Si Pakcik Tua yang Lumpuh

Hari ini di masjid Michael St semasa solat berjemaah, saya solat di sebelah seorang pakcik tua yang lumpuh sebelah badan. Beliau merupakan salah seorang jemaah masjid yang konsisten solat berjemaah, menghadiri kelas-kelas agama Syeikh Abu Ayman (tokoh ASWJ Association di Australia) dan program-program lain di masjid.

Baru hari ini saya menyedari sesuatu yang agak menyentuh hati saya.

Semasa duduk untuk tahiyyat akhir, dia menggunakan tangan kirinya untuk mengangkat jari telunjuk tangan kanannya. Ia mengingatkan saya tentang kisah hebat Jaafar bin Abu Talib dalam Perang Mutah. Beliau memegang panji Islam dengan tangan kanannya, ditetak oleh musuh. Disambut pula panji itu dengan tangan kirinya, sekali lagi terputus oleh musuh. Akhirnya beliau memegang dengan merapatkan panji tersebut ke dadanya menggunakan lengannya yang tinggal, sehingga akhirnya musuh membelah dua badannya.

Kalau seorang pakcik tua yang sudah lumpuh sebelah badannya itu sanggup datang berjalan kaki ke masjid untuk pergi solat berjemaah di masjid, menghadiri halaqah-halaqah dan sebagainya, apalah alasan yang patut keluar dari mulut seorang pemuda yang sihat tubuh badannya, cerdas otaknya, dan banyak masanya untuk tidak keluar ke masjid dan menghadiri program-program agama?

Terasa berlubang dada ini apabila diberi peluang untuk bermuhasabah peristiwa sebegini.

MP Questions for future trajectory

2nd day of Major Project presentation. 3/11/11. Building 8 level 12.

 
A quick note for future reference. First drafted on the day of Major Project presentation, 2nd of November 2011.

Being the first one to present for Major Project presentation offers a good opportunity to see the other presentations and observe the questions that architects/tutors/lecturers asked. Either we take it as a project-specific critique, or a kind of post-mortem that makes us question our own trajectory in the near future. Knowing the set of questions will make us ponder on our own architecture, in one way or the other.

Although, I felt that in most cases, it becomes a ceremony of congratulating friends, which is also great.

Among the big questions that came out from the crits were;

- How is our architecture different from the others?
- If we take out elements from our project (it can be program, political motive, user, etc), would it change our approach towards the architecture? 
- What are the things that we can bring forward from the project to our future career?
- What are the problems/issues that we are trying to address or solve?

Of course, before those questions were being asked, there were questions about site, materiality, form, program and what not. Things that need to be clarified to understand the project.

Almost all of the projects presented were proposing new ways of thinking, outside the norms. As one of my tutors once said, in major projects, we should challenge the norms. I see people making a hybrid between programs, blurring programs and spaces, misappropriation of typologies, integration of many ephemeral values that informs the design, politically driven project to address certain issues, process driven architecture and so much more.

Looking back 5 years ago, when we started our first project by designing a structure for an egg, its really amazing to see a wide spectrum of trajectories that all of us are undertaking now. Now I'm really looking forward to see what happens next. Will we be succumbed to the politics of a profit-driven office, or be one of those who design with budget or contract in mind, or design great spaces, or be an academician. The possibilities are endless I guess.