Indian Architecture (Buddhist and Hindu Periods) c39.44

c39.44

Yet in spite of the fact that there is much in both buildings that is rightly intentioned and thoroughly conscientious, there are certain features, not only noticeable in these two examples, but common to the style as a whole, which it is difficult to reconcile with what is ordinarily regarded as wholly good architectural design. One instance may be noted in the arched and pedimented recess, a motif repeated so frequently as to dominate the style. There is a lack of suavity in the rather inadequate curves of the trefoil, as they contrast abruptly with the acute angles of the pediment, neither of these elements flowing evenly by themselves, or with one another. But the least appropriate feature is the pyramidal roof, which the Kashmiri masons never succeeded in making really convincing Steeped in the tradition of the lap-jointed gable of their wooden structures, they copied this expedient ingenuously in stone, disregarding the fundamental principle that what is asked of stone construction is that it should look like stone, and so with regard to all the materials used in the building art. In addition to these particular inconsistencies in the Kashmiri style, there are other subsidiary architectural elements, not entirely satisfying. These include a certain immaturity in some of the forms, which give the impression of a combination of artlessness and experience, a paradox probably not unconnected with the isolated position of the country itself.