Why do we hate our history?

It is possible to preserve our monuments and be proud of it. And you don’t have to be a dubious art dealer to do that

Sanjay Kapoor Delhi

Hoi An is a small town on Vietnam’s South China Sea coast. It has been one of those few places that providentially escaped unscathed during the Vietnam war. Not a single bomb from the fearsome United States Air force (USAF) B-52 bombers fell on this quaint little 15th-century port town. Old time residents of Hoi An credit this to the luck the statues of monkeys, erected at a corner of the small, covered Japanese bridge, bring to the town.

Declared by UNESCO as a Heritage City in 1999, Hoi An’s many old houses of Chinese, Japanese and Dutch traders — all tourist attractions — are maintained and preserved by its residents. They are the stakeholders of their cultural heritage and derive profits with the proceeds from tourists who visit in big numbers. The local people here are zealous about preserving the old feel of the town and are particular about how the tourists conduct themselves.

Hoi An’s example proves that it is possible to preserve our ample cultural heritage without making our people its stakeholders. And they can look after these many sites if they provide a source of livelihood to them rather than be a threat to their existence, as has been visible in many of the historical sites in the subcontinent.

India has perhaps the oldest civilisation in the world and it has incredible monuments and structures of various periods and vintage. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) is mandated to look after some 5,000 old sites. The ASI, clearly lacking funds, has put up boards announcing that these buildings are protected, but it is doing precious little about it. The result is visible in many of the ancient cities of India.

Not only do these buildings wear a dilapidated look, many of them have become permanent abodes of the homeless and miscellaneous encroachers. In Delhi alone many buildings of the medieval period near Tughlaqabad and Mehrauli have been appropriated by encroachers and squatters who do not understand the meaning of preservation and are looking for a roof over their heads.

ASI bosses have expressed their inability to safeguard all these valuable heritage properties by claiming that they do not have the manpower or resources. In an interview to a website, C Babu Rajeev, Director General, ASI, admitted that his outfit does not have the resources to place three security guards at each site as it would mean about 15,000 security personnel. Some sites like the Taj Mahal, he said, require more than 200 securitymen.

The threat to the monuments is not only from the poor and the homeless, but from the land sharks, dubious art dealers and many of those well-heeled who criminally burgeon their buildings close to these old structures. In Delhi, innumerable buildings have become casualty to the builders who stealthily pull down these buildings. By the time the police show up, a major part of our history is lost to the avaricious spades of this mafia.

More dangerous are those who love to have antiques and frescoes from ancient buildings like Konark or Khajurao in their drawing rooms. Those who have been visiting sites like Konark regularly would spot growing gaps in the walls of the Sun temple. Figurines are slowly disappearing and finding their way to the antique bazaar or the drawing rooms of the rich.

It is not difficult to figure out why it is happening. A walk through the amazing Sun temple complex would bring to the fore the lethargy among its sentinels, some of whom perhaps directly or indirectly feed this loot of precious statues. Unlike Hoi An, for instance, where local residents are keepers of their heritage, in Konark most of the local people seem mired in poverty and are puzzled by the importance being given to an old temple. They realise the value of the stones and some of them are often willing to help the mafia pick anything that can get them money for the next meal.

The yawning gaps in the Sun temple’s pillars and walls are being filled up by the restorers of the ASI in a ham-handed manner. Restoration is a tricky job, but seemingly, this sensitive work has been given to a general contractor who believes in slapping lime and cement in gaps created by pilfered figurines. The ASI did a similarly shoddy job in Angkor Wat, Cambodia, and drew considerable flak from many experts. Although the ASI worked in trying circumstances, some of its work had to be ‘cured’ by other experts.

In recent times, the government has been trying to get the private sector to participate in looking after monuments of national repute. The Taj Mahal, which gets more tourists than any other monument in the country, has been subjected to much experimentation.

Not too long ago, the ASI decided to partner with a multinational pharmaceutical company to clean up the yellow hue of the Taj and make the exquisite marble shine again. This reporter remembers questioning the ASI official then whether this partnership was really required and whether the pharma company’s efforts were superior to what it (ASI) had been doing? The ASI official candidly admitted that they did not know who took the decision to draft the pharma company for this job. Needless to say, the relationship with the drug company did not last long.

During the NDA rule the government invited the Tata group to help manage the Taj Mahal. For a little more than a crore, the government gave a laundry list of jobs to the group to perform, which included fixing the fountains and the inlay jobs. In the second phase of the job, the Tata group, which controls the Taj brand of hotels, was expected to revive the gardens across the river Yamuna, create signages and develop the area around the marble building. The Taj Mahal-Tata relationship raised a howl of protest and proved to be a non-starter.

Many wondered why the government was so keen to hand over the management of Shahjehan’s monument of love to the Tatas for a pittance. Interestingly, nothing tangible emerged out of the much vaunted partnership.

In UP, headed by Mayawati, made grandiose and amazingly expensive plans to develop the area around the Taj. She came to grief when her plans were made public. The happy ending here is that despite the efforts of many lesser mortals to appropriate the Taj Mahal to their advantage, the great monument still stands tall and beautiful, providing sustenance and livelihood to lakhs of city folks.

Now the government is waking up to national heritage. The revival of Buddhist Nalanda with the help of Japan, is an outcome of this realisation that we have a responsibility towards our heritage, for all the people of Asia who look for spiritual sustenance towards India.