The article gives a useful periodization, but calling the British period the most significant for architecture in Pakistan feels overstated, especially since it downplays the earlier Islamic and pre-Islamic layers. The point about the lack of opera houses, major museums, and architecturally notable bridges is also worth taking seriously as a critique of post-1947 planning.
The article gives a useful periodization, but calling the British period “the most significant period for Architecture in Pakistan” seems like a stretch. The colonial buildings are certainly prominent and still in use, yet the piece itself notes the destruction and neglect of earlier Islamic structures under the Sikhs and the raids from Persia and Afghanistan, so the comparison feels uneven. The more interesting point is the closing observation about the lack of major libraries, museums, or opera houses since 1947 and the dependence on foreign designers—that seems like the real story about architecture in Pakistan rather than ranking periods.
While All Things Pakistan has remained alive and online, it has been dormant since June 11, 2011 - when, on the blog's 5th anniversary, we decided that it was time to move on. We have been heartened by your messages and the fact that a steady traffic has continued to enjoy the archived content on ATP.
While the blog itself will remain dormant, we are now beginning to add occasional (but infrequent) new material by the original authors of the blog, mostly to archive what they may now publish elsewhere. We will also be updating older posts to make sure that new readers who stumble onto this site still find it useful.
We hope you will continue to find ATP a useful venue to reflect upon and express your Pakistaniat. - Editors
The article gives a useful periodization, but calling the British period the most significant for architecture in Pakistan feels overstated, especially since it downplays the earlier Islamic and pre-Islamic layers. The point about the lack of opera houses, major museums, and architecturally notable bridges is also worth taking seriously as a critique of post-1947 planning.
fngauge.space
The article gives a useful periodization, but calling the British period “the most significant period for Architecture in Pakistan” seems like a stretch. The colonial buildings are certainly prominent and still in use, yet the piece itself notes the destruction and neglect of earlier Islamic structures under the Sikhs and the raids from Persia and Afghanistan, so the comparison feels uneven. The more interesting point is the closing observation about the lack of major libraries, museums, or opera houses since 1947 and the dependence on foreign designers—that seems like the real story about architecture in Pakistan rather than ranking periods.
ported2browser.sbs