8/14/2019 IIAS_NL57_2627

1/2

The colonial bungalow in India

The Newsletter | No.57 | Su mmer 201126 | The Focus: Cultural Heritage

The roots of the bungalow in India lie in the early attemptsof British military engineers in the eighteenth century to designa standardised and permanent dwelling based on indigenous

domestic structures for the East India Company when theBritish were still traders in the subcontinent. In its later version,the archetypal bungalow in the nineteenth century consistedof a low, one-storey, spacious building, internally divided, havinga symmetrical layout with a veranda all around, situated in a largecompound. This basic model was also adopted with modicationsalmost everywhere British imperial rule existed at that time.Miki Desai and Madhavi Desai

CRITICALLY SPEAKING, THE BUNGALOW as a house form is acontested concept of heritage in the Indian context. It is oftenperceived in scholarly discourses as a building type with astrong imperial ancestry. It was a counter concept to the moreor less socially-geared, collective lifestyle that was manifest inthe urban and rural dwellings of a vast number of indigenoussettlements of India. At the same time, traditional house typeswith a resemblance to the bungalow do exist in West Bengal,Karnataka and Kerala, but the context was not similar to thosebelonging to British residents. Thus, anchoring the bungalowas an Indian heritage appears at rst glance to be problematic.

However, there is another dimension to this phenomenon.During the late nineteenth century, Indian elites andpro-fessionals saw the British bungalow lifestyle as somethingto emulate. By the 1930s the bungalow had become a model

that was augmented and perso nalised by the middle classes.Socially and politically fostering the idea of a house in thecentre of a plot, this popular type got transformed in differentregions of India. Thus, an imperial socio-political house conceptmetamorphosed in the colonial and postcolonial period intoa widely popular and aesthetically rich cultural icon. It becamea part of the mindset of the populace and developed manysocio-cultural meanings along with spatial, stylistic andtechnological variations, terminating in the modernist house.

However, with increasing land pressures since the 1970s,other housing types such as apartments became morewidespread. In the twenty-rst century, these bungalowshave become signicant symbols representing a socio-culturalpast that is fast disappearing as a result of rapid populationgrowth and accelerated urbanisation. Colonial bungalows,with their staggering regional variation and expression, haveyet to receive adequate recognition as valuable heritage.

In India, architectural conservation efforts and awarenessare still framed by the legacy of colonial archaeology consequently; the governments efforts are largely limitedto the classical Hindu, Indo-Islamic and Buddhist monuments.The domestic genre remains marginalised, and there is stilla vast lacuna in the state of related knowledge and a lack ofgeneral awareness and sensitivity. In the recent past, colonialpublic buildings have been grudgingly accepted as heritage.However, the bungalow remains threatened, as it nds spacein neither any discourses nor policy matters, with a few excep-tions such as the imperial bungalows in New Delhi. This articleattempts to frame the meaning and signicance of colonialperiod bungalows against the states notion of national monu-ments in India, urging for a re-interpretation of the conceptof heritage from an Indian as well as an Asian perspective.

Traditional urban housing in IndiaDifferences in climate, topography and geology gavethe indigenous settlements and dwellings of India a variedregional character. The majority were walled cities witha fort built during medieval times for defence. Their morph-ology was characterised by an organic built form where theindigenous dwelling formed the primary unit of the urbanfabric. They had narrow winding streets on a pedestrianscale, a high degree of functional (private and commercial)mix, and inward looking residential clusters with courtyardswhich reected Indias social norms in domestic life. Therewas high population density and an intensive utilisationof land with close groupings of thick-walled houses.

The community-oriented layout reected inheritedcultural identities and status based on caste, occupationand religion. These traditional dwellings and settlementsstill exist today, albeit in a modied form; however, they areyet to be recognised as living heritage. The early impact ofcolonial culture was felt on these traditional settlements anddwellings in myriad ways, especially in the facades, as seenin the Bohra houses of Gujarat (photo 1) . When the bungalowwas adopted as a preferred house type, the form was in sharpcontrast to the traditional dwelling. [It went]from a one-,two- or more storeyed, courtyard type dwelling, with roomsgiving inward onto the courtyard, and structurally joinedto similar houses on one or more sides, to a free standing,courtyard-less, outward-facing, one- or two storeyedEuropean-style bungalow. 2

The colonial bungalowBroadly speaking, there were two bungalow categories:the urban and the rural. The latter were inhabited byBritish residents of India such as managers of various kindsof plantations or factories. They also included the dak bungalows (government guest houses, usually in remotelocalities) and other dwelling structures that were spreadall over the districts of British India.

In urban areas, large pieces of land adjacent to the city werereserved by the British for their cantonment and civil lines.At the beginning of the twentieth century, the bungalow,set in a spacious lot, was the norm as the residential housetype for British military officers associated with the IndianArmy, colonial administrators and business people as wellas a small group of wealthy Indian elites. The early bungalowswere austere, with simple volumes and a stark whitewashednish. This basic model developed into a more Europeanclassical form in outward appearance as time passed. It was

symmetrical in form and largely so in spatial organisation.It had a hall in the centre and rooms on each side of the hall,and a veranda in front facing the garden and sometimes alsoon both sides (photo 2) . The kitchen and servants quarterswere separate in most instances.

More elaborate types emerged on the scene in the nine-teenth century to indicate the superior social position of itsBritish owners. The veranda also disappeared from the sidesand remained only in the front and at times in the back.The bungalow with its Doric, and later Tuscan, columns onthe facade holding up the roof became a symbol of not onlythe evolution of the Indian prototype into a European buildingform but also of the commercial and the military might ofBritain. The labour of building the bungalows was suppliedby Indian craftsmen and contractors. Therefore, the physicalfabric of the bungalow remained rooted in Indian architectur-al traditions in spite of changes in the construction materials,technology and practices. 3 The bungalow, though initiallydesigned for an alien people, reected the cultural bases ofthe Indian population among whom it was found. This typedid not undergo much modication in the twentieth century.Few of these bungalows have survived in independent India,mainly in the military controlled cantonments.

Middle class adoption and regionalisationBy the beginning of the twentieth century, the bungalow as ageneric building type inuenced domestic architecture acrossthe country. Its dispersed settlement pattern was considered

to be healthier and was socially preferred. Set in a compound,it was also climatically suitable as it allowed a freer circulationof the prevailing winds.

We will now discuss the regional variants of the bungalowthat developed in the great colonial cities of Calcutta (nowKolkata), Madras (now Chennai), New Delhi, Bangalore (nowBengaluru), and Bombay (now Mumbai). In general, elementswere borrowed from the original colonial bungalow type, theencircling veranda was modied as an informal entrance space,and a courtyard was often introduced as a traditional Indianarchitectural device. While most families seem to have em-braced the bungalow as a new form of house, they continuedto live their daily lives according to local traditional moreswithin its shell, as social change was slower and more difficult.

Our narrative brings to the fore some of the major develop-ments in the house forms found in the ve cities mentionedabove. The few examples that remain today in the citiesof India should be part of the conservation agenda asthey express socio-cultural changes and are a record ofthe political history of Indian society in the colonial period,as the following descriptions will show.

Kolkata: RajbarisKolkata served as the capital of the East India Company from1772 to 1911 during the British Raj era. From the late eight-eenth century, the local elites/petty aristocrats from amongthe regions native Bengalis were courted by the British toserve as a comprador class of zamindars (landlords) whocollected revenue on land. Their assistance to the colonialadministrative system reaped rich benets they owned largeproperties and came to be known as the Great Families ofKolkata. This association generated a unique urban typologyin the nineteenth century in the form of opulent residences

called Rajbaris in Kolkata. These mansions were intended tocompete with and match the scale and grandeur of Britisharchitecture. Located on large grounds, the Rajbari expressedBritish colonial ideas of siting and spatiality while simultane-ously responding to the traditional life style of the zamindars .The building had a courtyard with the thakur dalan, thetemple of God. It was in the colonnaded portico, the facadesand the furnishings that the building showed the adaptationof British forms to Indian norms. Displaying neo-classicalfacades and strong European inuences in their visual charac-ter, the Rajbaris were planned as twin- or multiple-courtyardhouses which addressed the need for gender segregationand strict social hierarchy in a Bengali joint family. Over time,British trappings in terms of furniture and furnishing wereadded. 4 The Rajbari mansion is unusual and important as ahouse form that has come about through historic synthesisof the local and colonial cultures. The mansions are difficultto maintain by todays nuclear families and are being replacedor are gradually falling apart without attention and awarenessand in the absence of urban conservation policies.

Chennai: Garden housesMadras was one of the three provinces originally establishedby the British East India Company. In 1684, it was elevatedto a Presidency which included much of southern India.Chennai was its port city and trading centre. The last quarterof the eighteenth century was a period of rapid expansionfor Chennai which gave rise to an indigenous colonial modelof a palatial mansion called the garden house. 5 It was the

1: Evidence of Europeaninuence on traditionaldwellings of the Bonracommunity in Gujarat.

During the latenineteenth century,Indian elites and professionalssaw the Britishbungalow lifestyleas something toemulate. By the1930s the bunga- low had becomea model that wasaugmented and personalised bythe middle classes.

8/14/2019 IIAS_NL57_2627

2/2

A postcolonial cultural interpretation towards heritage 1

The Newsletter | No.57 | Su mmer 2011The Focus: Cultural Heritage | 27

early suburban home of the British, an exclusive residencethat stood in the centre of a large landscaped plot in thepicturesque tradition. While the rst houses were ratherplain, simple and massive, the garden house grew to be moreornate as time went by, with stylistic variations. It was anamalgam of the cantonment bungalow and the European villa(photo 3) . To its rear were servants quarters, stables and often

cowsheds, while in front was a lawn with owering shrubs andtrees where garden parties were held and tennis or croquetwas played. The houses were spacious and symmetrical withcolonnaded verandas in the front and at the back. The porchwas a commodious, major feature. Designed in Neo-Classicalstyle, the garden house was built as a solid masonry structurein lime plaster with the use of European elements such aspediments and balustrades. These houses were later boughtby the zamindars and rajahs who more or less continued theBritish lifestyle. In the post-Independence period, a few weremodernised and renovated for contemporary functions.The garden houses, though colonial in origin, have speciallocal and regional value as Indian heritage.

New Delhi: Imperial bungalowsThe capital of the British Raj shifted from Kolkata to Delhiin 1911 and an extensive urban design addition (called NewDelhi) was constructed between 1913 and 1930. A range ofbungalows were built here, located on tree-lined roads in

what is known as the Lutyens Bungalow Zone after Sir EdwinLutyens, the principal architect of the new capital. Whileearlier bungalows were built of stone by local masons, NewDelhis bungalows were mostly built of brick and lime mortarand plastered. By the 1930s, many were built on vast piecesof virgin land for British legislators and civil servants, othersfor the Indian nobility, professionals and senior officials inthe colonial administration and the legal system. The sizeand characteristics of each bungalow were commensuratewith the occupants position in the imperial communityssocio-economic and political hierarchy. Most bungalows wereof only one storey with a porch in front, and had tall columnsand arches. They also had elaborate replaces and nely-crafted colonial furniture. A few bungalows that belonged toelite Indians included a courtyard as an exception. The facadewas treated in a simple classical manner Tuscan rather thanRomantic Revival was in vogue at the time. Classical columnsbecame symbols of the European heritage and of good taste.Today, the top government officials and politicians in powerhave chosen to live almost the same lifestyle. These imperialbungalows from the late colonial period have become thecarriers of a socio-political mindset that has endured to thepresent time.

Bengaluru: Carpenter Gothic bungalowsBengaluru was the largest military cantonment town ofthe British Raj in Southern India and was part of the MadrasPresidency region. It was founded in the early nineteenthcentury; later the town ourished as a military station as well

as an administrative and residential centre. 6 Around 1883,the cantonment was enlarged by the addition of RichmondTown, Benson Town and Cleveland Town where a numberof bungalows were built for military officers or for retiredBritons. Many bungalow designs in Bengaluru were inspiredby what was going on in Europe and the Americas, as theCarpenter Gothic style began to inuence public buildingsand institutions there. From the 1880s to the 1930sthese bungalows became taller and assumed a Romanticexpression, with steeply pitched roofs whether or notthey were required for climatic reasons. Most examplespossessed symmetrical plans that invariably had a centralhall. The facades received maximum attention. Cast ironwere used for railings, brackets and pillars. The porchesof the bungalows were prominent with sloping roofs andfretwork inll (photo 4) . Gradually, the Carpenter Gothic style

was adapted by the locals as the town grew. The BengaluruMonkey-Tops, as the bungalows are popularly known, are arecord of not just socio-cultural but also craft history whichis unique to the region. With the rapid growth in the twenty-rst century of Bengaluru as the Silicon Valley of India, thesene examples are threatened by real estate speculationand city redevelopment plans as urban land prices soar.

Mumbai: Suburban Art Deco bungalowsThe trading centre of Mumbai became an important porttown after the takeover by the British Crown in 1858, growinginto a leading metropolis by the time of Independence in 1947.In the late nineteenth century, wealthier classes built gardencity type bungalows in up-market areas of South Mumbai.By the mid-1930s, the city expanded extensively into newlydeveloped suburbs. 7 Their infrastructural network promptedrapid residential growth where the bungalow (and even avilla-type house) became a popular choice of the middle class.Though earlier bungalows were somewhat similar to the ones

in Bangalore, Art Deco became the preferred style towards the1940s and at roofs, made possible by reinforced concrete,began to be associated with modernity. The Art Deco style wasfeatured on facades and in interior details. Curved balconies,bay windows, decorative surfaces, vertical and horizontalmouldings and patterned oorings gave them the ambienceand modern language of that time. 8 The remaining Art Decobungalows in Mumbai arguably superior to the examplesfound in Miami, Florida are excellent examples of crafts-manship and early modernist principles and require anurgent conservation awareness and policy in view of thefast growth of this megacity.

Standard bungalowsOther cities and towns of India were likewise dotted withregional variations of bungalows, large and small. During thetwentieth century, these went through stylistic and techno-logical transformations while responding to socio-economicchanges. Internal forces, such as the nationalistic fervourarising from the long drawn-out freedom struggle againstBritish colonial rule and the making of New Delhi, affectedtheir design. In addition, stylistic inuences from continentalEurope and America resulted in the adoption of Art Deco andStreamline Moderne features, followed by the InternationalStyle. With the arrival of Le Corbusier, the principles of theModern Movement dominated the post-Independence eraand the bungalow became a favourite modern option forthe individual homeowner. Thus, the simple cantonmentbungalow nally terminated in the modernist house.

Heritage valueThus, bungalows constitute a very special and uniquetypology in India, with a strong cultural/historic position asrepresentatives of a by-gone era. Historically they symbolisethe individualisation of private property, a concept new tothe collective lifestyle of traditional societies in India. Overa period of time they were absorbed into Indian society, theimperial roots long forgotten. The bungalow faces manyproblems of survival in the twenty-rst century. For example,the maintenance and upkeep of the buildings and gardenshave become the most nagging problem for the owners, andthe law of inheritance and division of properties is causingsocio-political confusion and fracture among the families.

An analysis of the transition between the colonial andpostcolonial periods, using the bungalow as a phenomenon,

would provide an excellent opportunity to investigate anumber of questions regarding the built environment andits relation to society. In the Indian context, the failure tounderstand the bungalows origins and evolution with itsdeeper social and cultural connections has brought aboutweak descriptions of its position in urban geography. In thetwentyrst century, in view of the forces of globalisation andmarket economy, indigenous insights into the understandingand preservation/adaptation of this heritage will assist inmeeting the contemporary challenges of not only lling thehousing needs of the country but also issues of urban designand planning from a local or Asian perspective.

Miki DesaiCEPT University & Archicrafts Foundation, Ahmedabad, Indiammdesai2@gmail.com

Madhavi DesaiArchicrafts Foundation, Ahmedabad, India

mmdesai2@gmail.com

Notes1 This article is based on the forthcoming publication:

Desai, Madhavi, Miki Desai and Jon Lang, The Bungalow inTwentieth Century India: The Cultural Expression of ChangingWays of Life and Aspirations in the Domestic Architectureof Colonial and Post-Colonial Society, Ashgate, UK.All photographs are by Miki Desai.

2 King, Anthony D. 1984. The Bungalow: The Production ofa Global Culture. New York: Oxford University Press, p.51.

3 Glover, William. 2004. A Feeling of Absence from Old England:The Colonial Bungalow. In Home Cultures 1 (1) Berg.

4 Bose, Kamalika 2008. Seeking the Lost Layers: An Inquiry intothe Traditional Dwellings of the Urban Elite in North Calcutta. Ahmedabad: SID Research Cell, CEPT University.

5 Muthiah, S. 2004. Madras Rediscovered. Chennai:EastWest Books (Madras) Pvt. Ltd., p.91.

6 Staley, Elizabet h. 1981. Monkey Tops: Old Buildingsin Bangalore Cantonment. Bangalore: Tara Books, p.7.

7 Dwivedi, Sharada & Rahul Mehrotra. 2001. Bombay: the CitiesWithin. Mumbai: Eminence Designs Pvt. Ltd., p.243.

8 Dwivedi, Sharada & Rahul Mehrotra. 2008. Bombay Deco. Mumbai: Eminence Designs Pvt. Ltd.

2 (left): A typicalcolonial bungalow.3 (above): A gardenhouse in Chennai.4 (right): A bungalowin Bangalore.

The bungalow,though initiallydesigned foran alien people,reected thecultural basesof the Indian

populationamong whomit was found.