Chadalavada Karthik, E. Sripadma Sanjiv; International Journal of Advance Research, Ideas and Innovations in Technology © 2020, www.IJARIIT.com All Rights Reserved Page |247 ISSN: 2454-132X Impact factor: 6.078 (Volume 6, Issue 1) Available online at: www.ijariit.com Defensive architecture – A design against humanity Karthik Chadalavada karthik.ch@spav.ac.in School of Planning and Architecture, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh Sripadma Sanjiv E. sripadmasanjiv@gmail.com School of Planning and Architecture, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh ABSTRACT A city should give its best to all those who reside in it. They might be the rich enjoying a fantastic view of the skyline from their balconies, or the poor who settle themselves under the flyovers for a night or two. Apart from all the living classes, a city can be completely accepted as livable only when it welcomes the homeless and those in need of a small shelter. In recent years, public architecture has involved both negative and positive issues of having homeless within the city. Some cities across the globe aspiring to build ‘less-ugly’ public spaces introduced the concept of ‘defensive architecture’, but in reality, these ideas turned out to be unkind actions against the homeless. Defensive architecture involves gating off the doorways and left-over urban spaces, which provide some refuge for those who have to sleep rough in cities, yet these spaces, are made uninhabitable for them. These concepts that are considered as a step forward to a better and high standard living prove to be a blot on humanity. In this paper, defensive architecture is explained as a hostile practice that creates a devastating psychological effect on the homeless. It further argues how an intention to make the cities’ investors and consumers feel safe in turn actually created hostile environments and that much more empirical research is needed on this topic. Keywords⸻ Defensive Architecture, Moral Considerations, Right to Public Space 1. INTRODUCTION The architecture of our cities is a powerful guide to its behavior, both directly and in its symbolism. Hostile architecture is a subtle expression of social division through urban design, mostly associated with the homeless. These include public spaces that are constructed or altered to discourage people from using them in a way not intended by the owner. As the writer, Amanda Lee Koe has said, “A city can be designed for you just as well as it can be designed against you.” It is almost an invisible way of denying support to the needy and helpless, to allow ‘legitimate’ users enjoy the seemingly open and inclusive urban environment. (Atkinson, While, 2015) Defensive architecture is not a mere accident or a thoughtless idea but instead, it is a well-processed thought that has over-ridden human consideration for the sake of hygiene and standards. It is kind of heartlessness which is planned, affirmed and subsidized. The very shape of our cities, beginning from public benches to empty spaces between avenues, reflect antagonistic vibe toward the destitute, in the form of design elements that keep them from looking for asylum in these spaces. These features are unnoticed by the common public but are well spotted by the ones in need of minimum hospitality. Although this sort of defensive architecture is widely used in many countries like Sweden, the UK, and the states, it has not undergone a systematic ethical analysis. (Edin 2014) Fig. 1: Tower Hill bench, London, Image courtesy of James Fruzer