As for the CRTBs (Concerned Retired Top Bureaucrats), who were moved from the comforts of their homes to enrage over ‘wastage’ and ‘lack of concern to heritage’, I have this to say: Are they intent on hanging on to only our colonial history in the name of ‘heritage’ by wanting status quo to remain?
The main task and mission for every national museum is to demonstrate the deep historical roots of the said nation—to connect today’s generation to their ancestors by anchoring the nation discursively in the past. The process frequently entails laying claim to ancient cultures and dynasties that have thrived on the geographical territory of the present nation state. The goal is to reinforce cultural stories with cultural symbols and provide a comprehensive historical master-narrative of the people as “always” having resided on “that” land.
Beyond contributing to anchoring the nation discursively in time and space, national museums also continuously engage in memory and meaning production, by which I mean defining and modifying the meaning of museum objects to reflect on and memorise broader ideological frames. Simon Knell reminds us that a museum object is imbued with multiple meanings and can be used as material evidence to represent different epochs and historical narratives. Once the objects are placed in an ideological environment, value and meaning get attached to them, usually through printed texts, wall texts, catalogues, audio clips, curated visuals of the period that broaden the perspective of the period, and in these days of advanced technology experiential modules through 3D multi-media; and through it all emerges a continuous process of articulation and re-articulation of a given representation of a nation’s collective memory.
I wonder how many of those severely criticising the shifting of the National Museum as part of the Central Vista project are aware that the blueprint for establishing the National Museum in Delhi was prepared by the Maurice Gwyer Committee in May 1946—less than a 100 years ago and a year before India got her Independence. An exhibition of Indian art, consisting of selected artefacts from various museums of India was organised at the Royal Academy, London. The exhibition went on display in the galleries of Burlington House, London during the winter months of 1947-48, possibly to introduce to the Empire and other advanced countries the civilisational history of the new independent India, seen through British eyes. It was decided that before returning the exhibits to various museums from where they had been borrowed, the same collection would be displayed in Delhi at the Rashtrapati Bhavan in 1949. This was the precursor to the establishment of the National Museum. The success of this exhibition led to the decision that “advantage should be taken” of this magnificent collection to build up the nucleus collection of the National Museum.
So, there was no deep thought, no specialists, no Indian scholars, no museologists who gave their valuable inputs to the creation of the National Museum in 1950s, nor was it for consolidating the memory of “so many pasts” that this land had been witness to—kingdoms, cultures, objects, artifacts, art pieces that could provide a glimpse into the richness of our civilisational history and structure around these relics a sense of belonging. Initially, the building just housed this collection that had evinced interest in England (possibly because the newly independent natives seemed to have some works that symbolised their “quaint”, “ethnic” backgrounds). Think about it.
75 years into Independence is a long time after to invest our energies to re-memorise our multiple “histories”, by investing in several museums in the heart of the national capital, with the most important of them all—the “National Museum”, holding a pride of place on the Raisina Hill in North and South Blocks.
As for the CRTBs (Concerned Retired Top Bureaucrats), who were moved from the comforts of their homes to enrage over “wastage” and “lack of concern to heritage”, I have this to say: Are they intent on hanging on to only our colonial history in the name of “heritage” by wanting status quo to remain? Do they want us to abdicate our responsibility and our right to re-structure our deeply rich past through our priceless art, architecture, sculpture, and artifacts, and re-etch our collective memory as a civilised people, who walked this land for several hundred centuries? Do we turn a blind eye to how badly housed our priceless treasures are, how only a fraction of the collection can be displayed at any given time because of shortage of space, how indifferent we are to dark spaces, gloomy surroundings, lack of ventilation, damp walls, leakages that damage our museum pieces, in short how inadequate the present National Museum building is to mirror the treasures of this great civilisation and its people?
How many of them, I wonder, even spared a thought to how a National Museum should run and what constitutes a museum, for that matter during their tenure? Many, I am sure, wax eloquent about the magnificence of the Louvre or Museum Of Modern Art (MOMA) or even the Metropolitan Museum of Art (MET) and must have visited these to take pictures with their families. But did they, when in positions of power, try to replicate any aspect of these museums, even on a minuscule scale in India?
I am certain that most of this group of CRTBs did not even bother to visit the National Museum and the National Archives, which seem to have become their primary concern today. If only they had visited these museums, pondered over the magnificent collections housed there—coins, sculptures, textiles, figurines, bronzes, paintings, manuscripts, relics of a million varieties; understood the collectiveness of our human history; invested thought and action of how to better the conditions in which these antiquities were preserved and presented, they perhaps would have earned the right to speak up now. Barring two lone senior bureaucrats, Venu Vasudevan, who strived to increase museum footfalls, and the present Secretary, Ministry of Culture, Raghavendra Singh, who collaborated to engage students and researchers proactively with the National Archives, there was no one in the last three decades even remotely interested.
All countries today, including China (which reconstructed its museums and cultural history, after everything got decimated during the Cultural Revolution), have museums on everything. They may be small, big, or mid-sized, but these museums on all subjects are replete with history, documentation of belonging to a “period” or “time in history” that are preserved for posterity to show continuity of a people, language, culture, achievements in science, astronomy, oceanography, agriculture, industrialisation, railways, aircraft to space technology. Some unusual ones that I have visited in England, Japan, China and the US that I recall offhand are museums of porcelain, war, maritime, textiles, footwear, even dinosaurs.
Most of us are aware that national tragedies are documented too for posterity through museums—the Holocaust History Museum in Israel, Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial Museum in Poland, or the Museum of Crimes Against Humanity in Bosnia. They inform, educate and kickstart one’s memory and conscience to reflect on genocide and inhumanity.
A museum is purposed to speak through objects to the people of today, of a people of the past through insightful knowledge of a continuous past moving into the present.
“The self-consciously selective accumulation of material objects in museums does not preserve ‘the’ past; rather each institution provides the structure (architectural and ideological) within which much more specific ‘pasts’ are conceived, structured, reinforced and promulgated,” says Molyneaux.
The Central Vista plan proposes the setting up of several museums, in keeping with world class cities around the world. The National Museum, as I said earlier, will be housed in the South Block and the North Block, holding a pride of place in the most prestigious part of the national capital, throwing open these heritage buildings to the public, after they are re-designed and retrofitted to display our national treasures.
A Ministry of Culture handout says, “The National Museum of India shall be the largest museum of India and one of the world’s premier cultural destinations exploring India’s glorious past, illuminating the present and imagining the future.”
The Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts (IGNCA), another bone of contention for politicking, is to be relocated to Jamnagar House, a prestigious location in the C-Hexagon and provided with state-of-the-art facilities. Till the time the Jamnagar House premises are ready, IGNCA will be located at Hotel Janpath, which has been fully remodelled for this prestigious arts institution.
The present building of the IGNCA, that will thankfully be demolished, was built after Indira Gandhi was assassinated. Many in the arts world were horrified when the ghastly structure came up in the heart of Delhi as an arts centre. There was nothing artistic about that building—no performance theatres, no rehearsal studios, no conference halls, no professional art galleries, not even a well-crafted amphitheatre. No cafes, no gift shops for books, curios, no water bodies, or fountains dotted with pleasing sculptures that create the feeling of entering a creative space. Considering that it prided itself to be an arts-research body, there were no state of the art libraries or friendly spaces, where creative minds could just sit and read or think and ponder. Successful performances, exhibitions etc., that took place in the IGNCA premises happened because of the tremendous resilience and beauty of Indian arts and artists, who get so little by way of infrastructural support but create such wonder through their talent.
The lawns of the IGNCA were at best votive pandals, where great artistes produced art fit for the gods and the audience’s enjoyment was oblivious to the technical flaws. Invite international groups to perform there and you would have seen the horror on their faces. For they were not given to performing in shamianas, constructed stages, with makeshift green rooms, toilets a mile away (open if you are lucky) and mosquitoes having a field day. Is any serious artiste, cultural stakeholder sorry to see it go? Not at all. A new India needs a “National Arts Centre” that is on par with the best in the world meeting international standards—no more jugaad for us.
The present heritage building of the National Archives will remain unaffected, say sources. New state of the art buildings will come up in the annexe, to take care of the present and future requirements of National Archives of India.
In addition, informed sources reveal that the existing Parliament building will also be converted into a museum. Imagine a Central Vista, with all its greenery and open spaces intact, dotted with several museums and arts centres. When it finally takes shape, maybe 5-7 years from now, we will have something that will create new memories—a world class capital city, of art and ideas with multiple museums and art spaces.
The present “Central Vista” will transform into a magical “Culture Mandala”.
Prathibha Prahlad is a pre-eminent classical dancer, educator, socio-cultural feminist, and a cultural visionary. A PadmaShri and Sangeet Natak Akademi awardee, she is the founder festival director of the prestigious Delhi International Arts Festival.
prathibhaprahlad@gmail.com /@PrathibhaP