Jury Insights (2016-17)
The jury as a whole wrestled with the amount of value that should be placed on the positioning of the project: type based innovation or newness in a geographic region—against the value of a formal exploration and resolution through tectonic and spatial means.
The general assumption one made looking at most of the work being considered was that good architecture requires a large commission, a healthy budget, and an indulgent client. This isn’t necessarily true. One was looking, more keenly, for the larger import of the work.
Since there is no fixed categorisation of projects, TML enables the jury to develop a system appropriate to the selection at hand. All of this provides credibility to the recognition as does the avoidance of artificial ranking.
To empirically delineate the complex narratives of the contemporary architectures-in-the-making of India; the strength of the TML Process is that it will avoid the facile generalisations that have characterised similar critical exercises in the past.