leaders of the British school of New Brutalism but her husband took most of the credit for British school of thought - New Brutalism from his wife and partner Allison (Design Museum). That‟s not all, there are many more. Women architects of this period have always been documented through their relationships with their male „friends‟ as if they derive their individual worth from these alliances. The reduced value placed on the works of women architects and neglected by architectural 10

historians is perhaps why women architects were and even today are continually marginalized. It gives origin to the questions like: If Modernism was a “Mass Movement”, why were only women targeted, marginalized, left out and ignored? How has a revolution with so many biases that favored men over women continued to influence global practice even today? How it is that one face of the coin was either not documented or completely ignored?

1.4 Modernism in India “Modernity can have no respect even for its own past...” – David Harvey(1990) According to Harvey, modernity must embrace a meaning which is collected and defined “within the maelstrom of change” (Harvey, 1990). The idea of “creative destruction”, the idea of abandoning the old in order to make something new, was incepted by the Modernists. The arousal of new standards of criticism created a revolt against rigid modernist judgment of aesthetic value. It provided a spirit to the movements like Marxism, Feminism, Deconstruction, Post-structuralism, Semiology, and Post-colonialism. There was a realization that the universal values of modern art and architecture were actually the values of a small and elite body of white, often Anglo- Saxon, Protestant men. Although some male members of different nationalities and religious beliefs were allowed in its sacred precincts, it denied the entry of outsiders, being women and non- westerners. (Faxon, 1997) Joanne Waugh has also addressed the issue of gender bias in modernist aesthetics. She said that due to strong domination of men in the production, language and criticism of modern art and architecture, it controlled the opportunities of women in the field. Hence, the resulting analytical aesthetics is a “masculine aesthetics”. (Waugh, 1990)

The irony is in the fact that modernism claimed universality, yet, it came out of the particular context of Western art history. It nurtured an avant-garde that challenged accepted norms and traditions. “„India has no avant-garde since the rebellious and progressive features of artistic development were channeled into the nationalist cause.” – Geeta Kapur (2000) Kapur (2000) argues that modernism, in the Indian context, forms a double dialogue with nationalism and the national and the modern are in constant dialogue. Nationalist art, for example, promoted the use of traditional or indigenous motifs. Modernism had constructed a paradoxical view of such motifs – sometimes rendering them as progressive signs, at other times subverting them as conservative and traditional. Yet, this paradoxical position is a symbol of India‟s particular form of modernism. The relationship between the notion of tradition and nationalism and modernism is a particular feature of cultural development in post-colonial societies. (Kapur, 2000) India got independence in 1947 at the cost of partitioning the country into two separate states, India and Pakistan. In 1971, Bangladesh was created out of East Pakistan. International modernism took an uncertain entry into India before independence but it gathered speed after 1947. The first prime minister of independent India, Jawaharlal Nehru, dreamt of creating a secular state, based on economic and social justice, which would offer an ethical leadership to the Third World. Nehru played a modernist who favoured state intervention in all spheres symbolized by the Five Year Plans. Before Independence, modernism was found in commercial buildings like Art Deco cinema halls, office buildings, and apartment blocks in Mumbai and Calcutta, built around 1930s, and not in official buildings. After independence, Nehru introduced modernism in public architecture in a bid to look to the future rather than the past. (Mitter, 2001). Nehru invited the French architect Le Corbusier to design the capital at Chandigarh in 1951.

“Le Corbusier‟s un-compromising functionalism deliberately broke with the past „historicism‟ of imperial architecture.” – Partha Mitter This was followed by an avant-garde architecture which was more machinic, abstract, brutal, and projected on the Indian urban landscape, which had traditionally been an absolute space of human relationships: mythic and haptic (Ghosh, 1996) . In this whole journey of adoption of modernism from West, women remained outsiders, still controlled by the domination of men. Post-Independent architects were anxious about avoiding pastiche, namely the attachment of Indian motifs to essentially modernist architecture. There was a search for more meaningful architecture rooted in Indian context. This got exemplified in the works of Charles Correa who worked on the concepts inspired by Indian climate and traditional ideas to save energy and explored the planning of space in vastu-purusa-mandala; B.V. Doshi who borrowed mughal structural features; and Uttam Jain who introduced indigenous modes of building in his work. (Mitter, 2001) Women employed in the construction were given inferior tasks. They were not allowed to be the masons or painter but carried bricks, stones and assisted the masons. Women played an important role in artisanal tasks like spinning yarns, shifting and kneading of clay for pottery and embroidery. There were taboos against women touching the potter‟s wheel or even the plough (Nanda, 1997) . But the pressure from the increasing commercial production demanded more women labourers. As women were a productive force, the male members and the society kept a strict control over them. They were inflicted with severe punishments if suspected of disloyalty on their part. (Rai, 2010)

1.5 Feedback In order to analyze the present situation and working conditions of women in architecture, a survey was conducted. Architects both from India and abroad shared their experiences and observations regarding current scenario of women in the profession. Women cited straightforward chauvinism about having women in senior positions and sexism. An Architect from UK, not willing to be named, said, “The system is set up for workaholic males. Only women that are prepared to be men‟ have a slight chance of promotion.” Man is the referent in the above statement. It establishes male actions as the standard against which all actions are judged. Hirante Welandawe, H W Architects PL, Srilanka, also shared the problem of sexism in the profession. She said, “As a student, one of my professors used to always think I had copied my boyfriend's design and never vice versa and then once another architect 'friend' had walked up to one of my client's and said ' why do you want to give a 50 storey tower to Hirante welandawe she is a woman architect‟.” Survey showed the high level of distrust of women architects‟ abilities. Some women suffered from loss of confidence because of their treatment. Many women reported that their ideas were sidelined or given little credence. According to Ar. Manjari Sharma, “Well, some male clients did turn to me for softer issues like “color” and “paintings on the wall”….while my male partner was trusted with the more “serious” issue.” In an interview with Ar. Anupama Kundoo, she said, “the general difficulties of being a woman in India was so general that they were not primarily felt by me, predominantly in the area of my profession. At that time I would have not even noticed this as an issue because it is the reality one has always lived with. Today I would see it clearer mostly because I have lived in various environments in other parts of the world and can see problems in India through a wider perspective. I think the issue of safety is a big one. I am also preoccupied that the women employed in the construction of our projects are given inferior tasks and paid 14

less than their male counterparts. Why can't they be masons, painters etc, why must they only carry bricks and stones and assist masons etc.” An architect from India (unwilling to be named) said, „I rarely went out on site or had to face a difficult client because my male boss dealt with these matters himself.‟ Some reported that their experience and thus their career prospects were limited to working on details and CAD packages. Dana Buntrock, Associate Professor at the University of California, Berkley commented, “in my experiences on construction sites and with contractors in Chicago, there was always this annoying „prove yourself‟ beginning.” In an interview of Sun Young Reih, AIA Associate Professor, Dept. of Architecture, University of Seoul, Korea, she said that if she would have been a white male, she would have achieved her goal earlier and further. She had often lost a few good chances because of her ethnical and sexual identity. She conducted the projects as a coordinator rather than a leader in order to reduce the negative response in case the clients would not have liked to have a female leader in the top position.” (Anthony, 2002) The question which bothers one is - why should one have to be a man to get what a man gets? What does it mean to be a man, if no woman with the awareness of her womanhood is around? It‟s obvious that women are being seen as a risk. They are being protected from undesirable situations. Is it not a well-intentioned form of paternalism? The survey highlighted the uncomfortable working environment for women. In an interview with Ar. Manjari Sharma, she said, “ women are often not taken as seriously as men, especially by the less sophisticated gentry. The contractors and laborers have a comfort with a certain kind of language, which they cannot use in front of women. So communication is constrained. Most women might not be comfortable with these situations. It may sound lame and squally, but it‟s an issue. For men it‟s black and white but for women there are a lot of greys within black and white.”

Women have a natural tendency of not compromising on many things to get the job done. On contrary, men architects can modulate themselves to fit into any kind of situation to achieve the final goal. “It's interesting how men are defined by their work and women by relationships" - Shyam Benegal The survey also highlighted the tendency of women sacrificing career progression for the sake of „work-life balance‟. Men define themselves by their work, but women define themselves from something very different – from their virtue of motherhood. If women find something unethical, unsettling, they have the courage to leave it and turn to their inside self.

Figure 1.13: cartoon sketch Source: Johnson, A.D.G and Greed, C. (May, 2003).Why do women leave architecture. Retrieved June 12, 2011from http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAProfessionalServices/Education/DiscussionPapers/WhyDoWome nLeaveArchitecture.pdf

Denise Scott Brown, in an interview conducted by Silvia Micheli said, “although women start out in practice equal with men, complications set in when they must juggle child-rearing and practice, just at the point in their professional development when seniority brings responsibilities for project management and the need for one hundred percent participation in the studio. Then even if you are brighter than they, the men will go further than you, and you will think: There‟s something wrong with me! There are other reasons why men receive 16

preference over women when both reach “the glass ceiling”. And there are reasons – too many to consider here – why architects don‟t make gurus of women. And another theory is sometimes offered women: You have power in your own sphere. Look at the power of the Spice Girls. Why must you compete with men? ” (Micheli, 2010) Survey also revealed that in some cases women were given lesser recognition than their male counterparts. Indian architect Madhavi Desai from the firm Archicrafts said that she had a joint practice with her husband; it worked in some ways because it gave her flexibility but it was a great disadvantage also, as the practice was identified with him. Not surprisingly, many of the most famous men in architecture today, who are presently in their 60s and 70s, depended heavily on the support of their wives as they rose through the ranks. The wives ran their offices, raised their children and loyally bolstered their egos.

1.6 Who is an Architect? If we think of the image of an architect in our mind, the model still promoted is that of Ayn Rand‟s hero from Fountainhead; a white, male, middle-class, architect who conforms to a masculinity model that is ruthless, uncompromising, and non- collaborative. (Sara, 2005) Architect as Individualist Architect as a „solitary genius‟, who produces masterpieces one after another enigmatically, is the notion of the sanctity of the individual creator and an intangible knowledge base, “founded on an art legacy of male practices and standards.”- States Sherry Ahrentzen in the article „F-word of architecture.‟ (Azherton, 1996) According to Sherry Azherton (1996), when women collaborate with male architects, their roles have been deemed marginal to the finished product, or even worse, their efforts have been inappropriately attributed to their male collaborators: Denise Scott Brown, Anne Griswold Tyng, and Truus Schroder are only a few cases in point. Ironically, male architects

collaborate, (for example, Robert Venturi, Louis Kahn, and Gerrit Rietveld) but the professional press often attributes their contributions as totalizing. “For the architect, the development of modernist methodology offered a new myth of total knowledge and total control of the design product. It sets architecture within a framework of classical economic models.”- Sherry Azherton Over the past century, there have been many husband-wife teams. Typically the husbands have attracted the fame and glory while the women worked in the background. However, Denise Scott Brown had already made important contributions to the field of urban design when she met and married her husband, Robert Venturi. Denise Scott Brown said, “Architects, grappling with the intangibles of design, select a guru whose work gives them personal help in areas where there are few rules to follow. The guru, as architectural father figure, is subject to intense hate and love; either way, the relationship is personal, it can only be a one-to-one affair.... I suspect... that for male architects the guru must be male. There can be no Mom and Pop gurus in architecture. The architectural prima donnas are all male.” (Brown, 1977) Most female architects have heard the horror stories: Mies van der Rohe‟s elevation to the pantheon of modernist masters, as Lilly Reich dies in poverty and anonymity. Le Corbusier vandalizing House E-1027, Eileen Gray‟s masterwork in the South of France. Robert Venturi‟s acceptance of the 1991 Pritzker Prize as his wife and partner, Denise Scott Brown, went all but unrecognized. Such examples are also evident in the profession, where the men inherently resist female architects in professional groups with male majority.

A male dominated profession Architecture is a male-dominated profession. Prestigious awards such as the Pritzker Architecture Prize rarely go to women, and women architects don't often receive headlinegrabbing commissions. Notable architects important to the history and development of the modernist movement who are reserved as „father‟ figures or masters are all male. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Frank Lloyd Wright, Le Corbusier, Walter Gropius, Alvar Alto, Louis I Kahn and so on. Ar. Revathi Kamath states “First of all being a woman in this field is not a very easy task- on a daily basis. Every day you have one encounter that will put you in your place and keep you grounded.” (Kamath, 2001) The few women who succeeded in the profession have to make notable sacrifices to their commitments as a woman.

1.7 Examining physiological differences Considering the social issues to be the only responsible factor for such discrimination and not considering the physiological makeup which proves this kind of discrimination to be natural to a certain extent is not justified. Much of the variation in mental conceptualization and information processing results from the relative dominance of one of the two hemispheres in the brain. Roger Sperry, a Nobel Prize winner, initiated the study of the relationship between the brain‟s right and left hemispheres. Sperry found that the left half of the brain tends to function by processing information in an analytical, rational, logical, sequential way. The right half of the brain tends to function by recognizing relationships, integrating and synthesizing information, and arriving at intuitive insights. In other words, the left side of the brain deals with a problem or situation by collecting data, making analysis and using a rational thinking process to reach a logical conclusion. The right side of the brain approaches the same

problem or situation by making intuitive leaps to answers based on insights and perceptions. The left brain tends to break information apart for analysis, while the right brain tends to put information together to synthesize a whole picture. (Dew, 1996) H. Norman Wright, a psychologist, says: “One of the unique differences between men and women is that women use both sides of their brain at the same time because of the thousands of additional nerve connectors that are there. Men have to shift from one side of the brain to the other. They‟re working out of the analytical, the left side, and if they have to move into the emotional area they drop that and move toward the right side. . . Men tend to be single minded. They get involved in one thing. And women have more of a capability of juggling”. (Wright, 1989) Women tend to communicate more effectively than men, focusing on how to create a solution that works for the group, talking through issues, and utilizes non-verbal cues such as tone, emotion, and empathy whereas men tend to be more task-oriented, less talkative, and more isolated. Men typically have stronger spatial abilities, or being able to mentally represent a shape and its dynamics, whereas women typically struggle in this area. Medical experts have discovered that women have a thicker parietal region of the brain, which hinders the ability to mentally rotate objects–an aspect of spatial ability. Research has shown this ability in babies as young as 5 months old, negating any ideas that these abilities were strengthened by environmental influences. (Hensley, 2009) Are these physiological differences considered in architectural education? Manoj Mathur, professor and Head of the department of Industrial Design at School of Planning and Architecture (SPA), New Delhi said in an interview, “Men are hunters and women are gatherers and while judging the individuals we keep in mind the difference and thus emphasis more on their respective qualities.” In an interview with Riyaz Tayyibji, an associate professor at Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology University (CEPT), Ahmedabad and partner in an architectural firm 20

Anthill Designs, Ahmedabad, said, "We have found that women who have worked with us in the office tend to have a spatial bias in their design development process. They tend to look at real requirements and circumstances with greater rigour. The men, on the other hand, are much more comfortable with formal processes. These are more amenable to the accepted processes of architectural abstraction. Women often struggle with these; their methods of description are more directed, experiential and not easily put into words. The same is true also for my students" Feminist writers have argued that the architectural profession is entrenched within a masculine paradigm and that it is this inequality that is at the root of a current crisis in architecture. (Sara, 2005)

1.8 The present crisis and conclusion The present situation is that every architect wants to do something new and innovative to become a star architect. The idea of an alternate model of practice based on interdisciplinary collaboration is not considered. This is the biggest problem that the generation of graduating architects face. The present crisis in architecture is due to this situation that is fuelled by the image of the architect as a male-solitary genius, indoctrinate in a modernist ideology that stresses on abstraction, producing masterpieces that are form-centric and unique. Women architects have been responsible for an enormous and diverse body of work in the last few decades. It deserves a wider recognition. In order to achieve this goal, Brinda Somaya, from Somaya and Kalappa Associates, India, organized a conference and exhibition in February 2000. It was titled â&#x20AC;&#x153;Women in Architecture: Focus South Asiaâ&#x20AC;?, to celebrate the built work of women architects in South Asia. (Milka Bliznakov, 2002) In spite of these efforts by the different organisations all over the world, the problem of sexism, chauvinism, uncomfortable working environment, mistrust of women abilities, lesser

recognition and their career sacrifice for the family, still exist in the profession. There is an overt neglect or naive attitude of feminism in the practice and discipline of architecture. Yet most men and even women architects disassociate themselves from talking of gender difference or social difference within the profession. The few women who succeeded in the profession have to make notable sacrifices to their commitments as a woman. This paper aims at bringing forth a perspective of modernism which has been accidentally or deliberately overlooked. Modernity in architecture is a masculine construct, characterized by words like heroic, brutal and savage. The entire movement, although conceived to be equal for both men and women, was based on the chauvinistic ideals of masculine superimportance and feminine side-lining. It is no surprise that these ideals have so entrenched themselves in the professional culture that women architects today, fail to even recognise the biases that may be inherent in the current system. Hence we have reached a state of crisis where the women are opting out of professional spheres, even though the gender-wise intake in architectural schools is even. Is it perhaps the time for a new culture in architecture based on empathy, collaboration, negotiation, emotion and experience?

Acknowledgement This paper would not have been possible without the significant involvement and cooperation of our guide Sudipto Ghosh and the various architects whose responses we got through their interviews via electronic media. The authors would wish to express our heartiest gratitude to our guide. Without his valuable input this paper would not have been in shape. Deepest gratitude is also due to the coordinators Mrs. Jaya Kumar and Prof. Ranjana Mital whose assistance also ensured the success of this exercise. Special thanks to our resource persons - Mrs. Anupama Kundoo, Mr. Manoj Mathur, Mrs. Manjari Sharma, Ar. Riyaz Tayyibji, Ar. Cany Ash, Ar. Wendy De Silva, Ar Madhavi Desai, Ar. Hirante Welandawe, Ar. Chitra Vishwanath, Ar. Katherine Guyot , Ar. Mona Chandra, Mr. K. T. Ravindran and Prof Badrinarayan for providing valuable information related to subject matter. Last but not the least my batch mates and all the well-wishers who were there to attend the seminar presentation and made it eventful.

List of Figures Figure 1.1: Pilotis, Le Corbusier- Villa Savoye

...................................................................6

Source: Howe, Jeffery. LeCorbusier -- Villa Savoye. Retrieved October 8, 2011 from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/Corbu.html

Figure 1.2: The free plan, Corbusier- Villa Savoye................................................................6 Source: Howe, Jeffery. LeCorbusier -- Villa Savoye. Retrieved October 8, 2011 from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/Corbu.html

Figure 1.3: The free facade, Corbusier- Villa Savoye ...........................................................6 Source: Howe, Jeffery. LeCorbusier -- Villa Savoye. Retrieved October 8, 2011 from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/Corbu.html

Figure 1.4: Slit Window, Corbusier- Villa Savoye ..................................................................6 Source: Howe, Jeffery. LeCorbusier -- Villa Savoye. Retrieved October 8, 2011 from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/Corbu.html

Figure 1.5: Roof Garden: Le Corbusier- Villa Savoye.............................................................6 Source: Howe, Jeffery. LeCorbusier -- Villa Savoye. Retrieved October 8, 2011 from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/Corbu.html

Figure 1.6: Pilotis by Eileen.................................................................................................. 7 Source: Design Blog(September 28, 2009). Eileen Gray's Classic Modernist Villa E-1027 Restored. Retrieved October 4, 2011 from http://www.housing.com/blogs/designblog/eileen-grays-classicmodernist-villa-e-1027-restored.html

Figure 1.7: Slit Window by Eileen .........................................................................................7 Source: Design Blog(September 28, 2009). Eileen Gray's Classic Modernist Villa E-1027 Restored. Retrieved October 4, 2011 from http://www.housing.com/blogs/designblog/eileen-grays-classicmodernist-villa-e-1027-restored.html

Figure 1.8: Free Facade Axonometric drawing of E.1027 by Eileen ....................................8 Source: Schilling, A.A.( 2004). Hinged Things: Concerning The Interior(s) Of Eileen Gray.Cincinnati:University of Cincinnati and Ohio LINK

Figure 1.9: Roof Garden by Eileen .........................................................................................8 Source: Schilling, A.A.( 2004). Hinged Things: Concerning The Interior(s) Of Eileen Gray.Cincinnati:University of Cincinnati and Ohio LINK

Figure 1.10: Free Plan by Eileen.............................................................................................8 Source: Schilling, A.A.( 2004). Hinged Things: Concerning The Interior(s) Of Eileen Gray.Cincinnati:University of Cincinnati and Ohio LINK

Figure 1.11: Eileen Gray…………………………………………………………………………..9 Source: Schilling, A.A.( 2004). Hinged Things: Concerning The Interior(s) Of Eileen Gray.Cincinnati:University of Cincinnati and Ohio LINK

Figure 1.12: Eileen Gray works..............................................................................................9 Source: Schilling, A.A.( 2004). Hinged Things: Concerning The Interior(s) Of Eileen Gray.Cincinnati:University of Cincinnati and Ohio LINK

Figure 1.13: cartoon sketch ...................................................................................................16 Source: Johnson, A.D.G and Greed, C. (May, 2003).Why do women leave architecture. Retrieved June 12, 2011from http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAProfessionalServices/Education/DiscussionPapers/WhyDoWome nLeaveArchitecture.pdf

WORKS CITED Anthony, K. H. (2002). Gender and race in Architecture- profiles of women architects. Retrieved October 11, 2011, from School of Architecture University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign: http://www2.arch.uiuc.edu/kanthony/arch-ws424fa02/sunyoung%20rieh,%20aia.htm Armstrong, C., & Zegher, C. D. (2006). Women Artists at the Millennium. Cambridge, Massachusetts, US: MIT Press Ltd. Azherton, S. (1996). The F Word In Architecture. In T. A. Duton, & L. H. Mann (Eds.), The F Word in Architecture: Feminist Analyses in/of/for Architecture (p. 329). Minneapolis, Minnesota, US: University of Minnesota Press. Brown, D. S. (1977). Learning's from Las Vegas. Cambridge: MIT Press. Craven, J. (n.d.). Marion Mahony Griffin, Frank Lloyd Wright's First Employee. Retrieved September 23, 2011, from About architecture: http://architecture.about.com/od/architectsaz/p/mahonygriffin.htm Design Museum. (n.d.). ALISON + PETER SMITHSON Architects (1928-1993 + 1923-2003). Retrieved 09 31, 2011, from Design Museum: http://designmuseum.org/design/alison-petersmithson Dew, D. J. (1996, April). Are you a Right-Brain or Left-Brain Thinker? Quality Progress Magazine , 91-93. 25

Faxon, A. C. (1997). Intersections of Art and Science to create aesthetic perception: The problem of Postmodernism. In A. I. Tauber, The elusive synthesis: aesthetics and science (p. 328). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Ghosh, S. (1996). The Space of Indian Cities: From an absolute to an Abstract Space. Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India: unpublished thesis, CEPT University. Harvey, D. (1990). The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Massachusetts, Cambridge, US: Blackwell. Hensley, A. (2009). 10 big differences between mens and womens brains. Retrieved october 29, 2011, from Masters of healthcare: http://www.mastersofhealthcare.com/blog/2009/10big-differences-between-mens-and-womens-brains/ Honeyman, K., & Goodman, J. (2002). "Women's Work, Gender Conflict, and Labour Markets in Europe, 1500-1900". In C. C. Fiona Montgomery, The European women's history reader (p. 380). London, UK: Routledge. Howe, J. (1996, 06 30). Villa Savoye. Retrieved from Villa Savoye: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/Corbu.html Kamath, R. (2001). Design Matrix. Kapur, G. (2000). When Was Modernism? Essays on Contemporary Cultural Practice in India. New Delhi: Tulika Press. McBride, T. M. (1976). The domestic revolution: the modernisation of household service in England and France, 1820-1920. New York: Holmes and Meier. Micheli, S. (2010, June 24). ARCHITECTURE, INTERVIEW-LEARNING FROM DENISE SCOTT BROWN. Retrieved october 9, 2011, from www.gizmoweb.org: http://www.gizmoweb.org/2010/12/learning-from-denise-scott-brown Milka Bliznakov, D. D. (2002). IAWA NEWSLETTER. Retrieved July 2, 2011, from International Archive of Women in Architecture: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/IAWA/news/news14.pdf Mitter, P. (2001). Post Colonial Art and architecture (1947-2000). In P. Mitter, Indian Art (p. 304). London, USA: Oxford University Press Publication. Nanda, M. (1997). Answering Criticism: the environment, wage labour and women. In C. I. Rosemary Hennessy, Materialist feminism: a reader in class, difference, and women's lives (p. 430). New York, US: Routledge.

Norberg-Schulz, Christian. (1971). Existence, Space, and Architecture. New York: Praeger Publishers. Pfeiffer, A. (n.d.). Lily Reich. Retrieved August 4, 2011, from AWID (Association of Women Industrial Design): http://www.core77.com/AWID/reich.html Rai, R. (2010). Themes in Indian History. New Delhi: V.K. India Enterprises. Sara, R. (2005). Feminising Architectural Education? Sheffield: University of Sheffield. Schilling, A. A. (2004). Hinged Things: Concerning the Interiors of Eileen Gray. Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati and OhioLINK. Seymour-Smith, M. (1998). The 100 Most Influential Books Ever Written: The History of Thought from Ancient Times to Today. UK: Citadel Press. Stoneburner, K. (2005, April 14). Manchester College. Retrieved October 12, 2011, from Katherine Stoneburner: http://users.manchester.edu/Student/KLStoneburner/ProWebsite/Women%20and%20Industr ialization.pdf Waugh, J. B. (1990). Analytic Aesthetics and Feminist Aesthetics: Neither/Nor? (C. K. Peg Brand, Ed.) Feminism and traditional aesthetics , 48, 421. Wright, H. N. (1989). Gary Smalley and Dr. John Trent:Right-Brain/Left Brain Pseudoscience. In Martin, & D. Bobgan, Prophets of PsychoHeresy II (p. 360). Santa Barbara, US: Eastgate Publishers.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Alberti. (1988). The art of building in ten books. In N. L. others. Cambridge: MIT Press. Ann de Graft-Johnson, S. M. (2003). Why do women leave architecture? Bristol: University of the West of England, RIBA. Anthony, K. H. (2002). Gender and race in Architecture- profiles of women architects. Retrieved October 11, 2011, from School of Architecture University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign: http://www2.arch.uiuc.edu/kanthony/arch-ws424fa02/sunyoung%20rieh,%20aia.htm

Armstrong, C., & Zegher, C. D. (2006). Women Artists at the Millennium. Cambridge, Massachusetts, US: MIT Press Ltd. Azherton, S. (1996). The F Word In Architecture. In T. A. Duton, & L. H. Mann (Eds.), The F Word in Architecture: Feminist Analyses in/of/for Architecture (p. 329). Minneapolis, Minnesota, US: University of Minnesota Press. Beatriz Colomina, J. B. (1992). Sexuality & space. (B. Colomina, Ed.) New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Brown, D. S. (1977). Learning's from Las Vegas. Cambridge: MIT Press. Craven, J. (n.d.). Marion Mahony Griffin, Frank Lloyd Wright's First Employee. Retrieved September 23, 2011, from About architecture: http://architecture.about.com/od/architectsaz/p/mahonygriffin.htm Design Museum. (n.d.). ALISON + PETER SMITHSON Architects (1928-1993 + 1923-2003). Retrieved 09 31, 2011, from Design Museum: http://designmuseum.org/design/alison-petersmithson Dew, D. J. (1996, April). Are you a Right-Brain or Left-Brain Thinker? Quality Progress Magazine , 91-93. Faxon, A. C. (1997). Intersections of Art and Science to create aesthetic perception: The problem of Postmodernism. In A. I. Tauber, The elusive synthesis: aesthetics and science (p. 328). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Ghosh, S. (1996). The Space of Indian Cities: From an absolute to an Abstract Space. Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India: unpublished thesis, CEPT University. Harvey, D. (1990). The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Massachusetts, Cambridge, US: Blackwell. Hensley, A. (2009). 10 big differences between mens and womens brains. Retrieved october 29, 2011, from Masters of healthcare: http://www.mastersofhealthcare.com/blog/2009/10big-differences-between-mens-and-womens-brains/ Honeyman, K., & Goodman, J. (2002). "Women's Work, Gender Conflict, and Labour Markets in Europe, 1500-1900". In C. C. Fiona Montgomery, The European women's history reader (p. 380). London, UK: Routledge.

Howe, J. (1996, 06 30). Villa Savoye. Retrieved from Villa Savoye: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/Corbu.html Kamath, R. (2001). Design Matrix. Kapur, G. (2000). When Was Modernism? Essays on Contemporary Cultural Practice in India. New Delhi: Tulika Press. McBride, T. M. (1976). The domestic revolution: the modernisation of household service in England and France, 1820-1920. New York: Holmes and Meier. Micheli, S. (2010, June 24). ARCHITECTURE, INTERVIEW-LEARNING FROM DENISE SCOTT BROWN. Retrieved october 9, 2011, from www.gizmoweb.org: http://www.gizmoweb.org/2010/12/learning-from-denise-scott-brown Milka Bliznakov, D. D. (2002). IAWA NEWSLETTER. Retrieved July 2, 2011, from International Archive of Women in Architecture: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/IAWA/news/news14.pdf Mitter, P. (2001). Post Colonial Art and architecture (1947-2000). In P. Mitter, Indian Art (p. 304). London, USA: Oxford University Press Publication. Nanda, M. (1997). Answering Criticism: the environment, wage labour and women. In C. I. Rosemary Hennessy, Materialist feminism: a reader in class, difference, and women's lives (p. 430). New York, US: Routledge. Norberg-Schulz, Christian. (1971). Existence, Space, and Architecture. New York: Praeger Publishers. Pfeiffer, A. (n.d.). Lily Reich. Retrieved August 4, 2011, from AWID (Association of Women Industrial Design): http://www.core77.com/AWID/reich.html Rai, R. (2010). Themes in Indian History. New Delhi: V.K. India Enterprises. Sara, R. (2005). Feminising Architectural Education? Sheffield: University of Sheffield. Schilling, A. A. (2004). Hinged Things: Concerning the Interiors of Eileen Gray. Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati and OhioLINK. Seymour-Smith, M. (1998). The 100 Most Influential Books Ever Written: The History of Thought from Ancient Times to Today. UK: Citadel Press. Stoneburner, K. (2005, April 14). Manchester College. Retrieved October 12, 2011, from Katherine Stoneburner:

http://users.manchester.edu/Student/KLStoneburner/ProWebsite/Women%20and%20Industr ialization.pdf Torrance, J. (1995). Karl Marx's theory of ideas. London, UK: Cambridge University Press. Waugh, J. B. (1990). Analytic Aesthetics and Feminist Aesthetics: Neither/Nor? (C. K. Peg Brand, Ed.) Feminism and traditional aesthetics , 48, 421. Wright, H. N. (1989). Gary Smalley and Dr. John Trent:Right-Brain/Left Brain Pseudoscience. In Martin, & D. Bobgan, Prophets of PsychoHeresy II (p. 360). Santa Barbara, US: Eastgate Publishers.

Appendix The F word in Architecture, Seminar 2011, SPA, New Delhi

Interview questionnaire Interviews were taken through email of the architects in India and abroad. Questionnaire send to various architects is as follows: Basic Data: Name: Name of Firm: Position within the firm: Years in the profession: 1. As a woman, what were the difficulties you faced in independent practice? How has the situation changed from the time you started till date? 2. In your view, what advantages do women have over men within practice and vice versa? 3. Have you ever been not taken seriously or mistreated for being a woman architect? 4. Do you prefer working for women clients or corporate clients with female representatives? If so, why do you think that is? 5. Do you think that women have gained recognition that is rightfully theirs, in the profession? Do you feel you have lost recognition for your works, just for being a woman?

6. Do you think men and women are naturally suited to different tasks within our profession? If so, should Architecture be taught differently within our schools? 7. What change or changes you feel will make practicing architecture more comfortable for women? 8.

Any other advice for students (both girls and boys) about to start their careers in architecture?