Disconnectedly connected

I woke up today with the rigour to express, write something that’s been bothering me for the past couple of days, something intriguing and unsettling. I have known a bunch of people who have been away from their families for long enough to not feel the need to get back. Myself on the other hand, have been home bound for years, not sure whether or not out of choice but possibly convenience took over. Trying to draw a line in between the above states of existence, I couldn’t concretely comprehend what HOME connotes to me and whether I have an emotional or physical resonance with the space/zone. It’s important for me to rant about this as somewhere deep down, it’s essential for me to question popular perceptions while also trying to build one of my own.

While home, in its literal sense means a physical space where one has been residing for quite some time, can we really restrict home based on geography? Does geography drive connection and correspondence? I am a Tamilian residing in Mumbai ever since I was born and I have more Marathi in me than Tamil but somehow idli & sambhar get to decide my identity. No matter how hard I try, my DNA seems to contribute to the popular perception. Has home got nothing to do with one’s cultural roots?

It’s tough for me to categorise home as a piece of property, its too personified to be confined by a bunch of walls. One of my favourite authors has rightly put, “Sometimes, home has a heartbeat” and that’s exactly what it all boils down to. Our hearts beat distinctly for different souls, places and experiences. We all borrow fragments of ourselves from someone else and just like that, our home is a blend of many other homes as well. The emotion of being deeply connected with a few and knowing that I can bare my soul to them just like a bare myself off my guard at home, is in itself being home. The space/zone where one need not look for parameters to define the other or mould one’s behaviour to fit in is what defines home to me.

No, I am not here just to emote. Technically, we build houses, live, paint our souls on and make it a home. Each one of us is eccentric with our individual sets of characters and preferences then why do our homes need to look identical? Why is there a need for walls to be painted and ceilings to be suspended? Why do show cases need to be cluttered with show pieces which have absolutely no significance? Why do wardrobes need to have horizontal compartments? As millennials, were we not supposed to subscribe to what we truly believe in? The entire generation is in search of oneself while the market is offering collectiveness. Home, something so integral and contributing to one’s persona, needs to be crafted with a lot more precision. Why can’t spaces be designed by behaviours? Why can’t designs be customised basis etiquettes? Why can’t my shoe rack not be a rack but a bunch of pouches coz I am clumsy and I don’t care? Why does design need to be aesthetically pleasing before being functionally appeasing?

While the market is booming with news lingos like customer experience, human centric design and a gazillion more, it’s truly essential to decode behaviours that vary from individual to individual before structuring solutions and I believe I have spoken quite a bit on how behaviours are influenced by distinct cultures. So let’s build homes and not houses.

Hope you had a good read :)