Under the patronage of the Indian National Commission for Cooperation with UNESCO United Nations. = Educational, Scinific and. + Cuftural Organization. = International conference on Intangible cultural Heritage MCIMSD 2020 Volume II Virendrasinh Khandare Editor in chief @ Indian Institute of Social Sciences and Folklore Research, Parbhani“Surface’ as an Urban Threshold: The Case of Mangaldas ni Haveli-1, Ahmedabad, Gujarat Maulik Hajamis Associate Professor, Faculty of Architecture and Planning, Parul University Introduction This essay briefly discusses one of the best-preserved Pol houses in the old-walled city of Ahmedabad, known as *Mangaldas ni Haveli-1°, located in the Lakha Patel ni Pol of the Khadia area, It studies the front exterior ‘Surface’ of the house, as an urban threshold through the theoretical lenses of ‘Order, decorum & animation’, ‘Urban theatricality’, ‘Shared territory’, “Wall as an event’ and “The art of dressing well’. The other aspects of the design such as the intemal activities, design principles, layout, construction details, etc. are excluded from the scope of the essay. Urban Surface The definition of ‘Surface’ in architecture, has been contested much through the years by researchers and scholars in their quest of arriving at an absolute definition of architecture. Leatherbarrow and Mostafavi state that surface became an autonomous entity with the emergence of the free fagade, The autonomy of the surface, the “free fagade,” presumes a distinction between the structural and non-structural clements of the building, between the frame and the cladding. Prior to the rampant use of framed construction, the need for light, ventilation and views outside the building were all provided for by the openings built in the walls, (Leatherbarrow and Mostafavi 2002) In architecture, ‘Surface’ can be specifically identified as sometimes coexistent forms and effects — wall plaster, paint, cladding, ornaments, fenestrations (doors, windows and louvers), projections (balconies and loggias), transparencies/ reflections/ translucencies and image. (Chatterjee, Ruskin and Beyond: Vital Surfaces and Making of Architecture 2017) Using these, surfaces create thresholds for transitions between spaces and realms. Chatterjee defines “Threshold’ as a connective tissue and “Surface” as an urban threshold consisting of fenestrations, entries, screens and other elements. She states that the surface plays akey role in connecting the building with the city and in shaping the public realm. Architectural historiography does not really concern itself with “Surface’. While the 19" century art-historical methods emphasized style, modernist histories asserted the themes of structure, function and above all, space as the essence of architecture, which continues to dominate the contemporary definition of architecture and architectural history. (Chatterjee, Surface Typologies, Critical Function and Glass walls in Australian Architecture 2018) MCIMSD 2020 ISBN: 978-81-89730-35-2 ua,Urban order and the threshold between architecture and the city informed the fashioning of the architectural surface from the Renaissance through to the 18" century. But since the onset of the Moder era, the quest for the truth, clarity, transparency and rationale abandoned embellishments and articulations from surfaces in architecture. Then onwards, prominent protagonists of Modernism including Adolf Loos and Le Corbusier consistently discarded surface ornamentation; until when ‘Surface’ as representation was revived by Robert Venturi and Denise Scott Brown’s notion of the decorated shed. Fiona McLachlan quotes Venturi: “Since the inside is different from the outside, the wall — the point of change — becomes an architectural event.” Along these lines, McLachlan suggests that “the contradictory demands of inside and outside, private and public, should be accommodated within the fagade, not necessarily resolved. (Chatterjee, Surface Typologies, Critical Function and Glass walls in Australian Architecture 2018) Mangaldas ni Haveli-1 This structure is a part of the densely built urban heritage fabric of the Ahmedabadi ‘Pols’. It was an abandoned house (about 200 yrs. old) which was refurbished and transformed into an interactive and informative exposition by Abhay Mangaldas with help of Vaishali Shah, an interior designer and conservationist. Currently, it functions as a boutique heritage hotel and restaurant. (Insite 2009) Fig. 1 Location of Mangaldas ni Haveli-1, Ahmedabad The exterior surface of the house is composed of two levels — primary and secondary. The former is comprised of the projected above floors and the wooden posts on the ground floor. The latter is comprised of the recessed wall on the ground floor along the inner edge of the “Otla’. Along the *Otla’ one finds the access point — the double-shuttered wooden panelled MCIMSD 2020 ISBN: 978-81-89730-35-2 usdoor to the house. This element has an elaborate doorframe with a ‘Ganesh’ motif in the centre of the wooden door lintel to demarcate the entry. The resultant exterior surface gives the house an identity within conformity. The surface profile of the house is reciprocated by similar other houses alongside and on the opposite side of the street. The surface of the above floor is composed by the repetition of a traditional double shutter panelled wooden window, each separated by a wooden post and bracket supporting the projected overhang. Each window on the first-floor surface is akin to ‘Sharokha’; together they define the scale of the surface and form ornamental proxies for the occupants. The surface forms an urban threshold which is analogous to a well-dressed person. It gives a decorum to the house while it stands as a part of the whole, a dignified member of a larger group. This threshold is further softened by the ‘Otla’ on the ground floor, which becomes a shared territory for the people on the street. It becomes an extension of the house onto the street, which provides a platform for social interaction and engagement. It becomes inclusive. The ornamentation of the surface and its elements is influenced by the traditional Gujarati embroidery motifs and pattems done on fabric. It animates the whole surface and engages the perceiver passing by the street. It validates what is stated by Chatterjee, “If there is nothing beyond the functional value or use of the exteriors of buildings, then the resultant city would fail to engage the inhabitants.” MCIMSD 2020 ISBN: 978-81-89730-35-2 150The front wall thus becomes an event for maximum reciprocal actions such as looking through and being looked back at the windows; a sharing ground for establishing mutual relations through the ‘Otla’. A peculiarity of these house forms is the similar theatricality and drama created along the inner surface of the above floors overlooking the courtyard of the house, which in fact, brings the outside inside. It is consciously organized in the design layout to acquire light and ventilation for all the rooms and activities inside the house, surrounding the courtyard. But it also establishes mutual visual connections with the floors above. The flooring tiles of the courtyard and other selective portions of the house are apparently analogous to the textile embroidery patterns of traditional Gujarati style. Fig. 3 Traditional Gujarati embroidered wall-picce called ‘Chaaklo’ Fig. 4 Entrance Door (Left), Views of the courtyard (Centre & Right) Conclusion MCIMSD 2020 ISBN: 978-81-89730-35-2 151Whether we question the appropriateness of the surface ormamentation, or not is one perspective. But for sure, one can decipher that Architecture never exists in isolation; that it is always urban; that it always creates thresholds between two realms. These thresholds are concretized or softened through the play of *Surfaces’ and ‘Elements’ of Architecture. In an urban context, each building is a part of a cluster, which further, is a part of a larger urban block. These urban blocks eventually constitute the city. Thus, since each built structure is a part of a larger whole, architecture should always attempt to be inclusive and engaging. Nowhere is this more evident than in the ornamentation and articulation of surfaces in the traditional Pol-houses of Ahmedabad such as Mangaldas ni Haveli-1. List of References Chatterjee, Anuradha. 2017. “Ruskin and Beyond: Vital Surfaces and Making of Architecture.” In John Ruskin and the Fabri of Architecture, by Anuradha Chatterjee, 1-28. Routledge. Accessed 12 8, 2018. htips://www.academia.edu/35424756/Ruskin_and_Beyond_Vital_Surfaces_and_the_ Making_of_Architecture. Chatterjee, Anuradha, 2018, “Surface Typologies, Critical Function and Glass walls in ‘Australian Architecture.” Chap. 8 in Surface and Deep Histories: Critiques and Practices in Art, Architecture and Design, by Anuradha Chatterjee, edited by Anuradha Chatterjee, 151-168. Newcastle upon Tyne, North East England: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Accessed December 8, 2018. https://www.amazon.com/Surface-Deep-Histories-Anuradha- Chatterjee/dp/1527505642. Insite. 2009, “Restoration insight: mangaldas ni haveli.” INSITE, 10 June, Monthly ed.: 36- 41. Accessed December 12, 2018. http://www scribd.com/doc/75538490/Mangaldas- Haveli, Leatherbarrow, David, and Mohsen Mostafavi. 2002. “Introduction: Why Surface Architecture?” Chap. | in Surface Architecture, by David Leatherbarrow and Mohsen Mostafavi, 7-8. London: MIT Press. Accessed 12 7, 2018. MCIMSD 2020 ISBN: 978-81-89730-35-2 1