Thinking Conservation

Malvika Singh Azhar Tayabji

Edited by Amita Baig & Rahul Mehrotra

Yaminey Mubayi Abha Narain Shikha Jain Lambha

Tara Sharma John Stubbs

Navin Piplani

Priyaleen Singh AGK Menon Rahul Mehrotra Amita Baig Ratish Tina Fielden

Contemporary Perspectives for India

Become a good architect first, and then become a good conservation architect

-Sir Bernard Feilden

Sir Bernard Feilden in India

Sir Bernard Feilden in India Tina Feilden Born in London, Sir Bernard Feilden spent his first nine years in the wilderness of western Canada, where his father was advised to go for the good air after being gassed in the First World War. As a widow with five sons, their mother brought the boys back to Bedford, England, for their education. Before the war, Bernard won a scholarship to the Bartlett School of Architecture in London. A year later he was unsettled as he felt the quality of teaching was not up to the mark. So when a school friend, who had become a professional soldier said to him “War is coming, you should enlist in the army, so that you get a choice of posting,” he followed his advice and requested ’The Middle East’. After some initial training, with the British Army evidently having a hazy idea of geography, he was sent to India.

“Having arrived at Bombay, we were billeted in the very grand Taj Mahal Hotel, but six to a bedroom. A gilded staff captain came and asked us which Corps of Sappers and Miners we would like to join. The Madras Sappers at Bangalore enjoyed an equitable climate; the Bombay Sappers at Poona had a good social life; the Bengal Sappers were a bit remote at Roorkee, and reputed to be either ‘mad,’ married or Methodist. As my policy was to travel as far as possible at King George’s expense, I opted for Roorkee and set off on a long rail journey changing at Old Delhi.”

This was his introduction to India and its people, and he loved it. Having spent some time training with his motley troops, many of who had never left their village, let alone drive a vehicle, he left for Iran and Iraq with them, spending two years or more guarding the oil wells against possible German invasion. These countries made a huge impression upon him and he loved them too.

While in Egypt for further training and some leave, he broke his leg and hence could not accompany his beloved troops to Italy, thereby missing

THINKING CONSERVATION

some of the bloodiest battles. He caught up with them fighting in the mountains in Italy, building temporary bridges and preparing others for destruction, should the tide of war change. This work formed the basis of his engineering training, which was to prove immensely useful to him in later years.

He returned to Britain after the war plus an extra year in northern Italy as a volunteer, which was a great place for a trainee architect, with Florence and many other architectural gems to admire and draw, within easy reach when on leave. He qualified as an architect from the Architectural Association in double time, and started, having married a Norfolk girl, a professional life in Norwich. Twenty years passed, during which he possessed a family and his own successful architectural practice. He had achieved great feats in the new world of conservation architecture, saving the spire of Norwich Cathedral from demolition and proposed rebuilding and the great central tower of York Minster (Cathedral) from twisting, sinking and falling, among many other projects. Many committees and appointments followed from this work. In 1982, after a decade of effort

by Bernard and his wife, Ruth, on a typewriter, his magnum opus ‘The Conservation of Historic Buildings’ was published. Since then, this work has been revised and re-published twice, and the RIBA now holds the copyright and may revise it again. Several other smaller books on the management of historic sites and so on followed.

In 1977 he was appointed to be Director of ICCROM, the UNESCO supported international school of conservation in Rome. This meant resigning all of his several appointments in the UK and leaving his family behind, though many visits were arranged in each direction.

Part of his work at ICCROM involved travelling around the world to promote its work. It was then that he returned happily to India and Sir Bernard Feilden in India

became involved with the work of INTACH, making many lifelong friends. He travelled extensively in India, studying and advising on various projects of conservation, lecturing students and was soon appointed as a Trustee of the INTACH UK Trust, helping administer a fund that sent British nationals to study in India; this was later extended to include projects in India associated with INTACH, in need of funding. The INTACH UK meetings were held in India every two years, in different cities. He always looked forward to these visits, and the chance to see many of the wonderful sights India offered. He loved teaching and even wrote a little book especially for India, ‘Guidelines for Conservation,’ to help Conveners of INTACH, which, I believe, has been reprinted several times.

Ruth passed away in 1994, and I was immensely lucky to spend 13 years married to such a man. In his last years, when long distance travel was no longer possible, he tremendously enjoyed the visits of the many Indians who came to see him and tell him of their work. He would be delighted and honoured that India remembers him and his work in this book and lecture series initiated by Indian Architect & Builder magazine. I am excited that this initiative will keep the discussions on conservation alive and vibrant in the years ahead.

THINKING CONSERVATION

The Initiative Amita Baig & Rahul Mehrotra The conversation around conservation in India has evolved significantly over the last few decades. There has been huge progress in terms of instituting heritage legislation which now covers many states in India. Today, the conservation and protection of the historic fabric of a city is accepted currency, while the Right to Information Act has transformed how we will mediate the future of our heritage. These have been hard fought battles but in the profession we are all profoundly aware that much remains to be done.

The pressures impinging upon every aspect of a city, it’s ever expanding boundaries and reckless consumption of resources keeps conservation vulnerable, rarely prioritised on the the development agenda. Perhaps the very fragility of its basic philosophy of anchoring memory and identity on the ground and in a particular place makes it even more tenuous.

This publication, titled ‘Thinking Conservation’ is dedicated to Sir Bernard Feilden has emerged from a series of papers written over the last few years by specialists in conservation for the magazine Indian Architect & Builder.

Many of these were published in a column called ‘Culture Counts’. These essays have kept the discussion on conservation in India animated and the very process of continuously debating and deconstructing the context within which we work ensures a rigor and deep engagement with issues concerning conservation.

Sir Bernard Feilden was a pioneer in developing paradigms which would be relevant and responsive to the cultural ethos of the Indian nation. He worked with Indian professionals to write the first Guidelines for Conservation for India, and one of his fundamental beliefs was that conservation must be rooted within the community, with their unquestionable skills and knowledge, and that “artisans will not survive unless they are properly paid and given due status and continuity of work. Without them we will have eaten the seed corn of the future - a course of action that would result in cultural famine”. He was convinced that the inclusion of local knowledge in any road map for conservation was fundamental to its success. His manual Introduction

10

for India was easily comprehensible by the layman and was the touchstone for conservationists in India for many years.

Apart from this, Sir Bernard was singularly responsible for ensuring that conservation education was established, initially in the University of York, but later he influenced the setting up of a number of graduate courses in conservation in India. This has given birth to new generations of conservation architects now fanned across India and committed to walk the line. Many of the contributors to this book have benefitted from his depth of knowledge and his practical approach to what often appeared to be insurmountable problems on the field.

Sir Bernard straddled conservation and contemporary architecture with immense ease. His idea of conservation was far from conservative as he reviewed many projects across India, he had great capacity to uncomplicate seemingly unreconcilable problems and conflicts. This publication pays tribute to the man for whom ‘heritage’ was not a static process but a means to modulate identity and memory in a rapidly changing society. He expanded his own understanding of conservation to address the imperatives of change.

From the redevelopment of the Victorian Liverpool Street Station to the provision of a visitor center at the Taj Mahal, Sir Bernard saw contemporary interventions not as a constraint but an opportunity. To him conservation was a practical solution to preserve the past; one which could embrace the old and invent the new – it was an engagement that resonated with the aspirations of both the intellectual and the layperson.

‘Thinking Conservation’ will be an ongoing discussion as India finds its own logic for intervention and its own principles for the practice of conserving its heritage. We hope that this book will open up new conversations that will enrich the discussions around issues of conservation and assist us in inventing new paradigms and approaches for the future.

11

THINKING CONSERVATION

Architectural Conservation in the Future

6

25 Years of Conservation in India... do we need Course Correction?

8

John H. Stubbs

Amita Baig

Conservation the Culture Ethos

11

Heritage Conservation and the Process versus Passion Conundrum

15

Custodianship of Heritage: Public-Private Initiatives

17

Values in Conservation

19

Malvika Singh

A.G.K. Menon

Abha Narain Lambah Shikha Jain

THINKING CONSERVATION

12

Situating Heritage Within a Development Context

21

Within Temple Walls - Preserving the Spirit of Place

30

Preparing Conservation Plans that Also Educate

40

On a Culture of Education & the Education of Culture

55

Engaging with Conservation at York.ac.uk

75

Conservation and Change: Questions for Conservation Education in Urban India

90

Yaaminey Mumbayi

Tara Sharma

Priyaleen Singh

Azhar Tayabji

Navin Piplani

Rahul Mehrotra

13

THINKING CONSERVATION

Thinking conservation

14

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

World Monuments Fund & Columbia University

John H. Stubbs

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future itectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Futu Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

a

ttempting to second-guess the particulars of the future of anything, especially in today’s fast-changing world, is likely an exercise in futility. However, when it comes to a fundamental concern such as cultural heritage protection, which is so reliant on cause and effect and where there is such deep history from which to learn, one may find firm ground from which to speculate.

Thanks largely to today’s Media Age heritage conservation professionals, in India and world wide, have the widest and most balanced view yet of local, regional and world achievements in architectural conservation. It is from this basis and with the belief that ‘the further back one can look, the further forward one may see’ that some future tends, and even some specific tasks, may probably be safely predicted.

Any retrospective glance at the progress of architectural conservation over the past two centuries reveals one development that has shaped the field above all else: heritage protection law. Today, the law and its increasingly effective administrative systems protect a majority of the world’s most significant built heritage. One by one, the governments and cultures of the world have come to realise the merits of heritage protection for the sake of heritage protection in the form of deliberate and organised applied measures, as opposed to in earlier times when cultural heritage was prized to be sure, but was protected more incidentally, if not accidentally.

Along with legal protection, an increasing number of additional resources and solutions have come into play. One is the well-known concept of ‘universal value’ that was institutionalised in the 1970s by UNESCO in the form of the World Heritage list. In addition to enhancing possibilities of protection, World Heritage listing has engendered international cooperation with respect to a number of related heritage ARCHITECTURAL CONSERVATION IN THE FUTURE

16

Religious Festival at he Hindu temple of Tanah Lot on the south coast of Bali.

The unbroken continuation of living traditions, which includes maintenance and upkeep of heritage sites, is usually the best architectural conservation and site protection measure of all.

protection matters including concurrence on listing criteria, advocacy, information dissemination, training and public education. In addition, applied conservation science has profoundly shaped architectural conservation practice and is responsible for many of the field’s successes.

The significance of the role of conservation science and its related methodologies cannot be overstated, since it is successfully conserved buildings and sites that count as the field’s achievements. Many other developments in architectural conservation could be cited, such as today’s wider interest in conserving authenticity, democratisation of knowledge and interest in heritage protection, and the participation of wholly new arrangements of cause-related, public and private partnerships.

Cultural heritage protection plays a prominent role in the milieu of continuing globalisation and its concomitant social, economic and geopolitical developments. History is certainly on the move in our time and along with it is expanding worldviews that include new interests in conserving and enhancing the human-built environment. These interests reflect some additional phenomena: qualitative and quantitative increases in the field’s accomplishments and further insistence on sustainable development and environmental protection. Now a much wider range of old buildings—not just the most monumental and historically significant ones—are seen as worthy of conservation and adaptive use, if only for their material value. Governments, architectural conservation professionals, the industries and craftspeople that serve architectural heritage protection and growing numbers of the private sector are rising to the occasion. The popularity and demand for the subject is visible in the growth of organisations and educational offerings and the attention given to it in the media and in political circles. Where is all this leading us? As heritage conservation practice has rapidly evolved to become today’s robust and diversified practice, it will continue to develop along the same lines.

17

THINKING CONSERVATION

Some Noticeable Recent Trends In a cursory look at today’s architectural heritage conservation practice, one notices a wide range of positive developments that in themselves point to the future. Recent telling trends include:

1. Some have suggested that we are at the end of a phase in the evolution of the world’s consciousness about conserving cultural heritage. While this may be true in some respects, new needs will replace those that have been addressed. Today’s global community has a healthy desire for continuity, as opposed to the discontinuity that characterized much of twentieth century.

It is likewise savvy to the possibilities that the skillful blending of old and new can bring to the built environment.

• Expanded interest in conserving places, not just individual buildings, including indigenous and vernacular architectural heritage • An increased demand for structures of all types and ages to be rejuvenated and recycled • Conservation of cultural landscapes on an unprecedented scale, e.g. trade routes, whole portions of countries • Increasingly sophisticated historic urban conservation schemes that address larger areas • Expansion of conservation education and training opportunities • Demand for better interpretation at heritage sites • Conservation of living heritage • Conservation of intangible heritage • Increased participation of the allied technical fields of engineering, geo-sciences, landscape architecture and planning • Increased participation of the allied social sciences of

archaeology, anthropology and sociology • Increased usage of specialty equipment and procedures made possible by developments in conservation science • Improved management systems, project assembly and funding schemes • Increased application of effective heritage protection laws and governance • Exemplary developments in international heritage protection practice • Developments in preventative conservation and post-disaster mitigation • Developments in conservation crafts training and related specialties • Additional developments in the broader ‘heritage industry,’ such as Web-based specialty resources, e.g. computer generated documentation and re-creations to exacting standards, information networks and educational tools anthropology and sociology

Looking Forward Continuing developments in the above-mentioned, relatively recent accomplishments in architectural conservation can certainly be expected.

Projecting forward one may also expect: ARCHITECTURAL CONSERVATION IN THE FUTURE

18

Utilization of the CyArk laser measurement system for historic buildings now provides for very close to 100% accuracy in architectural recording. Seen here is the measurement of buildings comprising the town square of Arles, France that contains the façade of the Romanesque church of St. Trophime

Increased Global Connectivity •

• •

An increase in comprehension of and interest in addressing yet broader views of heritage protection, e.g. expanded natural and cultural heritage conservation schemes, and multi-national, world regional, and even global conservation strategies An increase in interest in the lessons during past efforts at cultural heritage protection An increase of applications of examples of ‘best practices’ developed in other places

Reappraisals of History, Re-restoration, and Repatriation • • • •

19

An increase in assumption of responsibilities for the past An increase in concerns regarding ‘ownership’ of the past An increase in interest in intangible heritage An increase in needs for ‘re-restoration’ (conserving and/or modifying past restorations) THINKING CONSERVATION

• New more specialised interests in ‘re-researching’ prior historical queries and documentation • Increased interest in repatriation of displaced heritage • Considerably increased participation in conserving architecture of the the recent past

Expansion of the Field and Mergers of Disciplines • •

2. There is no going back to shaping the built environment in unresourceful ways where valued cultural heritage is mindlessly discarded. The bar has been raised; new standards are set. Nor, is there is time for resting on laurels. If anything, architectural conservation professionals and interested others should embrace even more progressive approaches to viably utilising and conserving the human built environment.

More bridging to and from allied professions More technological and procedural advancements from within the architectural conservation profession • Increased recognition and adaptation of methods and technologies developed in the allied professions of engineering, construction technology, museology, earth sciences, ecology, archaeology, history, anthropology, archival and library management • More diversification and specialisation within the field of cultural heritage management • Replacement of virtuoso restorers and general practitioners with custom-formulated collaborations of specialists • Increased popular interest and shifts from centralised to decentralised governance of heritage • Expansion of locally based heritage protection initiatives beyond their locales through the growth of non-government organisations • Expansion and adaptation of international organisations serving cultural heritage conservation • Improved training and educational offerings at the local, national, and international levels • More documentation, publication and dissemination of all facets of the field • Increased institutional capacities and presences which may include mergers and re-invention of some existing systems

Response to Social Issues •

Increased awareness of the limits of growth new demands for sustainable urban conservation and environmental protection • Recognition of the relationship of cultural diversity and sustainable development • Increased efforts to correct imbalances in cultural heritage protection and development • Enhanced efforts to address cultures in transition, threats to traditional rights and usage, pursuit of equal opportunity and popular cultural influences ARCHITECTURAL CONSERVATION IN THE FUTURE

20

• New interest in and efforts to address social fracturing, xenophobic tendencies and marginalisation especially in areas of conflict • Formation of new cultural policy that is reflective of social change and expanding definitions of culture • Respect for historic buildings and their values including the constituencies aiming to conserve these sites, especially in relation to religious heritage • Recognition that education and information is best positioned at the forefront of cultural conservation policy • Recognition of the importance of building ‘cultural capital’ • Recognition of the need to encourage and reward private initiative and self-reliance • Recognition of the curative effects that heritage conservation projects can bring to communities and places that have suffered physical destruction and former social constraints such as marginalisation, isolation, and a lack of transparency

Focus on New Threats All of the above-mentioned prospects in architectural conservation’s future represent a plethora of issues to be addressed in the decades and centuries to come. Added to these will be the continuing need to address the two ‘classic’ categories of threats to the built environment: human threats and natural threats. Within these realms four categories of threats are gaining new prominence as special issues to address: • Effects of global warming on cultural heritage, • Targeting the past though vandalism, iconoclasm, and terrorism, • Commodifying and marketing the past in insensitive ways, and • Diluting history through cursory treatment including inaccurate interpretation.

Conclusion Today’s architectural conservation practice is pervasive, influential and essential for the creation and maintenance of sustainable human built environments. There are countless ideas and possibilities yet to be realized. The field’s accumulated experience including its countless exemplars of best practice, its doctrine (charters, declarations and codes of operation) and its growing supply of expertise are all harbingers of the future.

21

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author A graduate of Columbia University’s program in Historic Preservation, John Stubbs served ten years as Assistant Director of Historic Preservation Projects at Beyer Blinder Belle, Architects & Planners in New York City. Today, John Stubbs is Vice President of Field Projects for the World Monuments Fund, New York.

He also conducts the Graduate Program in Historic Preservation at Columbia University.

Professor Stubbs recently completed a book entitled Time Honored; A Global View of Architectural Conservation published by John Wiley & Sons.

Arch

Architec

Architectural Conser

Archit

Architectu

Thinking conservation

22

hitectural Conservation in the Future ctural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Futu Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future tectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future ural Conservation in the Future

rvation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

25 years of conservation in India... do we need course correction?

Amita Baig

a

lthough the conservation movement in India has been in existence for just over twenty-five years, the recognition of conservation as a profession has truly been in the last decade. In 1984, when the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) was founded, the government was the exclusive proprietor of all knowledge in heritage, preservation, conservation and protection. In truth, the government is the largest stakeholder of India’s most iconic heritage but at that time, the distinction between custodianship and ownership had not been challenged and the Archaeological Survey of India held all encompassing sway over the monumental heritage, as a carryover of its colonial past.

Once INTACH came into existence and in its formative years challenged the status quo, there began a gradual acknowledgment of a role beyond the government. This increased once INTACH invested in training a vast number of architects in conservation in the UK. It also marked a shift from archaeologists conserving standing monuments, to a new genre of architects now moving into building conservation and what was, hitherto, the domain of government. INTACH’s road map those days was for conservation to be, not merely conservation of buildings, but the entire gamut of historic city revitalisation— ranging from infrastructure to waste management. It lobbied for the government to consider that heritage conservation was inextricably rooted in inner city renewal, and started various campaigns: from cleaning the Ghats of Varanasi to public interest litigation to preclude Bengaluru’s historic Attara Kachery from demolition. Conservation that had been the exclusive realm of government was gradually breached.

Cut to the 21st century, and there is an army of conservation architects working privately on the preservation of the heritage. There are an equally large number of buildings that have been restored, protected and won 25 YEARS OF CONSERVATION IN INDIA...

24

international awards for excellence—ranging from forts to churches, temples and public buildings and even public spaces. Conservation architects have established new road maps as multidisciplinary teams fan out across the country to research historic cities and sites, establishing conservation norms relevant to the area while upgrading techniques and methodologies.

However, the aspiration of every conservation architect is to work on the iconic monuments of India, thus the Archaeological Survey of India became the target of these highly committed professionals. Monuments previously tucked away from the public eye have now become tourist destinations. At the same time ‘World Heritage Site’ recognition by UNESCO demands increasingly high standards. And as development pressure erodes the boundaries of monumental sites around the country, the conservation challenges also grow exponentially; clearly the ASI is no longer able to manage the nation’s heritage through its fiats of ‘forbidding’.

The hundred-year-old organisation fettered with outdated practices, the inability or unwillingness to expand its skills, its reliance upon partnerships or invest in local knowledge and its insular work methods were unable to cope with the changes wrought inside and outside the nationally protected monuments and sites. Inevitably, conservationists have locked horns with the ASI over techniques and inappropriate interventions. And the pressure to engage private conservation architects has gained ground; a battle fought over several arenas in India, as privatisation became the mantra for the 21st century. The fundamental difference, however, is that the nation’s heritage cannot be privatised. The government is the custodian of the heritage, and that is their constitutional responsibility.

25

THINKING CONSERVATION

To the ASI, the management of its monuments has become an increasing burden, its own personnel inadequately equipped beyond preservation and protection; they were often, perhaps unfairly, critiqued. Reluctantly, it opened its doors to private partnership. Ironically it was the muchcontested non-technical Directors General of the ASI who made this paradigm shift, seeking the partnership of conservation practitioners to augment their limited resources. Over the past decade, with financial as well as human resources on offer, there has been a quantum change within the ASI. Conservation architects are now empanelled with the ASI and they write World Heritage reports, nomination dossiers, strategy documents, conservation management plans et al. Projects are sponsored, experts move in, cutting edge reports are generated and, in some cases, work executed. The government on its part has forged much desired partnerships, often mitigating the beady eye of the public and sporadically upgrading practices like using slaked lime mortar instead of cement, which had become the focus of the ills of the ASI. Nevertheless, in reality this system of partnership is unsustainable in terms of the heritage itself.

One then needs to ask, ‘what is the fate of the reports, plans and documents being generated for the ASI?’ Today superbly crafted, thoroughly researched, excellent quality data is generated and cutting edge management plans are prepared, often establishing benchmarks.

Equally, workshops on slaking or documentation are held with international experts, stakeholder consultative workshops; or capacity buildings are held, and reports duly generated. There is a need to assess the impact on the ground and to understand the challenges faced within the Archaeological Survey of India itself.

As much as it is fettered with outmoded practices, it is also consumed with the mediocrity of its own systems. With the governments’ minimal investment formula, archaeologists have been repairing buildings, their processes largely opaque. Despite the introduction of conservation architects into the ASI, there is limited impact in the organisation and its work methods. Even though improved techniques, scientific research, documentation and updated systems are proposed, in reality the primary stakeholder, the lone ASI man stationed at a remote site is completely isolated from these initiatives, his immediate problems at complete variance with the ideal solutions proposed.

25 YEARS OF CONSERVATION IN INDIA...

26

The need of the hour is to understand the capacities of the man who lives at the site, empowering him with the ability to cope with the changes and indeed embrace change as part of the life of a monument.

The reports being generated today assume quantum change without an adequate road map or emphasis in which human resource development is prioritised. Conservation architects must now extend their mandate from preparing conservation reports to a new trajectory that will actually invest in both, conservation and management capacities, which is inclusive and realisable by the custodian at the site.

Site management is not as yet an established profession in India. Now that there is significant architectural conservation strength, there is a need to engage constructively in developing this expertise. In reality, it is this aspect of a site that consumes the energy of the man responsible for India’s heritage and is often extraneous to conservation. Today, these extraneous issues are overwhelming and all too frequently conservation takes second place. The man at site was the person who reported to his superiors about the much-publicised Taj Heritage Corridor, which brought the wrath of the nation down upon the ASI, amongst others.

Falling as it did in amongst so many other critical issues that plague the Taj Mahal, Agra and the ASI, it was yet another letter written with another addition to the litany of woes afflicting this site. It was many months later that a media outrage resulted in the corridor being stopped.

This is just an example of many similar issues which embattle heritage sites and their ’site in charge’. They are the custodians,’ caretakers and conservators; often a one-man army who often fails to make the cut because we have failed to understand his challenges.

Without genuine inclusiveness on the part of the government willing to effect change or the practitioners who must effect that change, the lone caretaker of a nationally protected monument remains as isolated as ever. The future of conservation in India will critically depend on bridging these gaps. Although a well-restored building can stand alone and survive, in India, buildings have a cultural context and a community identity which makes management a priority. This, along with the wellestablished pressures of development and encroachment, makes the work of the ‘site in charge’ unenviable. He often has the most difficult road to negotiate, frequently exacerbated by its very isolation.

The successful management of historic sites in the decades ahead will 27

THINKING CONSERVATION

In truth, the government was the largest stakeholder of India’s most iconic heritage but at that time, the distinction between custodianship and ownership had not been challenged.

To the ASI, the management of its monuments has become an increasing burden, its own personnel inadequately equipped beyond preservation and protection.

depend upon the ability to negotiate multiple issues ranging from the sacred to the secular. In India, socio-political and cultural compulsions are continuously evolving processes, which have enormous influence on how we manage relationships in a historic site. In our determination to achieve our goals there is a tendency now to sidestep these issues.

In order to be more inclusive, we need to rethink how we valorise a site. Perhaps it is time to publish, at the very least, the summary of Conservation Management Plans and site reports in the national and regional languages and invite comment. Apart from the fact that the report on the monument or site will have a much wider outreach, it could in due course seminally alter the values or cultural significance we ascribe to a site.

Equally, while today there is emphasis and valorisation of local knowledge and skill, there is a risk of this becoming tokenism as the wealth of information available in India with skilled craftsmen is being lost to scientific research and technology. There remains a dichotomy between intrinsic knowledge and skills based approach and the currently more affirmative scientific approach. It is interesting to note that while there is a huge effort being made to generate and manage data with stateof–the-art technologies, there is almost no investment in development and incorporation of local craft skills, or promoting apprenticeships and upgrading existing manpower.

It would be a major value addition to commission a report by a craftsman about his work, his contribution to the monument and to record his skills and understanding of how conservation must be planned for the future of that specific site. In India, for each site to have a record of the creative skills would be a benchmark for future generations. If we can invest in this, then surely we will steer site management towards mandating local employment, training young unemployed, developing local skills 25 YEARS OF CONSERVATION IN INDIA...

28

towards a genuine and sustainable partnership in protection.

These are some of India’s ground realities that must be addressed on ground in the field of conservation. In order to be effective we as a profession require to engag substantively in these broader dimensions, unique to each site and which will impact our cultural heritage for future generations. Partnerships must be expanded to build capacities within the ASI and in the communities whose lives were traditionally part of the heritage. We must begin to rectify the skew‌shifting from creating an ideal list of programs and projects, to a holistic and sustainable commitment to a site. Such a paradigm shift will inevitably generate new opportunities and challenges. Conservation has made remarkable strides in these last two decades, it has created a sound basis for future planning at many monuments; we are now positioned to focus on course correction, acknowledging that the development of human resources is the only sustainable way to preserve our heritage.

This means a paradigm shift for the ASI, who must reorient their policies to developing specialisation at sites as opposed to their historic albeit colonial practice of transfers. Equally, the conservation profession must begin to chalk out a new approach to their commitments; maybe conservation internships will ensure a more sustainable road map for human resource development. The conservation profession has become extremely successful and competitive. It has been a meteoric rise, and now with so much work behind them there is a need for introspection.

Are we actually making the cut, are we effecting change? I believe, unless there is a quantum reorientation to commit to a site and to inclusive partnership, we will continue to perpetuate the chasm that undermines much of India’s development goals; I believe all of us need to expand our work philosophy to embrace a far deeper commitment, a challenge beyond technical excellence.

29

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author Amita Baig is a Heritage Management Consultant, presently consultant to the World Monuments Fund in India, the Namgyal Institute for Research on Ladakhi Art and Culture, UNESCO, the Taj Mahal Conservation Collaborative and Founder Trustee of the Jaisalmer Heritage Trust.

She joined the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage at its inception in 1984 and was Director General of the Architectural Heritage Division from 1993 to 1999.

Thinking conservation

30

chitectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Malvika Singh

Conserving the Cultural Ethos

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Fut Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

p

rotect, Conserve, Restore, Destruct, Deface, Ignore are six essential ingredients that are beaten together with careless, random additions of fluid diktats that stem from a lack of interest, knowledge, comprehension and, most importantly, pride in the textured, many layered, fragile legacy of this land. These sharp contradictions plague our land as frigid ‘policies’ and sterile ‘orders,’ crafted and implemented by uninitiated bureaucrats, reek havoc on the ground and utter confusion in the minds of people at ease with the ethos but unfamiliar with the alien rule. The ‘cultural ethos,’ a heavily flavoured curry that has absorbed countless spices, which titillate the senses and create for us a special place on earth, needs to be liberated from the straightjacket of ‘cultural policy’. Policy for whom and for what? Policy for which ‘ingredient,’ and to what end? This ‘policy’ has led to a destructive stagnation that has polluted our ethos.

The British, as they stumbled upon architectural marvels while traversing and exploring this undiscovered, hidden, rich and magical country they had ventured into, were urged by their instinct to preserve. To this end, they established a set of norms that would govern the protection of the manmade, material heritage of Indian civilisation through the centuries.

They understood the need to protect the most valuable, living and growing natural treasure: the larger environment, the forests and rivers, hills and mountain ranges. They respected the repository of skills, the great wealth of indigenous information technology; however, they could not fathom the nuanced and ancient but forever growing and changing ‘ethos’. Thus, they formulated a ‘policy’ that independent India inherited and put into practice; an alien and structured policy with a long list of do’s and don’ts.

Indians do not believe in ‘commandments’. They believe in a larger, amorphous culture, are directed by their faith in religion and live by Conserving the Cultural Ethos

32

their particular, community specific social structures. For centuries, this ‘diversity’ has learned to live together through ups, downs, political turmoil and societal upheaval. India has adjusted and overcome the tribulations that are part of the working of a plural state. The standardisation of the intrinsic differences with the policy commandments from an overhead governing authority has diluted and destructed an inherent, all pervading, deep-rooted ethos that had enveloped much diversity and kept India united, even when several Kings and dynasties ruled the subcontinent. This very same ‘ethos’ kicked in to bring the many states and principalities together, with comparative ease and good faith, to form the democratic, secular Republic of India; a heroic task realised because of a diverse but common, all encompassing, tried and tested ‘ethos’ of an ancient civilisation—moving one step forward to embrace the concept of a modern Nation State!

The many cultures that make up the federal entity that is India are firmly rooted. Strong roots withstand fraying at the edges and are able to generate fresh and healthy leaves off its numerous branches and new beginnings can unfold. India needs to nurture her intangible strengths in an effort to cleanse the system of abrasive intrusions, the redundant do’s and don’ts, and start the process of reinvention. It is often said that people are the repository of culture; structures and objects the manifestations of specific cultures. This truism holds good, and needs to be reinforced by empowering communities, cultures and their people to enhance their legacy by working ways to conserve and energise their inheritance. Living, breathing, moving and shaking cultures will live on, and those that are put into little boxes will suffocate and die. People and their communities must think out of the box and evolve exciting alternatives to ‘preserve’ and ‘conserve,’ to ‘protect’ and ‘restore’. The ‘policy’ makers never consult the people who, in fact, hold the ‘culture’ in trust for the next generation.

33

THINKING CONSERVATION

People and their communities must think out of the box and evolve exciting alternatives to ‘preserve’ and ‘conserve,’ to ‘protect’ and ‘restore’.

Wandering through the remote region of Nagaland a decade ago, I found that every village sitting atop a hill had two important buildings: a church and a museum. The church representing the religious conversion from animism to Christianity, juxtaposed with the ‘museum’ that houses, in safe-keeping, the private jewellery, headgear, ceremonial swords and elaborate shawls of individual members of the tribe. During festivals or when the occasion demands, people claim their possessions and return them to the community museum afterwards, where they stay on display for all to see. They are proud of their culture and have faith in their adopted religion. This fusion not only works but also adds another dimension to traditional Naga culture, in its broadest definition as well as to the intricate differences between the many tribes.

In Austria—where land owning families have lived in private ancestral castles through many generations, and where the rooms remain virtually intact with all the valuable silver, books and furniture as they must have been in the 1500s or earlier, much like living museums— the government deems each historically important Schloss a ‘heritage building,’ fixes a ‘blue board’ on the front and rear wall establishing the fact and the owners have to adhere to a set of stringent maintenance rules, from which no deviations are permitted. Thus, the old, traditional and cultural ethos lives on! We, in India, could learn a number of lessons from this working experiment.

A process has to be envisaged where government steps aside and allows community leaders and skilled professional practitioners – artists, Conserving the Cultural Ethos

34

craftspeople, architects, art historians, social scientists, engineers, municipalities and lawyers – to participate in formulating an inclusive path to ensure the ongoing sustenance of our habitats and environment.

Preserving civil society, saluting plurality and respecting differences will enliven the responses to culture and its infinite hues and patterns.

Therefore, the commitment has to be multi pronged and endeavours have to run parallel to each other. Government departments cannot be permitted to pull in all directions, fighting one another for space.

This problem can be resolved if the presiding force is the community concerned. Through a cleverly crafted ‘process,’ the people could act as the binding agent and be held accountable for the ‘preservation’ of what is rightfully theirs. A basic framework needs to be formulated through debate and discussion with all the ‘stakeholders’. More than five hundred constituencies in India could lead the change and get village communities and townships to take on the challenge of keeping their habitats clean, green and protected as part of a kar seva movement, the thing Indians are committed to when it comes to their faith; They must now be motivated to do for the same for their communities and for the legacy they leave behind. According to tradition, the prosperous build schools, hospitals and places of worship as their gesture of giving back from where they got and in memory of near and dear ones. This traditional quality of giving, the inherent culture of daan, needs to be extended into the realm of history, the larger, diverse repository of culture, community and the nation state. If we attempt this not-so-difficult task, India will have transited into the new millennium with her ‘ethos’ invading the world!

35

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author Malvika Singh is a political commentator and publisher of Seminar Magazine, which has been in the forefront of many heritage missions.

Thinking conservation

36

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future itectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Futu Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Heritage Conservation and the Process versus Passion Conundrum

A G K Menon

a

fter more than two decades of passionate advocacy by several interest groups countrywide, it has now become politically correct to espouse the cause of heritage conservation in the management of cities. Unfortunately, this has not altered ground realities, because city planners and administrators continue to pursue business-as-usual.

In fact, success of advocacy may have provoked a reaction: devious strategies are developed to circumvent heritage issues when they appear on the radar of the zealous proponents of urban projects (often the government).

These issues were foregrounded with the initiation of the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) in 2005. The government had awoken to the anomaly of the country’s growing economic stature and its failing cities to formulate a bold, innovative and time-bound Mission to renew sixty-three major cities. Besides infusing massive amounts of funds to improve urban infrastructure, it also mandated structural reforms in urban governance. The Mission produced ‘tool-kits’ to guide civic authorities to access project funding and undertake the mandated reforms.

Soon after the Mission was launched, INTACH highlighted the potential damage that mega-infrastructure projects funded by the JNNURM could inflict on historic precincts. Their concerns also drew attention to the consequences of removing social safety nets like rent control to make urban renewal projects economically viable. In sum, INTACH argued that the Mission’s success could lead to the loss of valuable tangible and intangible cultural resources that existed in historic cities.

INTACH collaborated with the government to discuss these issues at a national conclave in Mysore in May 2006. As a follow-up, INTACH was asked to produce a ‘heritage tool-kit’ to guide the process of formulating Heritage Conservation and the Process versus Passion Conundrum

38

This heritage precinct in Jodhpur illustrates the intrusion of infrastructure projects in heritage areas.

heritage-sensitive city development plans, on the basis of which project funding would be released.

This heritage tool-kit has been in circulation for almost four years; however, it appears that the results have not been satisfactory. The diagnosis points to the failure of the process followed by municipal authorities, which clearly did not adhere to the directives provided in the tool-kits. This disconnect between intentions and reality has led the government to contract UNESCO to formulate yet another tool-kit to guide Detailed Project Reports and ‘mainstream’ heritage conservation in the formulation of JNNURM projects. As a regular interlocutor on heritage conservation issues, one begins to wonder whether the new tool-kit will yield the desired results and whether we should not consider other strategies to achieve conservation objectives.

The success of any process depends on the mindset of urban planners and city managers. It determines their willingness to accommodate the imperatives of heritage conservation in Mission funded urban renewal projects. Given the socio-economic history of our country, their mindset could be described as being deeply imbued with development ideology: they are unsympathetic to heritage conservation, the antithesis of development. Even well defined and structured processes recommended by tool-kits will not mitigate the influence of this classic ideological dichotomy. To map its consequences consider three foundational questions that define conservation practice.

39

THINKING CONSERVATION

While everyone agrees that iconic historic monuments should be preserved, not many understand the rationale to conserve dilapidated historic precincts.

First, why conserve? In the conservation classroom, this question is compellingly explained; however, in public discourse or planning practice it continues to be contested. While everyone agrees that iconic historic monuments like the Qutab Minar and Humayun’s Tomb in Delhi should be preserved, not many understand the rationale to conserve dilapidated historic precincts like Shahjahanabad and Nizamuddin basti.

This is where JNNURM projects could inflict the greatest damage. Indian planners reflexively prefer to adopt the modernist approach to urban renewal, best exemplified by Chinese city planners who have ruthlessly destroyed their historic cities in order to modernise them. For example, in the once historic city of Suzhou, only isolated historic gardens, a few pagodas and a small stretch of the traditional network of canals have been preserved as tourist attractions in a sea of modern development.

The mindset of the Indian urban planner and city manager operates on similar lines, thus subverting any process based on classroom answers to the question, ‘why conserve’.

Next, what to conserve? Can historic cities like Shahjahanabad and Nizamuddin become the objects of conservation in the present system of managing cities? This cannot happen because of an inherent flaw in the imagination of the Indian urban planner: they cannot imagine, let alone consider protecting, an ‘Indian’ city with its organic network of roads and mixed land uses. Consequently, they are unable to value the hybrid urbanism that exists in historic cities—what Frederic Jameson refers to as ‘messy urbanism’—as a heritage resource, thus making it vulnerable to modernist urban renewal. Nevertheless, we know that it contains the tangible and intangible heritage of Indian society, its so-called ‘living heritage’. They prefer to modernise historic cities in the image of models like Suzhou, blunting any tool-kit designed to compensate for such limitations in their imagination.

Heritage Conservation and the Process versus Passion Conundrum

40

Finally, how to conserve? This brings us back to the issue of ‘processes’.

Urban planning in India is rooted in colonial imperatives. Heritage conservation too, has acquired these attributes: the process is Eurocentric and top down. New processes, like the JNNURM tool-kits, tend to reinforce these attributes even though aspire to accomplish the opposite. Consequently, the reform objectives of JNNURM will not succeed in the routine. The tool-kits will remain ineffective, and it’s well-meaning ‘processes,’ subverted. The process is not the key to the problem of heritage conservation.

Of recent, I gained an insight into the systemic failures of implementing heritage conservation projects while writing the history of INTACH on its 25th anniversary. Talking to people associated with its beginning, I heard a litany of complaints bemoaning the loss of ‘passion’ in dealing with heritage projects today. Of course, INTACH as an institution, needs to professionalise its activities over the years; but it struck me that it did not have to discard its ‘passion’. I realised that the conundrum between passion and process is endemic to the conservation movement in India: it is not a divisive problem, but its defining characteristic. We need to pursue both passion and process to succeed in our conservation endeavours.

Contemporary advocates for conservation need to take their cues from earlier activists who succeeded by pressing their claims against the system. To make conservation work today, conservation professionals need to work against the prevalent processes of urban renewal. In many of my own conservation projects, I have found that it can pay surprising dividends.

41

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author A. G. Krishna Menon is an architect, urban planner and conservation consultant who has been practicing and teaching in Delhi since 1972.

As a Conservation Consultant he has undertaken many pioneering urban conservation projects in India on behalf of INTACH, and authored several documents setting guidelines for conservation practice in India. While maintaining an active professional practice he remains a passionate interlocutor in mediating the development of Delhi as a Heritage City.

Thinking conservation

42

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Cons Architectural Conservation in the Future Archit Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architect

Abha Narain Lambah

Custodianship of Heritage: Public-Private Initiatives

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural

Architectural Conservation in the Future

u

until the 1980s, conservation practices were still unheard of in India. The only attempt at engaging with heritage structures was at the government level, through establishments such as the Archaeological Survey of India and State Departments of Archaeology.

The involvement of non-governmental agencies in the conservation field began by the 1980s; however, a palpable ‘coming of age’ of heritage conservation in India was observed only in the last decade. In the past ten years, India was a laboratory for various experiments in conservation, some that followed the conventional process of institutional frameworks, some that tweaked established methods and yet others that pushed the envelope to such a degree and created new paradigms for the conservation movement.

While most of the experiments have been in the private space, revolving around the conversion of palaces, forts and havelis into heritage hotels, some interesting models of public-private participation have come about in the sphere of cultural conservation of public buildings. These include attempts at public involvement in the care and restoration of public landmarks such as colleges, educational institutions and public offices, often owned by the government, or in the coalescing of communities to save or restore what they consider as part of their shared memory.

Fortunately, I have had a ringside view to some of these initiatives, and sometimes the experience of being in the ring itself.

Perhaps one of the earliest such endeavours is the formation of the Kala Ghoda Association by an assorted bunch of Mumbai citizens to help improve a part of their public realm and shared memory. The area bounded by institutional buildings such as the Prince of Wales Museum, Jehangir Art Gallery and the University of Mumbai is a nerve centre of the city; yet, the name of the area itself is an example of how public memory sometimes has a longer lifespan than tangible cultural resources, as it Custodianship of Heritage: Public-Private Initiatives

44

The Elphinstone College facade post restoration.

still bears the name that literally translates to ‘black horse,’ after a bronze equestrian statue of a British emperor that stood at this road junction in South Mumbai’s Fort area. The statue has been long since removed to a more apolitical venue inside the zoo, but the name of the area is still imprinted in public memory.

In 1998, a group of us, moved by the plight of the historic buildings in the area and a general air of municipal despondency, formed the association and then started to organise an annual Kala Ghoda Festival to celebrate art in all its forms. Book readings were held in the garden of the David Sassoon Library, morning ragas on the terrace of Jehangir Art Gallery, art displayed on pavements and free musical concerts were organised on Rampart Row and the parking lot.

With seed money of barely a million rupees (20,000 USD), we signed an MoU with the Government of Maharashtra to restore the Elphinstone College building, which resulted in the restoration of its Victorian stone facade, an integral part of the public realm of Kala Ghoda.

Emboldened by this experiment, the Friends of JJ School of Art was formed in 2002, with a view to restore the oldest art institution in India.

The issues facing the building ranged from timber deterioration and leaking roofs, to issues of stone staining and incongruous repairs over decades of maintenance by the PWD. 45

THINKING CONSERVATION

In the past ten years, India was a laboratory for various experiments in conservation, some that followed the conventional process of institutional frameworks, some that tweaked established methods and yet others that pushed the envelope to such a degree and created new paradigms for the conservation movement.

To raise funds for the basic urgent repairs work phase of the project, estimated at Rs. 66 lacs, the Trust organised a public concert by Pandit Ravi Shankar and his daughter Anoushka at the National Centre for Performing Arts in February, 2003, along with an art auction of significant works by the alumni, raising Rs. 18 lacs for the conservation project. At the event, a local Member of Parliament also committed funds from the Member Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) funds, to make up for the remaining expenses. The Jindal South West group of companies supported the project by bearing the cost of professional expertise. This was the first time in India that the Central Governments MPLADS funds were used for restoring a heritage structure; as a result, the project became a training ground for PWD engineers in conservation methodology and principles. To think that Osbert Lancaster once said, “Often it is better for the House of God to fall into the hands of the infidel, than to pass into the keeping of the Public Works Department.”

In the restoration of the Convocation Hall of the Mumbai University in 2005, the shortfall of Rs. 75 lacs needed for restoration was made up by the Jamsetji Tata Trust and for the first time, the PWD engineers accepted the use of special conservation specifications and rates for trained conservators, over unskilled labour, for restoring historic stained glass and gold leaf gilding on a government project.

These cases of government owned buildings being restored through public intervention have finally resulted in the Government of Maharashtra instituting an annual budget of Rs. 15 crores towards the restoration of heritage buildings in Mumbai. Thus, experiments of the Convocation Hall, Elphinstone College and the JJ School of Art have resulted in the establishment of a system within the governments mechanism to introduce conservation techniques and materials such as lime pointing, stained glass restoration, gold leaf gilding etc., in the government schedule of rates, enabling the inclusion of specialised conservation items in standard governmental procedure for repair and maintenance.

Public involvement in the realm of monuments, normally confined to the jurisdiction of archaeologists, has been witnessed in the last decade.

With the establishment of the National Culture Fund, corporate and private foundations have engaged with the government in the restoration of national monuments and World Heritage Sites. Ratish Nanda’s work with the Aga Khan Foundation on landscape restoration at Humayun’s Custodianship of Heritage: Public-Private Initiatives

46

Ongoing conservation work at Chandramauleshwar within the quadrangle and its walls along the embankments.

Tomb and the work of the Taj Mahal Conservation Collaborative on the preparation of a management plan for the Taj Mahal supported by the Taj Group of Hotels and World Monuments Fund are examples of this genre.

Furthermore, this public-private partnership has had a trickledown effect on state governments and among the pioneering projects is the restoration of the Chandramauleshwar temple, a 15th century Shaivite temple on the historic Vaishnavite site of Rishimukha, Hampi. Though within the core zone of the Hampi World Heritage Site, the temple standing on an island in the river Tungabhadra facing the Vithala temple across a medieval stone bridge falls within the State Archaeology. The Hampi Foundation supported by the JSW Foundation partnered with Global Heritage Fund towards the restoration of this monument. This project that has now sustained for 4 years, involved the preparation of a Conservation Management Plan, followed by a season of archaeology and nearly 2 years of careful restoration and structural consolidation of the monumental stone retaining walls of the temple that had severe geo– technical issues. We hope to close the current season after the structural consolidation, to monitor the temple for another season before deciding whether any intervention to the shrine is required.

From cases of public involvement in government monuments in geographically diverse areas such as Hampi, Mumbai and Kolkata, it is only a matter of time until we are able to join the dots and watch an Indian leitmotif to the conservation initiatives emerge. The geographical diversity of the many UNESCO Asia Pacific awards that Indian projects have won in the last decade, from Ladakh to Pondicherry, Mumbai and Gujarat, is testimony to the fact that conservation in India is finally come of age; this is perhaps the time we begin considering the forging of a South Asian conservation policy.

47

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author Abha Narain Lambah has a Masters degree in Architectural Conservation from the School of Planning & Architecture, New Delhi. She is an Executive Committee member of the Urban Design Research Institute and is a Founder member and Trustee of the Kala Ghoda Association and the Horniman Circle Association.

In addition to running an independent conservation consultancy firm, she is a principal of The Bombay Collaborative, a firm of architects involved in conservation and urban design.

Abha is a visiting faculty at the Academy of Architecture.

Thinking conservation

48

ectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Shikha Jain

Values In Conservation

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Futur Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future rchitectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

w

ith an increasing global exchange and a fresh stream of professionals, the conservation field in India is fast establishing its own identity. As this rapid change is evidenced in several ongoing restoration works across various sites in India, it is crucial that extensive research and a robust theoretical framework inform such activities.

Conservation though still a nascent field, even in the international arena, has come to terms with the crucial role of values, advocating a value based approach as the most transparent and appropriate means to conserve heritage (Torre and Avrami, 2000, ICOMOS Burra Charter, 1999).

While the analysis and assessment of values and the statement of cultural significance is a prerequisite for any successful conservation work, most conservation initiatives in India appear lacking in this respect. Though most professionals are well conversant with the process of extensive documentation and condition assessment, in the treatment of historic buildings, it is rare to find comprehensive value analysis guiding conservation works. Besides, an in-depth analysis of the range of values linked to the built heritage, their subsequent impact in evaluating significance and, finally, the role of values in decision making regarding intervention are crucial factors that are absent in most cases.

Dominated by the monument centric approach of the ASI for decades, conservation as a social agenda has only recently found its footing in India under the aegis of organisations such as the INTACH. Conservation has now clearly moved beyond mere technical restoration work supervised by professionals, to address wider social issues through a multidisciplinary team and the participation of users and stakeholders. However, be it the central government, the state level statutory guidelines framed on pre independence philosophies or the newly framed INTACH Charter for conservation in India, key definitions for heritage values and cultural significance are sorely lacking.

Values In Conservation

50

What is a value-based approach?

The ultimate aim of conservation is not to conserve material for its own sake, but rather, to maintain (and shape) the values embodied by the heritage—physical intervention or treatment being one of many means toward that end. To achieve an end wherein the heritage is meaningful to those whom it is intended to benefit (i.e. future generations), it is necessary to examine why and how heritage is valued, and by whom.

(Marta de la Torre and Erica Avrami, 2000) It is evident that an assessment of values is the key to arriving at a structures cultural significance, the prime factor to be conserved and enhanced. The aim is to assess the cumulative value that a place has, resulting from diversified values, multiple layers of meaning added over time, tangible and intangible, for past present and future generations.

The values associated with the site establish the heritage site to be of local, regional, national or international significance. Conservation of the site requires the protection and enhancement of these values.

Existing statutory documents Statutory instruments such as the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958; the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972; and the State Monuments, Archaeological Sites and Antiquities Act, specify historic value, archaeological value, aesthetic value, artistic value and scientific value associated with monuments, archaeological sites and antiquities. A significant missing aspect in all these documents is the social value. There are sections and sub-sections [Section 5 (sub-section 6), Section 7 (sub-section 3), Section 16 in the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, Section 4 (sub-section 5), Section 6 (sub-section 2) and Section 15 in the Rajasthan Monuments, 51

THINKING CONSERVATION

An in-depth analysis of the range of values linked to the built heritage, their subsequent impact in evaluating significance and, finally, the role of values in decision making regarding intervention are crucial factors that are absent in most cases.

Archaeological Sites and Antiquities Act, 1961], incorporating the continuation of religious use and protection of place of worship from pollution, misuse and desecration, that reflect the indirect acceptance of religious value. The heritage regulations recently adopted in the state of Gujarat and the model building byelaws recommended by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, provide a more holistic coverage of values.

However, a comprehensive coverage of all values and establishing methodologies in order to assess these values is definitely required.

One of the most comprehensive document addressing values for conservation is the ICOMOS Burra Charter, 1999. Besides accepting the four basic cultural values, it further specifies ‘Other approaches’. It states, “The categorisation into aesthetic, historic, scientific and social values is one approach to understanding the concept of cultural significance.

However, more precise categories may be developed as understanding of a particular place increases.” A similar value-approach that allows for the inclusion of the uniqueness of Indian historic sites should be integrated in the INTACH Charter to reinforce its existing articles.

Values in the Indian Context Though parallels could be drawn from the national and international charters, finally the significance assessment has to be arrived at by understanding the site specifics and identifying the distinct values associated with the same. For example, the continuity of indigenous processes and traditional techniques in India presents a unique aspect that, at times, conflicts with authenticity as accepted in modern conservation norms. These practices can be read and appreciated as the ‘tradition’ and ‘cultural association’ that has kept Indian heritage sites intact so far even in the absence of a formal conservation approach.

As Paul Phillipot noted, in most contemporary professional contexts, conservation has become the designated term for “an objective, scientific approach to the past in the form of historical knowledge, not the same as the continuity guaranteed by former tradition; a modern Values In Conservation

52

phenomenon of maintaining living contact with cultural works of the past.” (Matero, 2000) The quote raises the notion that in specific cases where traditional practices have continually evolved with time, they need to be specifically addressed possibly as the ‘continuity value’ of the site.

In such cases, the applicability of an objective, scientific approach would probably be an intervention in itself. What is exceptional and of value is the ‘process’ that has evolved over generations around the unique site with continuous exchange and interactions of space, place and people, thereby becoming an established mode of practice.

Indian sites express a wide range of diverse and unique values and thus can serve as ideal field laboratories to establish methodologies for assessing and protecting values. Such an initiative will not only result in more effective conservation of heritage sites but also will strengthen the current conservation philosophies in the Indian context and provide a platform for further dialogue in the global arena.

A sensitive conservation approach, not only requires documenting and evaluating the entire gamut of heritage values, but also negotiations of conflicting values to enhance the overall cultural significance. The conflict between cultural value and economic value is challenging in itself, but an initial act of balancing the diverse values comprising the cultural value (aesthetic, historic, social and scientific) is equally essential. To achieve sustainable conservation for heritage sites, professionals, government and non-government organizations in India need to: •

Acknowledge and accept the value-based approach as being an essential framework for any conservation work.

• Integrate value assessment in statutory guidelines and charters.

• Assess the diverse range of values associated with specific sites.

• Evolve conservation policies and practices that directly respond to the value analysis and remain useful for the future generation.

53

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author Dr. Shikha Jain, Founder and Director of NGO, DRONAH, has expertise in conservation and community design projects and has headed a number of urban conservation projects in Rajasthan, Haryana and Maharasthra.

She is also the Chief Editor of the biannual journal ‘Context: Built, Living and Natural’.

Ar

Arch

Architectural Cons

Arch

Architec

Thinking conservation

54

rchitectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future servation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Fu Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future hitectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in t Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future ctural Conservation in the Future

hitectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Situating Heritage Within a Development Context Yaaminey Mubayi

“h

eritage conservation is an integral part of civil society…

Conservation shapes the society in which it is situated, and in turn, it is shaped by the needs and dynamics of that society.”

(Erica Avrami, Randall Mason, Marta de la Torre, ‘Values and Heritage Conservation,’ The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, 2000.

Hereafter ‘The Getty Report’) The notion of Heritage, values, attitudes and belief systems inherited from the past and manifested in material remains, is a complex and often contested one. In today’s globalised societies, a sensible view of heritage views it as a process, with social, economic and cultural underpinnings, rather than as a fixed set of static objects.

The idea of Heritage Conservation, as well, has moved beyond physical intervention for preservation to a much larger process, subsuming academic research and inquiry as well as policy making and planning for sustainability.

The Getty Report proposes a model depicting the multiple action areas contained within the rubric of conservation, highlighting its multidisciplinarity as well as the need for an interdisciplinary approach.

The sequence of actions begins with the recognition of heritage through academic research, community consciousness and political trends; moves on to its protection through notification, museum acquisition etc.; followed by planning and management through designated stewardship and finally concludes with technical interventions for restoration, preservation and so on. While much attention has been paid to the final stage of physical interventions, very little thought is given to the recognition of heritage and its management and stewardship.

How do cultural forms, tangible and intangible, qualify for designation and protection as heritage? How is heritage to be made a sustainable resource, to be made available to future generations?

The two issues of designation and management for sustainability are closely related and most critical to the evolution of a society’s self-image and identity for generations to come. The question of what constitutes heritage is a problematic one, since it hinges on the related issue of whose heritage is to be preserved. Only when these issues are addressed appropriately, does the next stage, of how heritage is to be managed and preserved fall into place.

Situating Heritage within a Development Context

56

At the core of the recognition/designation of cultural heritage, lies the notion of value, an indefinable measure of the cultural form’s significance that would determine its eligibility to represent the society’s identity. Ascribing value to heritage is a difficult process with no formulaic solution. Whose interests should be represented? What should be the criteria for determining the value of heritage? Should income generation potential be a criterion for determining heritage value? The following sections examine two examples of the manner in which heritage can be designated and evaluated with a view to evolving sustainable management structures. The argument attempts to draw out the categorical imperative, as it were, the highest compulsion driving the designation and management of heritage and to determine its potential as a public good, capable of positively impacting the community.

I. Heritage Tourism Management Planning in Amritsar: The State Government Tourism Department began a programme for developing the pilgrimage centre of Amritsar, with the Golden Temple, the ‘Mecca of the Sikhs,’ as its historic core, into a major tourist destination. Since medieval times, this city has been a centre for trade and industry, being situated on the Grand Trunk Road, a major trade route in the north of India. Following Partition in 1947, the city has faced degeneration and neglect, when its proximity to the border precluded major industrial development. A Visitors Needs Assessment revealed that while its religious significance remained undiminished, tourists were uninformed and unenthusiastic about Amritsar’s other heritage sites and beleaguered by problems of traffic congestion, bad roads, visual clutter, lack of signage and public amenities and a complete lack of showcasing of the heritage.

As part of the Plan, a number of heritage sites have been designated for development, forming a matrix across the city. A fort has been earmarked for a son-et-lumiere, the historic Town Hall is to house a People’s Museum, a craft display and sale area a central tourist node and interpretation centre servicing the Walled City. The Summer Palace of the greatest of the Sikh monarchs, Maharaja Ranjit Singh, and its extensive garden will comprise a children’s activity zone as well as a performing arts teaching and performance space, inviting the participation of the 57

THINKING CONSERVATION

local community and institutions. The historic markets of Amritsar, the katras, are to be revitalised as tourist attractions, through infrastructure interventions like street upgradation, traffic management, signage and public amenities, heritage walks and public consultations with the Market Traders Associations, to better showcase their products and effectively pool and coordinate their resources. The local craftsmen are to be organised to give them greater voice and showcase their products to the tourists.

However, this is primarily a State-driven initiative, with appropriate technical experts designing the various components. The targets are largely predetermined, and it is up to the processes to be consultative and incorporate community sensitivities. Initial public consultations are slowly uncovering the multiple interests that will need to be balanced and conflicts to be resolved for implementation. The approach would have to be a combination of income generating activities and some welfare measures, especially with respect to showcasing crafts.

However, given the time-bound nature of the planning exercise, the role of the consultant experts is limited to catalysing local interest, setting in place community-based management structures for sustaining the initiative.

II. The Private Sector and Community Interface in Nabha, Punjab:

How is heritage to be made a sustainable resource, to be made available to future generations?

Strong family interest led an NRI firm to invest in social development in Nabha as part of their corporate social responsibility initiative. The core project was a public-private partnership to lease the Nabha fort for conservation and reuse as an institute of higher education. Around this, an integrated development model was adopted, with projects in Health, Education, Livelihoods and Heritage conservation.

The manageable size of the town allows for a deeper focus on tackling local needs at a fundamental level. The Heritage programme involves a combination of physical conservation of key sites, as well as an extensive research and documentation exercise involving students of a local college, heritage awareness in local schools and setting up a heritage database, community museum and website. There is enough time to carry out deep-rooted and phased interventions, demonstrating success Situating Heritage within a Development Context

58

and building credibility. The approach is as participatory as possible, with a local Development Committee providing inputs for target setting, local college students evolving the research agenda and implementing heritage documentation and public consultations for managing sites after conservation. A local Community Foundation is proposed to facilitate the collection and management of community resources for further development.

Guidelines, however, need to be put in place to protect the interests of the most vulnerable sections of the local community. The private sector, by definition is accountable to market and shareholders but not necessarily to the community. Local societies are composed of multiple interest groups that may not always voice the concerns of the vulnerable.

In order to ensure continued financial commitment by the private sector and pursue a participatory development agenda, a monitoring (but not obstructive) role must be played by the government and international expert agencies, which can ensure that best practices in heritage management and community development are maintained.

In conclusion, heritage conservation and management needs to be viewed in the context of broader developmental needs of the community.

Such needs must be ascertained through participatory assessments, and time given to evolve broad-based agendas balancing multiple interest groups. For instance, the development of the Nabha fort must be in consonance with developing the community’s capacities, or else a wellconserved heritage item will be mired in an undeveloped environment unable to sustain it. This is a existing problem in Amritsar, where the Golden Temple draws nearly 10,000 visitors per day, but not even 30% of them spend a single night in the city.

The research and planning aspect must be given due importance, a factor which is largely neglected in conservation and development practice at large. The designation of cultural heritage must be informed by the developmental reality of the community and resource management potential for sustainability. The role of the state and international development experts must be an evaluatory one to ensure that policy standards and developmental parameters are adhered to. Conservation and community development can work in consonance to fully realise and sustain their potentials.

59

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author Dr. Yaaminey Mubayi is the Nabha Foundation’s Development Specialist in Heritage, with over a decade of experience in the field. She has worked for UNESCO and has been a consultant on the conservation management plan of Delhi’s Red Fort.

She is currently Visiting Faculty at the School of Planning and Architecture, Delhi.

Besides her professional and teaching activity, Yaaminey is a member of the Expert Committee on Heritage Tourism Development and a Founder Member of Satark Nagrik Sangathan, an NGO working on governance in Delhi. She is also the author of ‘Altar of Power: The temple and the state in the land of Jagannatha,’ (New Delhi, Manohar Publishers, 2005).

Thinking conservation

60

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Tara Sharma

Within Temple Walls Preserving the Spirit of a Place

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future chitectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Fut Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

r

eligious sites across India, and indeed across Asia, are some of the oldest heritage sites in the world. A basic tenet of most Asian religions is the accumulation of good karma through various acts of merit, which include the commissioning of religious temples, murals, idols etc. Constructed centuries ago by patrons and continually added to by pilgrims, these sites are by their very nature dynamic – constantly evolving. Thus living sacred sites, as seen today, are a culmination of ancient traditions of addition and renewal.

Sacred sites in India remain some of the most contentious sites for conservators, where global conservation principles often come in direct conflict with the religious needs of the custodians and users seeking to continually develop the site in accordance with contemporary spiritual needs. Yet, if one were to trace India’s indigenous ‘conservation’ practices, it is evident that there existed a tradition of restoring and in some cases reusing abandoned temples through well-defined processes of consecration and restoration that ensured, both, the spiritual and material integrity of the site . The dilemma is rooted in the differing values ascribed to religious sites. For conservators, the primary aim is to preserve the physical fabric of the site, whose value is derived in terms of its historicity: its architectural or art historical value in promoting an understanding of the art, history or architecture of a bygone age. For the users and custodians of these sites, however, the primary value remains its spiritual value – one that’s intangible and moves beyond the realm of the physical form.

Thus, bridging global conservation practices with age-old religious needs remains a huge challenge. Living religious sites are not archaeological monuments frozen in a magical moment of time; more precisely, they are evolving sites whose principle raison d’etre lay in their function, as a means for people to accumulate good karma, rather than material form. If one recognises this basic premise, it is possible to develop a consensus for religious sites – what is preserved must be equall to the spiritual value of the site in addition to its material.

While working in Ladakh, the high altitude desert of the Himalayan region, it has been possible, in some measure, to develop a methodology that brings together these two seemingly divergent strands. In Ladakh that has a predominantly Buddhist culture, often the remote villages spread across the mountainous terrain are bound by their affinity to the sacred heritage, both natural and man-made. Ancient monasteries and Buddhist temples dot the landscape and these have a continued function and role in contemporary community life. It is this bond that has helped to promote a continuous Within Temple Walls - Preserving the Spirit of a Place

62

spiritual heritage dating back several centuries.

Temples continue to be renewed, rebuilt and restored based on a community’s understanding of their spiritual heritage, always preserving the sacred value of the site.

In the case of Basgo, a village located near the main town of Leh, the community initiated a long term programme to restore three temples dedicated to the Maitreya Buddha, on the verge of collapse. The principal of the three temples, the 15th century Chamba Lhakhang, an imposing structure, houses a colossal gilded clay statue of the seated Maitreya in the centre. The walls are embellished with paintings executed over several centuries that depict a range of Buddhist deities, spiritual lineages and royal patrons. The paintings had been badly damaged as the roof had decayed and water seeped into the fragile mud brick walls.

The conservation of the temples began in the 1990’s under the aegis of a local village body, the Basgo Welfare Committee. As a living religious site, the main aim of the ‘conservation’ programme for the village community was to safeguard their place of worship and to seek the deities’ benevolence in promoting the welfare of the village. This basic spiritual value of the site was of primary significance.

Villagers gathered to provide emergency measures such as the construction of a retaining wall around the most endangered temple. Volunteers worked on site and villagers donated materials such as grain and timber, which were sold to generate funds for the restoration. The community came together to perform this service which itself was seen as an act of merit. Stone by stone 63

THINKING CONSERVATION

Condition of the wall paintings before conservation. ©the author/ NIRLAC.

the massive retaining wall was constructed around the main temple. In 2002, the site was listed by the World Monuments Watch as ‘one of the Hundred World’s Most Endangered Sites,’ following which, through successive grants from the World Monuments Fund, conservation work began on the Chamba Lhakhang.

Bridging global conservation practices with ageold religious needs remains a huge challenge.

Prior to the commencement of work, special rituals were held to ensure that deities of the underworld, the Lu, were placated and would not disrupt work.

As the team of conservators and village leaders discussed the conservation strategy for the site, the temple was prepared for the conservation programme.

A special de-consecration ceremony was held led by the Ven Stakna Rinpoche. The ceremony involved the removal of the sacred essence from the murals depicting the powerful Buddhist deities and carefully storing this to prevent it from damage during conservation work. Following this ceremony, the architectural conservation of the building was undertaken by a group of traditional craftsmen, conservation architects and engineers. The most vulnerable elements in the temple were the exquisite murals, some of which had been damaged by water seepage and structural movements, leading to the formation of large cracks on the painted surface. The visual presentation of the wall paintings posed a philosophical challenge of its own. While the general approach to the conservation of mural painting is to carry out minimal reconstruction of damaged or missing elements, the same philosophy could not be adopted for a living religious site. The deities symbolised perfection of different qualities, all of which were represented in their depictions; damaged figures of deities could not be worshipped, as an incomplete depiction would be considered imperfect, thereby un-worshipable. Initial plans by the community to completely repaint the damaged figures and conservation practices were discussed and debated with the community and the monks.

The sacred value as well as function of the paintings was held to be of higher significance than the art historical value ascribed by the conservators. A consensus was finally reached on the visual reintegration of the areas of loss.

A range of techniques to restore the paintings was adopted to ensure that the final result complied with the sacred function and value of the temple. In the areas of total loss of major figures (such as the face of a Buddha, which had its historic layer painted over), it was agreed, would be completed by local artists working under the supervision of painting conservators to ensure that the correct iconography was followed.

With the restoration of the wall paintings, the temple was once again to be prepared for consecration to open it to worship in again. A consecration Within Temple Walls - Preserving the Spirit of a Place

64

View of the painted walls after conservation and the ceremony there© Art Conservation Solutions/NIRLAC.

ceremony was held to reinstate the spiritual essence back to the paintings.

This done, it once more became a living religious site ready for worship– its spiritual value reinforced. Attended by the entire village, the ceremony was also a time for rejoice – the temples would continue to perform their function for the village.

In 2007, the conservation programme won the UNESCO Asia Pacific Heritage Award of Excellence. At a ceremony organised by the village to receive the award, village leaders and members of the conservation team were thanked for their role in saving the temple. The spirit of the conservation programme was succinctly summarised in a speech given by a senior monk from Hemis gonpa under which the temples lie. He thanked the villagers for their efforts in restoring these temples and assured them of the good karma they had accumulated through this. He concluded his speech by saying, “Let us all once again meet in Tusita (heaven) to hear the Chamba (Maitreya) preach.”

The act of preservation had become an act of merit.

Bridging conflicting values remains a challenge for conservation professionals in India, particularly in regard to religious sites. In a country where religious sites, ranging from large temple complexes to simple roadside shrines, form the vast majority of our heritage, there is a need to understand our traditions and the values that we ascribe to our sacred heritage and not be governed solely by conventional conservation approaches.

65

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author Tara Sharma is a heritage manager who has been working for the past ten years with communities in Ladakh to support community stewardship in the conservation of their heritage. She has been an intern at ICCROM where she worked on the Living Heritage Sites programme.

She has also been working with the Aga Khan Trust for Culture on a cultural revival programme at the Hazrat Nizamuddin basti in Delhi which forms part of a larger urban renewal and conservation programme.

Thinking conservation

66

Preparing Conservation Plans that also Educate Priyaleen Singh

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Arch

Architectural A Architectural Conservation in the Future Arch Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Arch Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conse Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conser

t

he past means different things to different people. The relevance of the past in the present context can be justified at various levels and in several ways, depending on what one is looking for in the relationship, as well as the quality of communication with it. The necessity to refer to the past can lie in a sentimental nostalgic feeling, where nostalgia is memory with the pain removed. It often comes when the rapidity of change is difficult for people to absorb and where change represents loss more than gain. Referring to the past can also instil a sense of identity. In providing a sense of continuity, the surviving pasts most essential and pervasive benefit is to render the present familiar because, ‘you do not know where you are unless you know where you have been’. Overriding these and other diverse reasons for referring to the past, is the notion of invoking the past for the lessons it can teach and the knowledge it can aid us with in the process helping provide a better environment, today and for the future. This understanding of the relevance of the past and history is also linked with an understanding towards its conservation; where conservation is not viewed as merely an exercise in image collection from history books but a valid action aimed at interpreting and continuing with valid propositions from the past. Propositions that can still fulfil the demands and aspirations of the twenty-first century society in a progressive manner.

There are diverse agendas that have to be addressed in conserving a past that exists in historic towns and cities as heritage fabric. For an archaeologist, heritage is the ‘evidence’ of a lost age that has to be saved at all costs and that sometimes ends up being cocooned from the changed environment it suddenly finds itself in. To the tourism sector, a heritage building makes economic sense as the ‘goose that lays the golden egg’. On the other hand, for a developer, ‘old’ buildings are to be erased, a ‘burden’ to be shed as fast as possible in order to Working in historic cities: Preparing conservation plans that also educate

68

make the land on which they stand economically lucrative. In addition, other ‘modern’ paradigms of development often view these heritage structures as impediments on the path to ‘development,’ or at best as symbols to be ‘accommodated’ in the new planning schemes. For some architects working in historic cities, heritage structures are an essential reference point to root contemporary architecture in; for others, history ends up being the ‘inspiration’ for dressing a new building in historic attire. But, most importantly, for the residents living in historic areas, very often in conditions devoid of basic amenities, ancestral homes are not only the invaluable link with the past generations but also the only shelter they have and where, through traditional livelihoods, they eke out a living.

In wanting to safeguard this heritage, and enhancing it further, it is only in recent times that conservation architects are making their presence felt in historic towns and cities. Conservation architects, in taking the discipline beyond the training classroom, have to engage with all of the above to make the conservation exercise a successful and meaningful one. Crossing the threshold from the classroom to the ‘real’ world is not easy, as they are expected to negotiate with, take on board and share their education with a plethora of agencies functioning within these historic towns, who have, over time, established their, often impregnable, bastions and territories. Conservation architects also, in many instances, on interacting with the principal stakeholders, which is the local community, end up re-educating themselves.

Conservation actions rest on four basic principles. Conservation in both spirit and practice has to be integrated, holistic, sustainable and innovative. The first principle demands that conservation be integrated with development, or in another parlance be ‘integrated conservation’.

By definition, conservation is an alternate model of development, one 69

THINKING CONSERVATION

You do not know where you are unless you know where you have been.

that is more responsive to the socio cultural needs of the people and more respectful of the past. This is best understood in viewing concepts such as mixed land use, low rise-high density, pedestrianisation and green design, which are now re-entering contemporary discourse on the planning of new towns and cities. They have in fact been timeless concepts that have existed for centuries in our historic towns and cities and have ensured their efficient working. Historic cities exemplify human scale, craftsmanship, richness in meaning and form and a diversity that is largely absent in modern development. Traditional settlements have always been economical in their use of time, energy and land and were by nature ‘ecological’. However today, all these meanings and functions lay buried under the load of more ‘modern’ concepts of city planning, many of them a legacy of the colonial period. While the conservation architect strives to prepare development plans wherein heritage concerns underpin all development activity, the understanding in most cases is not reciprocated by the agencies working in these areas that have been tutored in the ‘modern’ vocabularies of planning. Until the proponents of these practices are not educated about the inherent merits of a historic city, heritage structures will continue to be lost to road widening schemes; traditional open spaces will continue to be built over to accommodate parking lots; historic gateways that established thresholds of access and hierarchy of levels of entry will continue to be knocked down to destroy what was more humane and pedestrian friendly, delicately balanced public and private realms. The onus is on the conservation architect to prepare integrated conservation plans which clearly and lucidly articulate proposals where heritage, not only guides contemporary planning, but is the crux to ensuring that the city functions more efficiently than its more contemporary counterpart.

Equally important is to simultaneously, through these plans, create an opportunity to educate the agencies functioning within these settlements

Working in historic cities: Preparing conservation plans that also educate

70

about alternate and equally efficient patterns of development. In the absence of this education and understanding, the plans will continue to stay unimplemented as cogitation on paper only.

The second principle of any conservation action is that it has to be holistic in nature. In wanting that conservation make a positive difference to the lives of the people, disciplines as diverse as traffic planning, disaster management, sociology, economics and anthropology are now considered integral to conservation. Again, while conservationists must be sensitised to the need to have a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approach to conservation, other professionals and disciplines concerned with planning and management of any urban environment need to be equally educated on means by which they can connect their disciplines to each other and to the concerns of heritage. Conservation plans become a platform where interdisciplinary knowledge can be shared, everyone working together towards enhancing the potential of traditional livelihoods, saving and upgrading the traditional housing fabric, ensuring equitable access to common resources as some of the measures to improve the quality of life of the people residing within. Thus, a conservation plan also fulfils its role of taking conservation beyond the sole concern of only conservation architects and heritage managers.

The third principle in any conservation exercise is that of sustainability.

Sustainability in this context, not only bears environmental connotations, but is also measured in terms of the ability of the proposals in the conservation plan to continue making a positive difference to the lives of the people, in a time frame beyond its immediate implementation.

This perhaps is the biggest challenge and one that most plans fail in, 71

THINKING CONSERVATION

because of one primary reason, the lack of involvement of the local community. Paradoxically, often communities living within historic settlements do not value its conservation. This is partly because conservation plans fail to clearly distinguish between the dynamic concept of conservation and a more static concept of preservation.

In looking for the involvement of local communities, conservation plans have to serve to de-mystify conservation and portray it as an activity that deals with providing livelihood opportunities, improving infrastructure and amenities within the ambit of the heritage fabric in order to upgrade the life of the people. Conservation plans can become a tool to unravel to the local inhabitants the richness of life in historic settlements, which today, as a result of neglect over centuries, has been lost in the squalor and filth enveloping these historic areas.

Conservation plans can, and should, be effectively used to educate the local communities in as much as to restore the faith of the local communities in the immediate environment they inhabit. Without this, no conservation plan can be either sustainable or successful.

Conservation as a profession is a nascent one, which has still not found its rightful place in the institutions and the frameworks that continue to work in historic towns and cities. As the fourth principle in finding solutions to save and safeguard heritage, the path conservation plans take has to be an innovative one, as one that questions the established norms and practices. This is particularly significant as these very norms and practices have, to date, discounted and undermined the values our historic towns and cities uphold and have resultantly, through their sheer neglect, turned them into slums that defy basic health and hygiene standards. It is this apathy and lack of understanding of the concerns and merits a historic settlement can have that resulted in the 1960 Master Plan of Delhi’s infamous decision to declare the historic city Working in historic cities: Preparing conservation plans that also educate

72

of Shahjehanabad a slum. While the objective is to make conservation a mainstream activity, one that is enabled through existing and modified regulatory mechanisms, very often answers to conservation of heritage have to be sought from outside these frameworks that define the pattern of urban development today. And in modulating these innovations, the answers often lie in an understanding of the historic city’s functioning before it acquired a heritage status. While it might not be possible, and more importantly rational, to recover and retrieve the original frameworks that had once existed and ensure that settlements functioned efficiently, references to these frameworks can certainly help in forming a conservation plan that understands and respects the spirit of the place.

In India, eighty percent of the urban population lives in historic towns and cities. Can conservation be the call for change that ensures more equitable development paradigms are introduced to reach out to this vast population living in historic towns and cities, which today exist as impoverished islands in a burgeoning landscape of ‘new’ cities?

While on their own, conservation plans cannot bring about structural changes in society; they can certainly assist other endeavours, political or otherwise, to intervene in these areas because at the end of the day conservation is about improving the quality of life in historic towns and cities. To achieve this and touch the lives of people in a significant manner, engaging with many players at many levels, through negotiated decisions, conservation education has to move beyond the classroom; it has to move beyond the domain of only conservation architects to include all agencies and departments connected with urban and rural development. Most importantly, for it to truly make an impact, it has to convincingly inform and take in its fold the people who reside within these settlements.

73

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author Priyaleen Singh, a landscape and conservation architect who works with due consideration for the environment, is former York scholar and current Head of the Department of Architectural Conservation, School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi.

Ar

Arch

Architectural Cons

Arch

Architec

Thinking conservation

74

rchitectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future servation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Fu Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future hitectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in t Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future ctural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future

Azhar Tyabji

Architectural Conservation in the Future

On a culture of education and the education of culture

hitectural Conservation in the Future

b

y the time a seventeen-year-old enters a college of architecture or engineering, her formative schooling has already profoundly shaped her basic attitude to the environment. This formative education consists of values she has imbibed in the classroom, and from her parents, and is deeply ingrained in her. As she moves towards a Higher Secondary School certificate, she is asked to begin specialising in distinct streams of knowledge; the arts, sciences and commerce, with little opportunity to explore potential overlaps and juxtapositions in such compartmentalised study. This forced fracture between disciplinary clusters has its historical roots, mandated by state policy which echoes antiquated British Colonial educational thinking grounded in the rationalist separation of the sciences from the humanities. Our student then encounters an architectural curriculum which continues to reinforce this compartmentalisation, where the qualitative, humanistic disciplines are relegated to the sidelines of a structure of formalised design-skill acquisition and application. The student of architecture, loftily lectured to about her discipline being part-art, part-science, finds herself at pains to straddle boundaries between disciplines which appear, in her youthful reckoning, to be incompatible given their qualitative subjectivities. At best, the humanities elective she will take in architecture school becomes merely a late remedial measure in overcoming the indoctrination of her childhood thinking.

A crisis of culture, and what the policy doesn’t say

The Framework does not as yet reflect the possibility that logic and rhetoric

One major lacuna in the architecture student’s childhood education is the acquisition of skills in formal, philosophical (mathematical) logic and rhetoric. Again, this has its roots in formative, state educational policy which should ideally go towards shaping the architect’s later capacity to think critically. The NCERT’s National Curriculum Framework of 2005 now posits philosophical thinking in applied terms, spreading it across the disciplines: for example, it encourages critical thinking within the ‘applied knowledge’ subject areas of art education, graphic design and Indian crafts. But such categorisation presumes formal logic and rhetoric to be mere techniques, not bodies of knowledge in themselves–and the Framework does not as yet reflect the possibility that logic and rhetoric, if studied as actual units in themselves, might constitute the building blocks of formal critical thinking and shape a sensitivity to the comparative On a culture of education the education of culture

76

evaluation of cultural subjectivities, i.e., ways of thinking that should ideally be at the very core of architectural and cultural practice.

I see this as a policy crisis in our culture of education, and I think it continues to have a profound impact upon our education of culture: particularly in the fields of (architectural) heritage conservation, crafts/ product design, the intangible arts, and the philosophy of aesthetics.

The definition of ‘culture’ itself remains maddeningly elusive, a concept rendered even more unstable in post-liberalisation 1990s India, when institutions of urban development were being profoundly reshaped, and when markets were decentralised and opened up to innovation, defining new geographies of location and progress. The very notion of rootedness in ‘a’ culture became geographically unbound in 1991, as transnationalism (Non-Resident Indianness) came to claim equal political legitimacy. Aesthetic standards became conceptually shakier and politically suspect thanks to market competition; and suddenly heritage conservationists found themselves increasingly at odds with a privatesector community of development professionals bidding competitively for change.

‘Fixing’ culture. Two problems.

Two major problems have plagued the education of culture, and more specifically characterise curricula in architectural conservation: one problem lies in intellectually reconciling multiple, contingent definitions of ‘culture,’ especially conflicting notions of cultural time; the idea of fixing authenticity in any one cultural ‘moment’ becomes problematic when conservation architects encounter anthropological beliefs of time and space which might be quite different from theirs, and try to reduce these concepts to the two-dimensional drawing. A second problem lies in acknowledging that there are immeasurable social values which might straddle both the binary categories of tangible and intangible heritage, and which architects need to give serious anthropological attention to. These values, for example, of respect (adab), belonging, compassion, honesty and nostalgia, underscore the very project of cultural heritage decisionmaking, but end up escaping substantive discussion in the design studio.

Rather than accepting that these terms should also be architectural in intellectual scope, educators and students tend to discount their proper 77

THINKING CONSERVATION

qualitative scrutiny in the architectural seminar for lack of their fixity in concepts material and measurable. And this can profoundly numb the student’s understanding of semantic significance. Whereas the foundations of a conversation between what should really be inter-dependent fields (architecture, planning, real estate development and heritage conservation) must lie in a common understanding of nostalgia, respect (adab), belonging, compassion, and honesty, the building professions end up clinging to their own watertight technical vocabularies. Why? Because in the world of reductionist binary oppositions (traditional versus modern, order versus chaos, good versus bad) that we have schooled our students in, there is no space for the qualitative in-between, those qualities we cannot put our finger on precisely.

It is noteworthy that curricula in craft technology and product design have for some time now been stressing the cultural process not as some static, essentialised, bounded “thing,” but as an idea in constant flux; it is, however, more difficult to argue such thinking within the structure of the currentday curriculum in architectural heritage, since questions of temporality, authenticity, and the architect’s fascination with the photograph as an ‘authentic’ historical record have preoccupied professionals in the discipline for some time. This problem with accounting for the continuity of time puts the conservation community’s thinking at odds with the worlds of real estate and urban development, where the idea of time and change is systemic. It is high time, then, that we re-examined core curricula in the education of culture in order to address such serious disjunctions of emphasis.

Some ideas for action While any argument for structural changes in the NCERT curriculum would be beyond the scope of this article, certainly improvements in the architectural/conservation curriculum could help to bridge the gap between a student’s formative education in her childhood and her training in architecture school.

First – and most crucially – schools teaching architecture, architectural conservation, and building technologies must include core curricular modules in philosophical logic and formal rhetoric as tools of analysis contingent upon their work in design studio: formal logic could become one important cognitive tool to helping students think through an On a culture of education the education of culture

78

architectural programme better; and rhetorical thinking will hone their critical and expressive faculties in the presentation of ideas. Logic and rhetoric need to be taught by professional logicians with PhDs from university departments of philosophy, and recognised not as techniques or applied methods but as systems of knowledge in their own right.

Secondly, the Indian Institute of Architects (IIA) needs to profoundly re-evaluate the debilitating politics of the ‘elective’ course offering, instead positioning courses in the humanities at the very core of the formative years in an architectural education. When students of architecture are required to read cultural texts more (and more critically), they will be able to write critically nuanced theses and express the content of their studio programmes far better.

Thirdly, the professional community needs to interact urgently with schoolchildren. There is at present no imaginative, institutional collaboration between the IIA and local educational boards. If the IIA were to encourage interactions between architects and children, perhaps invoking the principles of social entrepreneurship and Corporate Social Responsibility in that arrangement, then innovative conversations might develop between the professional class and student class, introducing the child early to fundamental debates to do with the meaning of dwelling, homelessness, urbanisation, lifestyle, politics, and money. Architects and conservation enthusiasts should consider talking to students about concepts that are truly at the core of their discipline: notions of respect (adab), belonging, compassion, honesty and nostalgia in the public realm.

And finally, PhD scholarship in architecture and craft must begin to converge with doctoral research in the field of education, forging a vigorous dialogue between the arts and sciences, the qualitative and the quantitative. Two current-day experiments point to new collaborative possibilities. Bhutan recently developed a mathematical formula to quantify a Gross National Happiness Index. Its mathematics has excited anthropologists and econometricians concerned with material culture (visit www.newyorktimes. com, and then search for ‘Recalculating Happiness in a Himalayan Kingdom’); and Amartya Sen’s latest book, The Idea of Justice (Belknap Press, 2009) argues that it is perfectly possible to quantifiably account for the notion of well-being – once we have engaged in a firmly philosophical discourse about it first. It is precisely such qualitative/quantitative overlaps that should occupy a place for analysis at the core of a cultural education.

79

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author Azhar Tyabji MPhil (Social Anthropology), MCP (Planning), BA (History of Art) is a member of faculty at the Institute for Financial Management and Research (IFMR), Chennai, where he teaches courses in sustainable development and is shaping interdisciplinary action research in cultural asset valuation. His book, Bhuj: Art, Architecture, History (Mapin Publishing/ Environmental Planning Collaborative, 2006) was nominated for the 2007 Henry Glassie Award of the Vernacular Architecture Forum, USA.

Thinking conservation

80

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future itectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Futu Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Engaging with conservation at York.ac.uk Is it relevant to Conservation in India?

Navin Piplani

t

his is indeed the appropriate moment in time to discuss the role of education and training - its historical contribution and future impact on the conservation of monuments and sites in India. The discussion illustrates crucial aspects of this role in relation to the postgraduate degree course in the Conservation of Historic Buildings at the University of York, UK. This course, with its alleged western approach to conservation, provided the initial impetus to the understanding and conservation of cultural heritage in India. The following article examines the impact of the York course on Conservation in India, evaluates its contemporary relevance and explores future directions for it to consolidate and enhance its pioneering academic position in the Indian conservation context.

The postgraduate course offered by the Centre for Conservation Studies, now over 35 years old, was the first of its kind in the UK. Set up in 1972 as part of the Institute of Advanced Architectural Studies (IoAAS), it was incorporated into the Department of Archaeology in 1997. Historically speaking, the course has aimed to provide ‘students with a sound understanding of the principles of conservation, as well as practical knowledge of techniques and policies’ (Worthington 1995).

Successfully achieved over the years, this is now evident in the directions that former students have chosen to pursue in their own practice— academic or fieldwork. Over 600 students, from over 60 countries, are making a significant contribution to the understanding, awareness and practice of architectural conservation in their respective countries and worldwide. Peter Burman, based on his own experience as former Director of Studies, asserts that ‘many of those former students occupy key positions – in Government service, in NGOs concerned with aspects of conservation and regeneration, in teaching posts and in various forms of private practice’ (Burman 2002).

Although the original course structure and content was based on the Engaging with conservation AT York.ac.uk Is it relevant to Conservation in India?

82

British experience, the approach and principles were resonant with a diversity of issues in other parts of the world. The multi-cultural composition of the course, with up to half the student intake from outside the British Isles, added to its international character, relevance and demand. Thus, the ‘York experience,’ as it was lovingly regarded amongst the course alumni, had a significant impact on the development and awareness of conservation discipline across the globe, building up a sizeable ‘international conservation community’ of former students.

The introduction of the York course into the Indian conservation context has had an interesting connection with the history of conservation in India. In the early 1980s, there was a renewed interest in the heritage of India, which led to the establishment of the Indian National Trust for the Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) as a non-governmental organisation in 1984. It was envisaged that INTACH would complement the ideologies and efforts of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). It considered as a catalyst for change, whilst the ASI’s lingering colonial attitude to conservation reflected a rather limited perception of the cultural heritage.

The ASI extended ‘protection’ over a selective list of ‘monuments and sites’ across the sub-continent and was the only legal custodian responsible for their care, protection and preservation. INTACH’s principal role included the identification, listing and conservation of an infinite resource of the unprotected heritage in India–natural, material and architectural.

Therefore, it had a much wider perspective of conservation in focus, but sadly, equally limited resources to work with.

The ASI, however, had a vast reservoir of archaeologists, engineers, scientists, historians and craftspeople to concentrate their collective efforts on relatively fewer numbers of monuments and sites. In addition to this, working with an unwavering (blind) faith in the policies and guidelines set out by the British Director Generals of the Archaeological 83

THINKING CONSERVATION

Survey of (colonial) India, the post-independence ASI had (and continues to hold) a clearly defined approach to adhere to. INTACH, on the other hand, has been in search of its own lamps of conservation since its inception until 1989, when the late Sir Bernard Feilden, an eminent British conservationist, wrote the Guidelines for Conservation: a Technical Manual, providing direction to its conservation endeavours. [It is quite recent that INTACH has prepared and adopted its own Charter for the conservation of architectural heritage and sites in India (INTACH charter 2004)].

Burman, P. (ed.)

(2002) ‘Introduction’ in Celebrating Conservation: 30 years of conservation studies at the University of York, proceedings of the conference marking the ‘celebrating conservation’ reunion held in York, 13th 14th September 2002: pp 5.

CAM (2004) First report on the Conservation Architects’ Meet, pp 7, http://www.intach. org/pdf/report_ cam2004.pdf Page consulted 16 June 2009.

Gouldsborough, P. (2007) ‘MA in Conservation Studies (Historic Buildings)’, http://www.york. ac.uk/depts/arch/gsp/ publicity/builddet2. htm Page consulted 16 June 2009.

By this time, a certain lack of understanding, knowledge and skills towards the key issues, principles and practice was realised by those playing a pivotal role within the ASI and INTACH. It was then that the most invaluable suggestion by the late Sir Bernard to Shri B. K. Thapar and Shri Martand Singh of INTACH led to the establishment of a unique programme for Indian mid-career professionals to travel to the UK and undergo structured learning and hands-on training in the conservation of historic buildings and places. Timely indeed, the Charles Wallace (India) Trust agreed to support this initiative wholeheartedly and dedicate fully paid scholarships towards the study of MA in Conservation Studies at the IoAAS, the University of York.

In 2004, at the Conservation Architects’ Meet in Mussorie, Shri Martand Singh reinforced that, “20 years ago there were no conservation architects in India. With advice and help from Sir Bernard Feilden, Mr B. K. Thapar and the British Council the movement began, architects were trained through the Charles Wallace programme…” (CAM 2004). A turning point in the history of conservation in India, this marked the beginning of a new way of looking at conservation as a professional practice outside the bounds of the ASI and INTACH and also as an academic discipline in need of research, development and learning.

The ‘York scholars,’ as they are affectionately addressed, value their experience in York as one of the most cherished times of their professional lives that made a tremendous difference to their perspective and approach to conservation in particular and profession in general.

Here, at The King’s Manor, the core of York’s historic environment and amidst a world-body of professionals and experts, their learning graph developed a steep upwards curve, adding enviable attributes to their professional career, academic excellence and intellectual growth. Since

Engaging with conservation AT York.ac.uk Is it relevant to Conservation in India?

84

1985, over 60 York scholars have been actively and successfully engaged in conservation practice, not only in India, but also across the globe.

This success however, has not come easy to them, for they are often seen as believers, practitioners and preachers of a western thought and ideology. A few Indian conservationists advocating conservation education in local universities have questioned the relevance of their Euro-centric training and approach in relation to the specificity and uniqueness of the Indian context. Rightfully so, the cultural differences between eastern and western conservation philosophies do raise issues that cannot be ignored or discarded. Thus, there has been a constant debate around the relationship of conservation education in India and conservation education abroad (UK, Europe, USA or Australia). Like the discipline itself, there has been no absolute right or wrong solution to this situation, only subjective points of view – diverse and evolving.

Taking any one side could pose a serious threat to the holistic growth of conservation profession and practice in India. The uniqueness of the Indian approach to conservation education and training must lie in it being inclusive, informed and imaginative.

Based on similar deliberation, the York course aims to keep the focus considerably wide-angled, without distorting the depth of the knowledge field and losing the contextual clarity of its conservation vision for the future. At the time of its conception, this course was the one of its kind in the English-speaking world; and continues to uphold that position even today by providing unprejudiced dialogue, an adaptive attitude and new directions for the learning and teaching of conservation studies.

Developing upon the idea of constructivist pedagogy, the course curriculum supports student-centred learning rather than tutor-imposed teaching.

On examining the course content, the core of the syllabus is a consideration of the history, ethics and philosophy of conservation, coupled with an introduction to the practical aspects of finance, economics and project management associated with conservation projects. Alongside these core aspects of conservation, is a series of short modules on specific building materials taught by specialists in their fields and take the form of ‘miniconferences’. Wherever possible they include a practical element and field observation of the structural and mechanical problems that have been discussed in the lecture theatre.

85

THINKING CONSERVATION

ICOMOS 1993 Guidelines for education and training in the conservation of monuments, ensembles and sites, http://www.icomos. org/docs/guidelines_ for_education.html Page consulted 16 June 2009.

Indian National Trust for Arts and Cultural Heritage, Charter for the Conservation of Unprotected Architectural Heritage and Sites in India, 2004, http://www.intach. org/pdf/charter.pdf Page consulted 24 December 2009.

Worthington, J. (1995) Institute of Advanced Architectural Studies Student Handbook, the University of York: pp 30.

Developing upon the idea of constructivist pedagogy, the course curriculum supports studentcentred learning rather than tutorimposed teaching.

The intended learning outcomes of the course are directed towards augmenting the knowledge of history, theory and concepts of architectural conservation; deepening the understanding of conservation principles, practices and processes; developing the expertise on nature, use and conservation of building materials; acquiring the skills required for reading, analysis and interpretation of historic buildings and enhancing the experience of learning in a historic setting, with a world-body of professionals and experts, via placements in professional organisations, on international study tours and through seminars, workshops and conferences. In addition to these discipline-related attributes, the course nurtures the students’ ability to confidently present proposals for informed conservation and where appropriate, to supervise or execute conservation projects–modest or major, simple or complex, local or international. The latter aspect is of substantial value, for an articulate and effective communication of ideas is equally important as the strength of the idea itself. Overall, the aims and objectives of the course align and adhere in spirit with the ICOMOS (1993) Guidelines for Education and Training in the Conservation of Monuments, Ensembles and Sites.

Furthermore, the departmental framework within which it sits adds to the distinctiveness and integrity of the course. The recent modularisation of postgraduate programmes allows for students reading for the MA in Conservation Studies to pursue interests in buildings’ recording and analysis or in the presentation and interpretation of the heritage, by taking modules from the MAs in Archaeology of Buildings or Cultural Heritage Management, respectively. Having considered the programme

Engaging with conservation AT York.ac.uk Is it relevant to Conservation in India?

86

in its entirety, it may be equitable to conclude that the context, structure and content of the York course do make it ‘progressive, multi-disciplinary and international’ (Gouldsborough 2007).

Building upon decades of experience and expertise, at the dawn of the twenty-first century, The King’s Manor in York consolidates its traditional reputation and continues to evolve and strengthen its voice in the realm of conservation education, training and practice worldwide. In the Indian context, the significance of this voice has deepened ever since the first York scholar returned home, creating an overwhelming impact on the history, ethics and philosophy of conservation.

The knowledge and skills acquired in York introduce a scholarly, structured and informed way of conserving historic buildings, not necessarily ‘English’ or ‘Western,’ but a new point of view to think and argue about.

This approach does not aim to create any duality in the existing situation, but seeks a harmonious coexistence with traditional knowledge systems and indigenous conservation practices in India.

In conclusion, I would like to suggest that the York course is continuously evolving, even as I write this article, and with its new modular structure, multi-dimensional linkages, cross-cultural relevance and avant-garde vision it has much to offer and in turn gain from the Indian context.

An alumnus of the course, practising conservation architect, HamlynFeilden Fellow and now Director of Studies from India, provides a unique opportunity to forge our traditional conservation links with York.

87

THINKING CONSERVATION

About The Author Navin Piplani MA (York) BArch (Delhi) is a Hamlyn Feilden Fellow in Conservation Studies at the Department of Archaeology of the University of York. Navin runs his own architecture conservation practice in Delhi with conservation projects in India and Europe.

Engaging with conservation AT York.ac.uk ARCHITECTURAL Is it relevant CONSERVATION to Thinking Conservation conservation IN THE inFUTURE India?

88

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Rahul Mehrotra

Questions for Conservation Education in Urban India.

Conservation and Change

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future itectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Futu Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

Architectural Conservation in the Future

U 1. Weddings are examples of how the rich, too, are engaged in the making of the kinetic city. The lack of formal spaces for weddings as the cultural outlet for ostentation have resulted in public open space being colonised temporarily for consumption by the rich as spaces for the spectacle of elaborate weddings.

Often very complex wedding sets are constructed and removed within12 hours – here a temporary spectacle is set up by the rich in the public domain for private consumptionand again the margin of the urban system is expanded momentarily.

rban India is emerging as a unique landscape of bewildering architectural pluralism. This landscape is characterised by intense dualities where modernity and tradition, prosperity and acute poverty, communality and communalism, medieval society and cutting edge information technology, coalesce to create seemingly incomprehensible cities. These are represented more accurately as being driven by ‘motion’ and mutation of urban space rather than by conventional notions of the city as a largely ‘static’ and stable entity. One of the effects of this condition is that it challenges the conventional ideas of the conservation of the built environment and even our basic attitudes towards architecture, urban design and the training of professionals to deal with these emerging urban landscapes.

Contemporary Indian cities reflect two components occupying the same physical space. First is the formal or static city. Built of more permanent material such as concrete, steel and brick, it is comprehended as a twodimensional entity on conventional city maps and is monumental in its presence. The second is the informal or kinetic city. Incomprehensible as a two-dimensional entity, it is perceived as a city in motion— a threedimensional construct of incremental development. The kinetic city istemporary in nature and is often built with recycled material: plastic sheets, scrap metal, canvas and waste wood. It constantly modifies and reinvents itself.

The kinetic city is usually not perceived as architecture, but instead in terms of spaces that hold associative values and supportive lives. Patterns of occupation determine its form and perception; it is an indigenous urbanism that has its own particular ‘local’ logic. (Mehrotra 2002) It is not necessarily the city of the poor, as most images suggest; rather it is a temporal articulation and occupation of space that, not only creates a richer sensibility of spatial occupation, but also suggests how spatial Conservation and Change

90

The close adjancies of the static and kinetic city – these intertwined existences characterize the landscape of the emergent Indian cities.

limits are expanded to include formally unimagined uses in dense urban conditions.(1) The kinetic city presents a compelling vision that potentially allows us to better understand the blurred lines of contemporary urbanism and the changing roles of people and spaces in urban society. The increasing concentrations of global flows have exacerbated the inequalities and spatial divisions of social classes. As foreign investments find their way to India under the new liberalised economic policies of the government, the system by which the city form is evolved has transformed rather dramatically with private enterprise playing a much larger role in the delivery of housing and other public amenities. And so, as globalisation ‘hits the ground,’ it brings both glamour and displacement in its wake.(2) In this context, an architecture or urbanism of equality in an increasingly inequitable economic condition requires looking deeper to find a wide range of places to mark and commemorate the cultures of those excluded from the spaces of global flows. These don’t necessarily lie in the formal production of architecture, but often challenge it. Here the idea of a city is an elastic urban condition, not as a product of a grand vision, but instead as one that might be characterised as a ‘grand adjustment’.

91

THINKING CONSERVATION

KINETIC CITY

The kinetic city presents a compelling vision that potentially allows us to better understand the blurred lines of contemporary urbanism and the changing roles of people and spaces in urban society.

The kinetic city, bazaar-like in form, can be seen as the symbolic image of the emerging urban Indian condition. The processions, weddings, festivals, hawkers, street vendors and slum dwellers all create an evertransforming streetscape— a city in constant motion— where the very physical fabric is characterised by the kinetic. The static city, on the other hand, dependent on architecture for its representation, is no longer the single image by which the city is read. Thus architecture is not the ‘spectacle’ of the kinetic city, nor does it even comprise the single dominant image of the city. It is perhaps for this reason that conservation debates don’t have the currency they would in other societies, where architecture is the most important mechanism by which the memory of the city is codified and contained. In contrast, festivals such as Diwali, Dussera, Navrathri, Muhharam, Durga Puja and Ganesh Chathurthi have emerged as the spectacles of the kinetic city. Their presence on the everyday landscape pervades and dominates the popular visual culture of Indian cities. Festivals create a forum through which the fantasies of the subalterns are articulated and even organised into political action. In Mumbai, for example, the popularity and growth of the Ganesh festival has been phenomenon.(3) Here immersion becomes a metaphor for the spectacle of the city. As the clay idol dissolves in the water of the bay, the spectacle comes to a close. There are no static or permanent mechanisms to encode this spectacle. Here the memory of the city is an ‘enacted’ process— a temporal moment— as opposed to buildings that contain the public memory as a static or permanent entity. The city and its architecture are not synonymous and cannot contain a single meaning. Within the kinetic city, meanings are not stable; spaces get consumed, reinterpreted and recycled. The kinetic city recycles the static city to create a new spectacle.

This transformative ability of the kinetic city becomes even more vivid in the events that play out at Mumbai’s Town Hall every year on 15 August, India’s Independence Day. The Public Works Department (PWD) subverts the meaning and symbolism of the architecture of this classical building by reconfiguring it for an annual ceremony when the Governor of the State addresses the citizens. To ensure it is weather protected from the monsoon rains, the PWD builds a structure, a sort of large porch, which attaches itself to the building. Built overnight in bamboo and cloth, the decorative trim and other ornamental highlights graft on to this classical Conservation and Change

92

(Two images) The Town Hall in Mumbai – wrapped up every year for Independence day can be read as a momentary subversion of this colonial icon to celebrate India’s independence A safe reversible intervention that symbolizes a gentle accommodation that the static city makes for the kinetic city.

building a local and perhaps traditional sensibility that momentarily transforms its architecture. Many conservation professionals in the city protest this phenomenon each year, decrying this as an abuse of the legislation that protects heritage buildings, but they ignore the fact that this is a reversible action, well within the bounds of even the holiest of preservationists’ canons. The intended image of this symbol of colonial power, a celebrated asset of the static city, is subverted and re-colonised by the kinetic city. The PWD alters the significance of this building momentarily to expand the margins of the kinetic city.

93

THINKING CONSERVATION

CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE This idea takes on a critical dimension when contemplating the preservation of the built environment in these contexts. Debates about the conservation of the static city have often revolved around the idea of significance. The notion of ‘cultural significance’ as an all -encompassing idea is something that emerged clearly in conservation debates in the 1980s. To be more precise, it first emerged in what is referred to as the Burra Charter – one of the many resolutions made by the International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) to define and guide conservation practice. The Burra Charter (adopted at Burra, South Australia in 1979) defined cultural significance as the ‘aesthetic, historic, scientific or social value for past, present and future generations’. Implicit in this definition is the belief that ‘significance’ is static. It is a definition that sometimes leads to ‘object-centered’ conservation (devoid of life) with its roots in the debate propagated by the antiquarians of the Renaissance.(4) What is the validity of such a notion where cultural memory is often an enacted process, as in the kinetic city? And what about its validity, where meanings are fluid, like

A complex gaze.

Young men look at the Victorian statues that were relocated from the central public spaces in Bombay to the periphery of the Mumbai zoo in Byculla.

Conservation and Change

94

the kinetic city itself and often complicated in post-colonial conditions by the fact that the creators and custodians of historic environments in the static city are from different cultures? Thus their relationship to the built environment differs. For example, in Mumbai the generation that grew up in the cities before India’s Independence in 1947 saw the British buildings as icons of oppression and saw no need to preserve them. It took another generation to establish neutral associations with these buildings, draining their symbolic potency. Even then, for the present generation of custodians, the buildings and the colonial environments are just carcasses another culture left behind.

How then do we read cultural significance in the kinetic city, which now forms a greater part of the Indian urban reality? In this dynamic context, if the production or preservation of architecture or urban form has to be informed by a specific reading of cultural significance, it will necessarily have to include the notion of ‘constructing significance,’ both in the architectural as well as conservation debates. A process by which use, association and significance are constructed and invented carefully in order make these historic environment be useful and in the process conserved for the future. In fact, an understanding that ‘cultural significance’ evolves will challenge as well as clarify the role of the architect as an advocate of change (versus some preservationists who oppose change) – one who can engage with both the kinetic and the static city on equal terms. Under such conditions, a draining of the symbolic import of the architectural landscape will potentially lead to a deepening of ties between architecture and contemporary realities and experiences. This approach will allow architecture and urban typologies to be transformed through intervention and placed in the service of contemporary life, realities and emerging aspirations. Here, the static city will embrace the kinetic city and be informed and remade by its logic.

95

THINKING CONSERVATION

Craft is alive in India – a reconstructed column at the Chowmahalla palace in Hyderabad that now functions as a city Museum.

2. These arguments have been elaborated in some detail by Saskia Sassen refer Sassen (1996) and (2005) also refer Chaterjee (2003). The authors discuss the effects of economic liberalisation and the processes of globalisation on the built environment.

3. The Ganeshotsava (as it is referred to locally) in its present form was reinvented in the late 19th century by Lokamanya Tilak, as a symbol of resistance to the British colonial regime. Tilak took a domestic and private idiom of worship and translated it into a collective and public rite of self-assertion.

Bazars in Victorian Arcades. Can the arcades simultaneous keep the illusion of the architecture of the buildings in tact while accommodating a contemporary bazaar?

Ironically and sadly, in this dynamic shifting and unique urban condition of India, the training of the conservation architect has not recognised this emerging landscape.

The phenomenon of bazaars in Victorian arcades in the old Fort Area, Mumbai’s Historic District, is emblematic of this potential negotiation between the static and kinetic city. The original use of the arcades was two-fold. First, they provided spatial mediation between building and street. Second, the arcades were a perfect response to Mumbai’s climate. They serve as a zone protecting pedestrians from both the harsh sun and lashing rains. Today with the informal bazaar occupying the arcade, its original intent is challenged. This emergent relationship of the arcade and bazaar, not only forces a confrontation of uses and interest groups, but also demands new preservation approaches. For the average Mumbai resident, the hawker provides a wide range of goods at prices considerably lower than those found in local shops. Thus, the bazaars in the arcades that characterise the Fort Area are thriving businesses.

For the elite and for conservation professionals, the Victorian core represents the old city center, complete with monumental icons. In fact, as the city sprawls, dissipating the clarity of its form, these images, places, and icons acquire even greater meaning for preservationists as critical symbols of the city’s historic image. Consequently, hawking is deemed illegal by city authorities, which are constantly attempting to relocate the bazaars.

The challenge in Mumbai is to cope with the city’s transformation, not by inducing or polarising its dualism, but by attempting to reconcile these opposite conditions as being simultaneously valid. The existence of two worlds in the same space implies that we must accommodate and overlap varying uses, perceptions and physical forms. For example, the arcades in the Fort Area are a special urban component that Conservation and Change

96

inherently possesses a capacity for reinterpretation. As an architectural or urban design solution, the arcades display an incredible resilience; they can accommodate new uses while keeping the illusion of their architecture intact.

One design solution might be to re-adapt the functioning of the arcades.

They could be restructured to allow for easy pedestrian movement and accommodate hawkers at the same time. They could contain the amorphous bazaar encased in the illusion of the disciplined Victorian arcade. With this sort of planning, components in urban historic districts would have a greater ability to survive because they could be more adaptable to changing economic and social conditions. There are no total solutions in an urban landscape simultaneously charged with the duality between permanence and rapid transformation. At best, the city could constantly evolve and invent solutions for the present through safeguarding the crucial components of its historically important ‘urban hardware’. Could ‘Bazaars in Victorian Arcades’ become a symbol of an emergent reality of temporary adjustment?

Unfortunately, most conservation debates discuss change in terms of the loss of something as opposed to new possibilities – because people (especially the propagators and patrons of conservation effort), will easily react to any sort of new condition as worse than some ‘magic moment’ in the past. Conservation professionals then easily develop a rationale to describe that sense of loss. However, in the context of our contemporary urban state, the issue is how to actually simultaneously identify new typologies and work with them rather than to dwell too dominantly in the ‘postcard city’ – a city that only flights of nostalgia momentarily recreate!

It is this shift that is crucial for both the practise of conservation in Indian urban areas as well in the education of practitioners for this context.

CONSERVATION EDUCATION Conservation education in India in its present form, with an emphasis on formal and linear histories, does not equip potential practitioners to intervene in the Indian urban context. In fact, what the present structure of education does is emphasise the validity of only continuous historic narratives and in the process that education serves to perpetuate the nostalgia driven motivation to preserve. Discontinuities or inconsistencies in the environment are seen as aberrations in an otherwise ideal built 97

THINKING CONSERVATION

4. The original 1979 Burra Charter has gone through a revision and in the latest edition of the Illustrated Burra Charter, 2004 the Charter has been broadened to include the conception of cultural significance to include fabric but also use, associations and meanings. The revised Charter also encourages the coexistence of cultural values, particularly where they conflict, and recognises the importance of interpretation and also that restoration and reconstruction are themselves acts of interpretation.

However in the Indian context where these ideas and their applications is still a recent phenomenon, the profession does not yet posses the confidence to interpret charters that provide any ambiguous space.

Rather most practitioners refer to original statements in charters and hold these as sacred – often limiting their application or effectiveness in the Indian context.

environment. Thus, the ability to accept the simultaneous validity of opposing or seemingly irreconcilable forms, histories or narratives is not something conservation education prepares architects for, but rather draws them further away from dealing with the pluralism that is inherent in the built environment (both historic as well as contemporary) in India. Furthermore, with the recent liberalization policies of the Indian government and the massive change that it has triggered in the built environment, this approach, to create an imagined world of lost glory, seems a more futile, irrelevant and unproductive tact for conservation professionals to take.(5)

5. In this scenario of the post liberalisation economy, cities in India have become critical sites for negotiation between elite and subaltern cultures. The new relationships between social classes in the new economy are quite different from those that existed in state-controlled economies and the welfare state (Chatterjee 2003)..

With the dramatic retreat of the state through the 1980–90s, the space of the ‘everyday’ is where economic and cultural struggles are articulated. These common spaces have been largely excluded from the cultural discourses on globalisation, which focus on elite domains of production in the city and their spatial implications (Chatterjee, 2003)

Several crucial questions (with far fewer answers) follow from this situation. How do we then embrace this ‘change’ as integral to the practise of conservation? How do contemporary aspirations ‘inspire’ the process of conservation, where we look to the future and the past in a simultaneous gesture? How does one identify the contemporary engines that will drive this process of urban conservation? How does one read cultural significance and the validity or necessity to sometimes invent ‘cultural significance’ to drive this process?

In this context of the Indian, emerging urban condition, how do we then train professionals who can grapple with this emergent reality? What does Architectural Conservation mean in this dynamic context? Does the training of effective architectural professionals in the Indian and South Asian contexts require a training that’s broader than the present ‘material conservation’ centric education that conservation programs seem to emphasise? This is a particularly difficult condition, because in India the conservation movement is in its very nascent stage – focusing largely on establishing fundamental rules (often driven solely by the International Charters), thus allowing little room for conjecture and strategy that might employ subjective interpretations.

While conservators with specialised skills are far more objective in their interventions, the conservation architect by definition necessarily has to play a role, which requires strategising and interpretation especially in the dynamic contemporary urban Indian context. Thus for specialised conservators to be effective when collaborating with architectural conservation practitioners, their ideological clarity about the practice of conservation within the discipline of architecture must be contextualised and made to respond to the realities of the contemporary Indian urban context.

Conservation and Change

98

Clearly the roots and norms of architectural conservation education in urban India lie in the western canons of conservation practice in the United Kingdom, and are therefore limited by the issues and approaches dealt with in its practice in the west. Similar limitations are encountered when various charters of conservation practice are too literally or rigidly applied in the Indian context. For example, the articles of the Venice Charter, ‘direct the restorer to sharply distinguish, on the surface of the monument where he is intervening, the elements of the past from those of the present’. Such a practice could be applicable in Europe where the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution and the fifty million deaths caused by two world wars have repeatedly wiped clean the slate on which living practices could have survived. But in most Asian countries such sudden catastrophes have not devastated craft beyond recovery”(Khosla) As craft is alive and continuously evolving it is capable of endless adaptations.

In the practice of building in India, it is not easy to distinguish between conservation, preservation, restoration, reconstruction and contemporary formulations. Besides the obvious reasons of living craft traditions that facilitate repair, preservation and reconstruction as easily and perhaps as authentically as norms might demand, the coexistence of many times where skills, practices, approaches and values from different centuries are simultaneously alive is an aspect in India that a practitioner cannot escape. In India (in the Hindi language), the word ‘kal’ means both yesterday and tomorrow – the past and future are often viewed simultaneously in our perception. In fact even today, a number of heritage buildings in India are actively used by contemporary society – and are not treated as dead isolated monuments. Thus the continuous nature of use and the notion of cultural traditions evolving into each other over time most often blurs the distinctions that are other wise made in western traditions defined by specific time periods. In this respect, the Indian example and more specifically the urban Indian condition, relate much more relevantly to situations implied by the Nara Document on Authenticity (1994), where conservation professionals from around the world questioned some of the assumptions about authenticity found in earlier international charters. The Charter and its follow up discussions emphasised developing a greater understanding of the values represented by the cultural properties themselves, as well as respecting the role such monuments and sites play in contemporary society – suggesting that significance evolves.(6) 99

THINKING CONSERVATION

6. The Nara Document on Authenticity was drafted by the 45 participants at the Nara Conference on Authenticity in Relation to the World Heritage Convention, held at Nara, Japan, from 1 to 6 November 1994, at the invitation of the Agency for Cultural Affairs (Government of Japan) and the Nara Prefecture. The Agency organised the Nara Conference in cooperation with UNESCO, ICCROM and ICOMOS. The general reporters of the Nara Conference, Mr. Raymond Lemaire and Mr. Herb Stovel, have edited this final version of the Nara Document.

In contrast to this, institutions such as the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), established in the colonial period, propagate the European view codified in many of the earlier charters and in particular the Venice charter.

The ASI is limited by the bereaucracy of the government and is run by an administrative officer with no training and exposure to conservation or archaeology, thus, limiting the direction the ASI can take. Its work thus is one of stabilising monuments to ensure their continued survival rather than examining, questioning or even discussing ways in which their contemporary relevance can be reinterpreted or reinvented.

7. This two year long masters program in Architectural Conservation is at the School of Planning and Architecture in New Delhi. The program was established 1986 and was the first in the country and even today the only one. The All India Council for Technical Education and the Council of Architecture cleared the establishment of two other programs in May 2007. One located at CEPT in Ahmedabad and the other at the KRVIA in Mumbai. These commenced in late 2007 and are too recent to evaluate.

In 1994 under the directorship of Professor Nalani Thakur, the curriculum of the School in New Delhi was modified considerably, moving

Similarly, UK-trained Indian professionals too rarely think outside the box of their training that is tempered with western sensibilities. Furthermore, being part of a relatively recent professional specialisation in India, they are extremely conservative in establishing the norms for practice and are often unwilling to take the risk of interpretation that might retard the establishment of their practice and identity as preservationists. Therefore the path of least resistance and a dogmatic adherence to the base line interpretation of the Charters is the norm. Trained professionals in India, for example, pay lip service to craftsmanship limited by the subservient role the colonist delegated them to— where communities were codified for particular skills. The reference to craftsmen by the communities or guilds they belong to is a historic and nostalgic view of craftsmanship – as opposed to viewing them as practitioners of an evolving and alive trade capable of adaptation as well as mobility within the multi-ethnic composition of contemporary India.

In India, the sanctity of the site is often considered more important than the building that sits upon it. The building is regarded as a continuously evolving artifact, not a static object. J. B. Jackson, the renowned American landscape commentator and historian, was incredibly insightful when he observed that any society that sees itself as the direct product of the cosmic plan is likely to celebrate the original circumstance of creation.

This, then, allows a symbolic representation of that circumstance without necessarily resorting to its physical embodiment in buildings and the built environment in general. Thus, for example, in the Banganga Tank complex in Mumbai or other such temple tank complexes across urban India, often the buildings around the tank (however ancient) are continuously replaced and transformed but the water in the tank (often with a pole at the center symbolising the axis mundi) remains unchanged for centuries.

On the other hand, religions such as Christianity or Judaism assume that Conservation and Change

100

the true meaning of existence derives not from the beginning of the world but from some extraordinary event or revelation, from a covenant between man and the divinity. Such religions are not concerned with reproducing any cosmic symbolism, but in celebrating the circumstance of the covenant. Here, then, a building such as a church becomes the embodiment of the celebration of such a circumstance. Thus, the attitude in these different cultures to the marker of the sacred is very different. In one, the sanctity of the landscape and place are essential and continuous and not embodied by an object. In the other, the object of the place that represents a covenant is sacred and it is this focus upon the object that renders this condition more static.

Ironically and sadly, in this dynamic shifting and unique urban condition of India, the training of the conservation architect has not recognised this emerging landscape. Architectural education has thus far been technology based, and has not emphasised the phenomenological aspects of the built environment that are so critical to the Indian urban landscape. With regard to the specific training of the conservation professional, the situation is even more dismal, where so far there is only one master’s level conservation program in the country. This situation forces students to train abroad (generally in the UK) and bring back with them a Eurocentric view on conservation. A view shaped by international charters that still hold good but seem fundamentally challenged in dealing with conservation approaches in India. While these professionals, along with those trained in India, bring to practice high standards with regard to material conservation, their inability to connect with broader issues of the city in which their projects are located is perhaps an ineffective use of their skills. Thus, their inability to reconcile the scientific view of conservation with ground realities is clearly a limitation. This postgraduate education is largely unable to generate solid knowledge for use outside the academy or university even worse; this kind of education produces seemingly overeducated professionals who usually do not engage productively for several years, doomed beneath the weight of their limitation to put into practice the paradigms they have been taught in school.

In the master’s level program in Conservation education that exists in India, the emphasis squarely lies on architectural conservation. The one program that exists was established in 1986.(7) This relatively young program has attempted to widen the scope of training to include management 101

THINKING CONSERVATION

away from a westerninfluenced, material conservationcentered thrust to one that attempted to respond to and connect with the India reality. In 2002, this was further modified to encompass ideas about cultural landscapes and to broaden the studio offerings to integrate urban conservation in a more holistic manner. In spite of these attempts by the faculty and director, a technical program embedded in a university is limited by the requirements for technicalities that are more tangible, thus constraining a program that might otherwise explore new directions that might be geared towards the liberal arts, which are within an intellectual territory that is harder to quantify.

8. Conservation legislation was first introduced to Mumbai in 1995, the first of its kind in India. Over the last 10 years, the debate about historic preservation or conservation (as it is more commonly referred to in Mumbai) has become a well-articulated one. A number of NGOs in the city are involved in activism and advocacy, and in lobbying for the protection of listed buildings.

Unfortunately, most debates about the practice of conservation are biased towards British conservation practice, because the largest numbers of Indian architects trained in conservation come from universities in the UK. They tend to bring a Britishcentered view to the protection of colonial buildings, often totally out of sync with contemporary Indian urban realities.

Their benchmarks are British and European standards, which often contribute to the drawing of conservation practice into the realm of the elite (banks, government agencies, etc). The result is that all too often conservation is perceived by many to be an exclusionary activity.

and engage with the intangible aspects of heritage conservation.

However, weighed down (presumably by university requirements), it is still overly centred on ‘historic building’ and ‘material conservation’.

Except for one course in the two-year program that examines ‘cultural landscapes,’ the remaining training is largely in architectural history, site management, legislations and material conservation. Its emphasis on the studio format is a good one and seeks to integrate the issues of dynamic urban landscapes in the studio projects. While this format does encourage conceptual thinking regarding the exigencies of the contemporary environment and their impact upon historic districts, it does not necessarily facilitate room for new theoretical frameworks to emerge, as might be the case when courses such as this are set within cross disciplinary laboratories. The limitation of a single lens, in this case building conservation, to view the complex urban condition of India is self-evident. Furthermore, in India, often the students who gravitate to conservation programs at the master’s level are those who, in the course of their architectural education, realise their inability to engage with design. Thus, while this creates more focused interest in conservation, the self-selection process often reinforces the isolation and subculture of anti-design and the cynical reaction to any imagination of the future.

QUESTIONS FOR THE FUTURE To deal with this highly complex entity of urban India, notions of ‘cultural significance’ need to be broadened to respond to this highly pluralistic society where cultural memory is often an enacted process. This is especially relevant given the fact that the ‘kinetic city’ now forms a greater part of our urban reality! In this dynamic context, it is perhaps necessary in conservation debates to focus even more intensively on the notion of ‘constructing significance’. In fact, an understanding that significance ‘evolves’ will truly clarify the role of the conservation professional from being thought of as one who opposes change to one who manages, or facilitates change.(9) In this latter case, a conservator would be seen as an agent not only of retention of what survives from the past, but also as one who gives expression to contemporary aspirations. Naturally, this crucial shift must occur first in the education of the conservation architect. If this shift occurs – where the disciplines of architecture, landscape architecture and urban design once again blur – then new kinds of conservation architects would be formed who could work more positively with the wonderful kaleidoscopic entity of the Indian city, Conservation and Change

102

where new futures are imagined and the past informs these futures.(10) In India we need to reorient education to meet these challenges and to increase the number of training programs for conservation professionals.

It is critical that at this formative stage these programs take into account their local context and the particular complexities of the urban Indian cultural landscape. What are the conservation and development related issues of urban India and how should these issues influence the content and teaching methodologies of conservation training programmes?

Should urban design and conservation practice be an integrated discipline? Can conservation practice be as much about imagining futures as retaining pasts?

One of the fundamental conditions that prevent the merging of academic disciplines from occurring is the divergence that modernism has caused in both the profession and study of architecture. Modernist ideology has had a profound impact on contemporary architectural education, resulting in the often too rigid separation of the disciplines of architecture, urban planning, design and preservation into distinct and often polarised professions. One consequence of this division has been the development of specific subcultures within these professions, which has not only drawn them apart but also made collaborative work harder to facilitate. The obvious impact of this on the built environment has been dramatic, resulting in unfortunate disjuncture in the physical form of cities, not only in India, but also around the world.

How then can the blurring between these disciplines be reinstated and re-established? Can these disciplines of design, planning and preservation be re-converged?

While this condition of total convergence is an idea that may be challenged and difficult to achieve, at least the curriculum for conservation studies can be expanded to include a greater emphasis on the emerging landscape in urban India. Essentially, it will be necessary to equip conservation practitioners with the analytical skills to conceptualise a framework where they might view concerns about the past and future as being simultaneously valid. They need to play a role both in engaging with the past as well as in discussing the future, because the future of the past depends on it. By fostering this approach, conservation efforts will more neatly fold into broader planning processes, and the static city and kinetic city can both be seen as integral to the emerging forms of contemporary urban India.

103

THINKING CONSERVATION

9. Refer to Jeanne Marie Teutonico and Frank Matero, Eds. (2003). In the book: Managing Change: Sustainable Approaches to the Conservation of the Built Environment.

The contributors to this volume argue that conservation must be a dynamic process, involving public participation, dialogue, consensus and, ultimately, better stewardship.

10. For examples of works / projects that have attempted to translate these ideas refer: Mehrotra Rahul (2004)

About The Author With an academic background comprising CEPT, Ahmedabad and the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University, Rahul Mehrotra has been in private practice since 1990. His practice RMA Associates has projects ranging from Interior and reuse projects to historic preservation, urban design as well as Architectural commissions.

Mehrotra has taught at MIT since 2007 and teaches design studios as well as a seminar course that examines emergent forms of Architecture and Urbanism in Asia.

He is currently the director of the SMArchS program at MIT.

Bibliography Chatterjee, Partha. (2003) “Are Indian Cities Becoming Bourgeois at Last?” Body. City, siting contemporary culture in India House of World cultures in Berlin and Tulika, Delhi Jackson J.B. (1980) The Necessity for Ruins and other topics, Amherst, Mass.: University of Massachusetts Press.

Jeanne Marie Teutonico and Frank Matero, eds, (2003) Managing Change: Sustainable Approaches to the Conservation of the Built Environment, Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute Khosla Romi, (2002) The Loneliness of a Long Distant Future – Dilemmas of Contemporary Architecture, New Delhi: Tulika.

Mehrotra Rahul ( 2002). Bazaar

City: A Metaphor for South Asian Urbanism, Kapital & Karma, Angelika Fitz (editor), Kunsthalle, Wien.

Mehrotra Rahul (2004) “Planning for Conservation – Looking at Bombay’s Historic Fort Area”, in Future Anterior, journal of Historic Preservation, History, Theory and Criticism, GSAPP, Columbia University, Volume1 number 2, Fall 2004, New York.

Sassen Saskia (1996),”Whose City is it ? Globalization and the formulation of New Claim”, Public Culture 8.2 , pages 205-23,Duke University Press, Spring 1996.

Sassen Saskia (2005) Fragmented Urban Topographies and Their Underlying Interconnections, in Informal City, Alfredo Brillembourg, Kristen Feireiss and Hubert Klumpner editors, Prestel Munich.

Conservation and Change

104