Existence, a term that circumscribes a being’s origin, cause, reason, significance, and relevance, is a ‘phenomenon’ that is at constant flux. One encounters these questions almost every single day, “What is the reason behind this phenomenon?”, “What is its relevance?”, “How was this substance or element formed?” or “What is its origin?”..., the list of such questions is interminable. The origin, cause, and reason form the concomitant intangibles of a being, the order of which continues to be a big question. The universe we dwell in consists of a plethora of such ‘beings’ and their idiosyncrasies, some of which are yet to be discovered by human civilization. The ones already found are complex enough which makes our eyes squint and put our brains in deep contemplation. The process of comprehending a foreign idea involves a distortion of meaning that breeds new concepts and questions. This particular distortion, which embraces the immensity of the complexities of a being, interest Space Anfractuous.  Architecture is a narrative-loaded complex system that houses within itself several layers of meaning. These ideas and questions fuel Space Anfractuous’ architectural works.

​

Space Anfractuous is a metaphor for a smooth mixture of ambiguities and ambivalence – like ethereal forms, juxtapositions, and multilayered folds of meanings – that exists in perhaps every possible substance. The explorations wrap these several frames and forms architecture out of them. The workflow adopted embraces processes and ideas like free-hand drawings, intuitive ideation, and subjectivity – the endangered species now. One question that is prevalent in the architectural field is the question of style – “In what style one must build in?” or “What style is the most pragmatic and aesthetic at the same time?” In the search of a new language of architecture, the works try to suspend the notion of style – a rigid framework that puts architectural works into specific categories. It tries to unveil the combination of various styles that any architectural piece houses within itself. The works believe that complex systems should not be immured in one definite thing and our explorations should go beyond the idea of ‘either-or’ and embrace the idea of ‘and-both’.

​

​