Author 1
– Abhishek Sanjay Kshirsagar
Author 2
– Dr. Abhijit Natu
Student of Fourth Year at B.K.P.S. College of Architecture, Pune

Abstract : In the regions of conflict, the damage as a
result of war can be seen in the form of destruction of
structures. Wars also have long-term social and
cultural consequences. The research paper aims to
study the impact of war on architecture and its
occupants. A question needs to be raised as to what
should be the future of these affected structures. The
study attempts to find appropriate strategies by
analyzing events in warfare regions through archival
data, book case-studies and photos. Architecture can
be a tangible tool to restore the identities of
individuals and communities.
Keywords: War, architecture, community, impact,
strategies, restore

I. Introduction
“War, painfully enough, is good for architecture”.
– Rem Koolhaas, during the 2nd annual
lecture on „Warchitecture‟, Amsterdam.
War is a state of armed conflict between different
nations, states or armed groups. Architecture is a target
of war where an attack is done to destroy settlements
and cities resulting in loss of life, loss of home and loss
of identity, thus the loss of culture. The impact of war
on a building is not just physical but also has a
perceptual impact on our memory. Building is
memory. 1
As a result f war, within instants the spaces
of dialogue and living become fragments of volumes
where these fragments and remains of the buildings
become the determinants of that space. The images of
scarred facades and volumes of rubble make one to
relive the moments one had associated with the“War and architecture have a long and often
parasitical relationship; the building and the unbuilding
of urban centres, the making of enclaves, walls and
segregated
residential city zones has been fundamental to urban
form and human experience. The destruction of
buildings and cities has therefore always been an
integral part of winning and losing wars.”
2
Buildings are the targets of high priority as they are the
shelters of human beings, the primary targets causing
the inception of conflict. The result could be seen in
the late 20th century and the last two decades where a
study stated 90% of the people directly affected by
wars were civilians. 3
A question has to be asked as to
what should be our approach towards such structures.
Should we use the fragmented volumes and remains to
our advantage to create something new or should we
continue to let the past being destroyed?
The study aims to analyze the post-war strategies of the affected buildings with the objective to understand the
impact the war had on the architecture. As this impact
on architecture can result in the loss of culture, it is
relevant that architecture itself can be an impetus to
restore or preserve a culture.
“There has always been another war against
architecture going on-the destruction of the cultural
artefacts of an enemy, people or nation as a means of
dominating, terrorizing, dividing or eradicating it all
together.” 4
The scope of the research is limited to study
architecture as a casualty of war where a war is waged
specifically to target architecture and to destroy it
intentionally II. Theoretical Framework
In past, researches have been done studying the causes
and the effects of war on architecture of particular
regions. There have been researches published on the
housing of the migrants and the refugees of the war
affected regions. This research paper refers the article
published by Ar. Lebbeus Woods on War and
Architecture: Three Principles which discusses the
approaches for the architecture of a post-war world.
Principle 1: Restore what has been lost to its pre-war
condition.
Principle 2: Demolish the damaged and destroyed
buildings and build something entirely new.
Principle 3: The post-war city must create the new
from the damaged old.
III. Methodology
The research applies thematic sampling as a method to
study case specific structures through secondary data
sources like books, archival data, articles and tries to
apply these principles as to what must been their post
war-approach. They can be a guideline for what
approach a war affected structure can have, if any, in
future. Inferences:
– Restoring the architecture to its original state
might help in erasing the memory of war from
the minds of the people.
– The attempt of trying to forget the past might
lead to the loss of identities of the victims
affected by the events of war. Principle 2: Demolish the damaged and destroyed
buildings and build something entirely new.
Building on the past for the future.5
The new can be
something radically different from what existed or
something more to that of pre-war normal. A new
modified normal can only be created with consent and
partition of the peoplePrinciple 3: The post-war city must create the new
from the damaged old.
As the finances are depleted by war, salvage the
building stock to build the „new city‟.
“The spatial volumes are not meant to fit within their
surroundings, but to stand as proof of old and new, safe
and dangerous, past and present.”
– Vrilio, Paul, Bunker Technology,
Princeton Architectural Press To honor the people who lost their lives on that day,
landscaping was done in place of the footprints on the
2 existing buildings. The basements were restored and
a museum was proposed in its place to depict the
history of the attacks. In the museum we can see the
original structure of the old towers which was
destroyed.
Talisay City in the Philippines features a mansion (fig.
5) built by a sugar magnate at the turn of the last
century that was twice destroyed during the Second World War in order to prevent Japanese forces from
using it. Once on their way out of the Philippines, the
USA air force bombed and strafed the home, and
Philippine rebels burned it down to keep it from falling
into Japanese hands. Currently only the facades remain
and the mansion has been converted in a museum for
visitors.