Racism: An Architectural Litmus Test?

Jun 8, 2011
  • Article by Christopher Vernon
  • Designer

Australians, according to a 2009 CommSec study, build the largest houses in the world. Indeed, with the average dwelling measuring in at 214.6sqm, we have even overtaken the McMansion’s birthplace, the United States (there, the average house size is 212sqm). This is hardly news to Perth. Here, McMansions began proliferating in the late 1980s and are now ubiquitous in the booming capital’s suburban sprawl. Sadly, Perth’s specimens are, more often than not, the products of ‘master builders’, not architects, with an aesthetic vacillating between Tuscany and Ikea. There are, however, at least two exceptions, one no less architecturally notorious than the other.

In 1990, Rose Porteous and her then husband, the late iron ore magnate Lang Hancock, famously erected their lavish home, Prix D’Amour, on an expansive 16-block parcel overlooking the Swan River. The two-storey, 215sqm mansion was designed by Palassis Architects. At their clients’ instruction, the architects drew upon a cinematic source, the fictional Georgia plantation Tara featured in Gone with the Wind. This film, as Perth-based artists Darryn Ansted and Jon Tarry recently put it, deployed Tara ‘as a set to locate the viewer in the same domestic sphere as the characters.’ A half-century later in Perth, when it became the model for a real dwelling, Ansted and Tarry assessed, ‘the spaces of reality and illusion collapsed’.

Prix D’Amour


As a simulation – or copy of a copy – it strived to replace reality with the illusion of the silver screen and succeeded in creating a local fiction. Prix D’Amour referenced, for instance, Tara’s luminous white finish, grandiose entry, balconies, a ballroom accessed by a spiral staircase, and terraced garden surrounds. A radical architectural departure from its ‘understated’, if not bland, 1970s neighbours, Prix D’Amour attracted criticism. That Rose was a Filipina and younger by decades than her husband also fuelled controversy as to ‘taste’ and ‘excess’. The mansion soon gained new dimensions as, in Ansted and Tarry’s words, ‘a screen for the projection of the broader society’s architectural ethos and even morality.’ In the eyes of some and in contrast to those of its detractors, Prix D’Amour was iconic, eventually figuring into Perth’s tourist circuit. As Ansted and Tarry recall, one ‘very sorry’ onlooker to the mansion’s 2006 demolition lamented the loss, saying the house ‘was a great icon’. In testament to Prix D’Amour’s iconic status, Jon Tarry documented the demolition in his film A Rose No More.

A year after Prix D’Amour’s demolition, Perth fertiliser baron Pankaj Oswal and his wife Radhika revealed their intention to construct a palatial new home or, as they put it, a ‘little India’ overlooking the Swan. The couple’s estate agent (and, coincidentally, now Rose’s husband) publicly billed the Oswals’ future mansion as ‘Australia’s most expensive home’ and hinted it would make ‘an architectural statement for Perth’. He would not prove mistaken, but this was a considerable understatement. The Oswals purchased a 6600sqm riverfront block, not far from Prix D’Amour’s former site. Having paid nearly $23 million for the land alone, the couple, like the Hancocks, commissioned an architect. Later in 2007, The West Australian revealed the Oswals’ design, sensationalising it in word and image under the headline ‘The $70m Taj Mahal-on-Swan: It has its own temple, observatory, separate gym and parking for 17 cars. But what do the neighbours think?’ As we will see, not much. The newspaper characterised the multi-domed mansion as a ‘two-storey, Indian-infused luxury residence,’ designed to ‘the traditional Indian principles of Vaastu Shastra’. Along with the features touted in the headline, the Oswals’ compound was to include a six-bedroom main house, a swimming pool and extensive formal gardens. Ostensibly only owing to the development’s scale, the plans quickly attracted criticism. His mansion, Oswal countered, would only occupy ’30 percent of the site,’ and it had been ‘carefully scaled to fit into the existing environment’.

Oswal Mansion


‘A key design objective for the development,’ he explained in his planning submission, ‘is for the proposed residence to appropriately reflect the family’s cultural and spiritual heritage.’ Although he conceded that the proposed house was ‘palatial and exhibiting a certain grandeur,’ it was not, in Oswal’s view, ‘ostentatious’. Scale issues aside, these qualifications suggest Pankaj Oswal anticipated resistance to his explicitly Indian architecture. Although the Prix D’Amour had similarly looked to an overseas design source, American references were at least comfortably Western. As readers and Oswal himself appreciate, the making of architecture is seldom, if ever, a merely benign aesthetic proposition.

After reducing the height and number of turrets and domes, the Oswals’ plans were approved. Before construction began, however, the design was apparently altered again. This time, the domes themselves were redesigned. In the initial scheme, the domes were more Islamic in profile; now they were revised into conformity with the more bulbous forms typical of their Hindu counterparts. This significant alteration suggests that local appreciation of traditional Indian architecture was limited and that the final design was possibly the product of multiple hands. With the plans complete, construction began; even this activity, however, would prove controversial. A militant vegetarian, Radhika Oswal forbade construction workers from consuming meat on-site. Disgruntled workers, as one (sub)urban myth circulating in Perth has it, retaliated by lacing the concrete work with mince.

The controversy surrounding their rising house aside, the Oswals remained on Perth’s ‘A-list’. Like F Scott Fitzgerald’s Jay Gatsby, the couple was famous for throwing lavish parties, with no expense spared. Last December, however, Pankaj’s business was placed in receivership. Almost overnight, nobody seemed to want to know the couple and they soon departed Australia. By January, the Oswals had decided to sell their unfinished mansion, should they ‘get the right price.’ As the house was still under construction, one estate agent assured potential buyers that there was ‘scope to reshape it into something more European’. Telling is the choice of ‘European’, not ‘Australian’. As no purchasers were forthcoming, local newspapers began trumpeting a ‘Derelict “Taj” Fear’ and that the ‘Taj on Swan may be left as is’ – no doubt to the terror of the Oswals’ would-be neighbours. Last month, however, The Australian reported that a buyer had been found, contingent upon the removal of ‘the Taj Mahal-like domes’. It remains unclear as to whether or not the transaction actually transpired.

In some ways, the Oswal episode is an instance of history repeating itself. In the 1970s, Mukarram Jah, the last Nizam of Hyderabad, similarly relocated from India to Perth. Rather than electing to erect a lavish Indian-inspired house in a prominent riverfront location (something he could easily have done), the Nizam chose to buy, paradoxically, a heritage Federation mansion near the city centre. Given the Oswals’ experience, this was an exceedingly wise decision.

‘Can it all be put down to a cultural clash?’, The Australian mused. ‘Radhika Oswal appears to think so, blaming incessant criticism of the couple on racism.’ Indeed, if a wealthy non-Indian erected an aesthetically conventional McMansion of a similar scale, one wonders if there would have been protest. Paradoxically, last March, the local press reported, almost gleefully, that a local ‘favourite son’ sportsman was building a ‘$3 Million “Bachelor Pad”‘ in the shape of a sea shell and that among the ‘Benefits of Boom’ was the fact that an ‘A-list couple’ had flown over a ‘London lighting expert used by pop queen Madonna’ and a home builder had imported $70,000 of Grecian stone to line his McMansion’s corridors. Needless to say, none of these people are Indian.

In late 2009, the Oswals’ estate agent set an Australian record, selling a nearby mansion for nearly $58 million. The estate features a trio of buildings, a boathouse and private jetty, a gymnasium, and cinema, pool and tennis court and occupies a 7567sqm riverfront block – almost 1000sqm larger than the Oswals’ property. As readers have likely guessed by now, the house can be described in keywords: columns, balconies, terracotta roof tiles and lots of render. I do not recall any public outcry or charges of excess when the house was constructed or sold.

Perhaps the lives of Pankaj and Radhika Oswal would have been easier had they chosen to camouflage themselves and their wealth in a ‘supersized’ Tuscan box. Despite our embrace of a multicultural society, our built environment remains ethereally homogenous. Nonetheless, for now at least, the ‘Taj Mahal-on-Swan’ remains an unfinished concrete shell, evocative of Auguste Perret’s dictum, ‘Architecture is what makes beautiful ruins.’ Racism remains the elephant in the room.

Christopher Vernon is associate professor, Faculty of Architecture, Landscape and Visual Arts at The University of Western Australia.

Read ADR’s update on the Taj-on-Swan, questions of race and our appreciation of foreign architecture in a local context here.

Not your average polar bear, Francesco Binfaré's latest design statement

Working with Edra from the start, Italian designer Francesco Binfaré has produced some of the brand's classics, including the recent Pack and Chiara sofa.

Conversation • 13 comments

Add to this conversation


09 Jun 11 at 5:02 AM • Joseph Austin-Crowe

This article is fundamentally flawed in continually using the term ‘McMansions’ incorrectly. ‘McMansions’ are mass-produced, large, block-consuming homes for the mainstream market, created by large project building companies. Definitely NOT architecturally designed mansions, to the author’s taste or otherwise.

09 Jun 11 at 5:07 AM • Liam Radich

I agree the article is flawed and inflammatory.

09 Jun 11 at 5:45 AM • June

Whats wrong with the Oswals wanting to build a house the way they want on a property they own?Are they breaking any law? Being disrespectful in any way? No. I don’t know if racism is the cause of this behavior,but its certainly not anything to be proud of.

09 Jun 11 at 5:54 AM • Pat

Agree with comments above. Mass produced oversized McMansions lining the streets of new developments and slowly infilling older suburbs are a separate issue to commuity reaction to architect-designed mega-houses. An article on this suburban blight would be much appreciated.

The article has missed key issues relating to the infmaous super-block, and the location of the Oswal site within the suburb. The $58m Bennett house is a completly different context. Similarly the Oswal’s sought media attention at every turn, while the Bennet’s did not.

The article is deeply flawed.

09 Jun 11 at 7:50 AM • David

To be fair, I’m pretty sure everyone thinks the Bennet house is over the top as well, she just didn’t flash it around like the other two…and yes, none of them are McMansions, our distaste of which is class-ist but by no means racist.

09 Jun 11 at 8:12 AM • Peter

Not sure if racism has anything to do with it? But it clearly shows that money doesn’t buy taste! And more fool the planning system for allowing and approving such inappropriate buildings and visual pollution – showing no respect for context, neighbours, scale, history, landscaping etc. One despairs at the destruction of our once lovely suburbs, particularly around the river. By the way, not a very well written article – and from an associate professor!

09 Jun 11 at 9:18 AM • Mano

A similar event occurred in Sydney in the 1990’s – typically of Sydney on the Harbor. A Chinese ‘pagoda’ floating restaurant called the Tai Pan was heavily criticized by ‘experts’ and the media and sent packing from the harbor….however a fake ‘Mississippi’ paddle steamer restaurant (the Sydney Showboat) happily cruised for years without lifting an eye brow, oh well !
p.s.: I do not support McMansions designed or otherwise in any way or form!

09 Jun 11 at 3:11 PM • Elizabeth

I disagree with Peter’s criticism of the planning system for enabling a land-owner to build to their desired aesthetic. Undoubtedly, the council should define an envelope in which a building can be created, to ensure no excessive impingement on neighbouring property, but style is a personal thing. Without the idiosyncrasies of individual tastes our suburbs would all become “Ellenbrook”, monotone expressions of undemocratic design guides. The Australian dream of being “king of our castle” does not make the suburb our kingdom.

09 Jun 11 at 6:17 PM • Allison Lyons

The author should note that Tara of Gone with the Wind did not have a grandiose staircase, ballroom, or terraced garden surrounds. It was a large, but simple Greek Revival building. The interiors of other houses in the film (notably the Wilkes mansion, Twelve Oaks, and the Second Empire-style Atlanta home of Scarlett and Rhett) are grouped with Tara in this McMansion fantasy architecture to create a hyrbid Gone with the Wind-style.
“Tara’s luminous white finish, grandiose entry, balconies, a ballroom accessed by a spiral staircase, and terraced garden surrounds.”

10 Jun 11 at 4:23 AM • Sonia

I wouldn’t call it “racism” but certainly we tend to have pre-conceived ideas about “European Style” as being acceptable as opposed to other cultures and influences. Surely the Oswals did enjoy riding on the great waves of publicity and social attention however there are giant eye-sores around the suburbs, architecturally designed and not, and you wonder whether ‘good taste’ should be regulated. Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder and money does not buy taste, however Australia is a very multicultural country and perhaps building with ‘style’ will always be a distinct issue of our society. Should we have a planning/government body who regulates what is acceptable and what isn’t, who will the representatives be? Perhaps we’re leading towards the creation of the Australian Style…

14 Apr 13 at 11:13 AM • Notte Lling

Firstly this has nothing to do with racism. The Taj on Swan has been built in a beautiful part of Perth and is completely out of place and overwhelmingly ugly and garish. The Oswals have shown a complete disregard for their neighbours and for the aesthetic of the location. The building is a disgrace, plain and simple. It doesn’t matter what race the people are that purchased, ordered or designed it, it’s simply disgusting and the architect should be embarrassed.

16 Feb 14 at 3:19 PM • Linda M

I like the house. If I had enough money I would buy it and finish it off. I like the many domes and the openings to the outside. I bet the light moves beautifully into and fills those spaces. I would be sorry to see it pulled down.

05 Oct 15 at 3:31 PM • Christopher Vernon


‘Guilty graffiti’ (‘Cambridge [Western Australia] Post / 5 September 2015)

‘Graffiti vandals left some qualified abuse on Radhika Oswal’s unfinished mansion on Wednesday. SEE! INDIANS ARR … was sprayed on a dome at the property in Bay View Terrace, Peppermint Grove. Then the vandal added: NOT ALL OF THEM THOUGH OBVIOUSLY. Ms Oswal is trying to stop the council’s demolition order against her half-completed building’.

‘Taj tags spark a new war of words’ ([Perth, Western Australia] Sunday Times / 4 October 2015) (extract)

‘Racist graffiti on the abandoned Peppermint Grove mansion dubbed the “Taj on the Swan” has offended visiting Indian dignitaries, giving the local council another reason to appeal for its demolition’. ….


Your email address will not be published.