1

The Capitol Complex at Chandigarh,A study of Aesthetics

Scott Crisman Sworts

1Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture, 1923, p. 4

2

Architect: Le CorbusierBuilding: The Capitol Complex at Chandigarh (Palace of the Assembly, Secretariat,

and The High Justice)Theme: Aesthetics

In 1947, India gained independence from the British Empire. The resulting political

situation created the need for numerous new civic projects and new capital cities for

several provinces. Among the provinces needing an administrative center was East

Punjab, where Chandigarh is located.

In 1951, Le Corbusier was appointed as the Lead Designer of the new city. For the

urban plan, he worked with a team of architects that included his cousin Pierre

Jeanneret. However, in designing the Capitol Complex, Le Corbusier worked alone,

developing both the urban plan of this city sector and the structures. In 1962, work was

completed on the Capitol complex at Chandigarh.

“Architecture goes beyond utilitarian needs.” -Le Corbusier1

THE AESTHETIC

The design of the Capitol complex was perhaps Le Corbusier’s greatest opportunity.

For the first time, he had a chance to put all of his theories on urban planning and

architecture into practice. His charge was to create a center of government “. . .Where

2Norma Evanson, Chandigarh, 1966, p. 71

3Norma Evanson, Chandigarh, 1966, p. 75

4Le Corbusier, Oeuvre Complete, 1946 - 52, 1958, p 195

5Le Corbusier, Oeuvre Complete, 1946 - 52, 1958, p 118

3

state functions were not merely housed but celebrated and where an architectural

statement could be created strong enough to embody a sense of power and

permanence, of seriousness and exaltation.”2 In writing about this project Le Corbusier

stated it was, “a great architectural venture, using very poor materials and a labor force

quite unused to modern building techniques, with the tremendous obstacle of the sun

and the necessity of satisfying Indian ideas and needs, rather than to impose Western

ethics and aesthetics.”3

Despite stating that the project needed to satisfy Indian ideas, most of the aesthetic

components of his work at Chandigarh are a continuation and development of his earlier

work. An example is the use of rough concrete that showed the marks of construction.

(See figure 1) This style was first fully expressed on the l’Unite de Habitation in

Marseille. Discussing this form, Le Corbusier stated, “these are magnificent to look at,

they are interesting to observe, to those who have a little imagination, they add a certain

richness.”4 Another reiteration of a previous aesthetic form was his use of the Brise-

Soleil on the facades of the buildings. (See figure 2) He commented, “they take the

place of the weather drips on a classical facade, but they cover and influence the whole

structure.”5

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 2

6Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture, 1931, p. 29

7Le Corbusier, Oeuvre Complete, 1946 - 52, 1958, p. 195

8Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture, 1931, p. 127

4

The form of the Brise-Soleil is used as an element in molding the play of light on

surfaces. For Le Corbusier, light is one the most important aesthetic considerations in a

building. He stated it as follows, “Architecture is the masterly, correct and magnificent

play of masses brought together in light. . . . Light and shade reveals these forms;

cubes, cones, spheres, cylinders or pyramids are the great primary forms which light

reveals to advantage.”6

Related to the play of light was the use of bold color, about which he said, “I have

decided to make beauty by contrast. I will find its complement and establish a play

between crudity and finesse, between the dull and intense, between perfection and

accident. I will make people think and reflect, this is the reason for the violent,

clamorous, triumphant polychromy.”7 (See figure 3)

Le Corbusier had a love of relating the design of machinery to architecture. He said,

“Every modern man has the mechanical sense. The feeling for mechanics exists and is

justified by our daily activities. . . . There is moral sentiment in the feeling for

mechanics.”8 This was the concept behind one of the most visually striking pieces of

the entire complex, the assembly space, the form of which was derived from an

industrial cooling tower. (See figures 4 and 5)

FIGURE 3

FIGURE 4

fIGURE 5

9Norma Evenson, Chandigarh, 1966, p.89

5

Chandigarh is Le Corbusier’s aesthetic at its most refined and developed form. But,

does it work?

“In India, I thought everything is elegant and refined; but here was something

crude. I thought this building should have elegance . . . but it is a fist instead of

a hand.” -Minoru Yamasaki9

ANALYSIS

In Chandigarh, Le Corbusier imposed his will without consideration to the context of the

project. He made no move to acknowledge the culture and heritage of India, a culture

at least a thousand years older than that of Europe. Yet the Capitol Complex does not

reflect the European culture either. It exists in a cultural void, a wasteland created by

the rejection of any icon or symbol that spoke to the past.

The closest analogy to the architecture that Le Corbusier created is Newspeak, created

in Orwell’s book 1984. Newspeak was a version of the language that removed all

elegance and symbolism, leaving only cold functionalism. Le Corbusier created an

architectural language that removed all ideas that he deemed inappropriate.

Unfortunately, one concept that he disapproved was the use of references to past

cultures. By not incorporating elements of culture, and advocating the notions of mass

production, the architecture could be located anywhere in the world. Chandigarh would

6

be as appropriate for Phoenix as it is for India.

The Brise-Soleil sun shade is an excellent example of this. The form has no heritage in

Indian architecture, but was developed for Le Corbusier’s European projects. By

obscuring where floors, ceilings and windows are, they destroy the scale of the exterior

of the building. Only the people around the building and a few visible doors give any

indication of the size of the structure. (See figure 2) One element of most traditional

architecture is a well-developed sense of scale. Removing it leaves the building adrift in

a sea of space, an effect heightened by the vast plaza spaces surrounding each

structure.

Although the Brise-Soleil fails in many ways, it does create fascinating deep shadows.

The way light hits the buildings is probably the best aspect of the entire complex. The

building’s surfaces are articulated by the play of the shadows, creating dynamic

buildings that seem to change as the sun moves across the sky. It gives the building a

certain elegance.

Rough concrete, on the other hand, has no elegance of form, it does not speak of

craftsmanship but of a lack of it. By calling it an aesthetic form, Le Corbusier is taking a

flaw in construction technology and turning it into surface decoration. He says that they

add “richness to a building for those who have a little imagination.” By saying this he

seems to be making the arrogant statement “art can only be appreciated by the

educated elite, and no one else really matters.” Appreciation of buildings should not be

7

limited to people with a good imagination.

The use of color is jarring, which was Le Corbusier’s stated intent. It does not relate to

the form or function of the building, nor is it in any way linked to the context. Like

Harvest Gold and Avocado Green appliances, the colors chosen seem to have an

element of fad to them. They do not reflect the timeless nature of an institutional

building. Perhaps the worst example of this is the combination of magenta and red that

dominates the color scheme of the Assembly.

The tower for the Palace of Assembly is the most dominant form in the complex, but it is

a failure functionally. The acoustics inside are so poor that all speakers must have a

microphone to be heard. (See figure 6) The building is also designed in a way that

keeps the citizens, press and members of the Assembly separate. This design seems

to say, “The people have no access to the workings of the government.” Interestingly,

the Palace of the Assembly has one of Le Corbusier’s few gestures to Indian custom

and tradition. He has created a separate gallery for women, hiding them behind glass.

However, it should be noted that this custom of segregating women was falling into

disuse even when the building was designed. (See figure 7)

On the whole, Le Corbusier showed contempt for the culture of India. A glimpse of this

can be seen in the following statement, “The sun is so violent that until now the habits of

siesta and laziness were inevitable in native architectural conditions which allowed no

FIGURE 7

FIGURE 6

10Norma Evanson, Chandigarh, 1966, p. 75

11Norma Evanson, Chandigarh, 1966, p.75

8

work whatsoever at certain hours and seasons.”10 In his writings, he seems to think of

the Indians as a primitive, ignorant people who can only benefit from his greatness and

intelligence.

He feels he can solve all of India’s problems with his genius. If the people are restive in

the afternoons because it is so hot, he will create an architecture that allows activity in

the heat of the day. Of course, by creating the vast open spaces, he has arrogantly

ignored all traditional Indian methods of coping with the heat. Buildings built close to

each other create shaded walks; in Chandigarh, half mile strolls in searing heat are

necessary. Because of his assumption that he always knows the correct solution, he

made an existing minor problem a major one.

Other examples of this refusal to acknowledge anything other than his own opinion are

evident in the High Justice building. He indicated a wall of glass and stated, “It is all

glass, but the sun will never be dangerous. He will not be the enemy, but the friend.”11

His shuttering did keep direct light out of the courtrooms until very late in the day, but

reflected glare forced many judges to move their benches so as not to stare into it. The

court entries lead directly outside, causing people to wait in areas directly exposed to

the driving monsoon rain. Because Le Corbusier felt that the Entry hall should not be an

indoor area, but a continuation of the exterior space, rain is also a problem in that part

9

of the building. In fact, employees of the High Justice find it almost impossible to move

around the building without getting wet.

Le Corbusier designed tapestries for the courtrooms that many judges declared were an

affront to the dignity of justice. One judge even went as far as to say, “For God’s sake

burn them or do something.” Two or three tapestries were removed, but were replaced

when Le Corbusier appealed to Prime Minister Nehru.

Perhaps, if he could have laid his preconceived notions and western arrogance aside,

he might have been capable of producing something wonderful at Chandigarh. Many of

his aesthetic concepts are exciting, but fail horribly in their execution. The buildings do

not convey the sense of timelessness inherent in much of India’s built environment, they

appear very dated only fifty years after completion. The entire Capitol Complex is

bleak, utilitarian without being functional, and devoid of any trace of humanity. In all,

Chandigarh is little more than a monument to one man’s overwhelming ego.

10

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Chandigarh Perspectives Website. http://www.cperspectives.org. March 19, 1999.

Evanson, Norma. Chandigarh. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966.

Kalia, Ravi. Chandigarh, In Search of an Identity. Carbondale: Southern Illinois

University Press, 1987.

Le Corbusier. The City of Tomorrow. London: The Architectural Press, 1924

Le Corbusier. The Modulor. Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press, 1954.

Le Corbusier. Oeuvre Complete 1952 - 57. Zurich: Girsberger, 1958.

Le Corbusier. Towards a New Architecture. New York: Dover Publications, 1931.

Orwell, George. 1984. New York: Signet, 1949.