Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : India Coffee House -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mohan Marette who wrote (9711)	11/21/1999 10:00:00 PM
From: Mohan Marette	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12475

The Red Fort in decay delhitourism.com (Rupika Chawla) Once upon a time a beautiful palace reclined upon the river Yamuna. This was the Red Fort, the symbol of Shah Jehan's artistic, political and economic strength. With the decline of the Mughal empire after Aurangzeb, the Red Fort deteriorated rapidly. Nadir Shah invaded the Red Fort in 1759 and plundered it of its Peacock throne and the Kohinoor diamond. The following year, the Marathas carried away the silver ceiling of the Diwan-e-Khas. When the British entered the fort in 1803, pipal trees were growing out of the Diwan-e-Khas. After 1857, the British army added to the indignity by making the Red Fort their headquarters. Much within the fort was destroyed to make way for barracks while various palaces served as kitchens, a hospital and store rooms. The British were later to try and improve the fort but not before much damage was done. The Indian Army today continues to control the major part of the fort area which is not open to the public while the grounds and palace area are with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the Department of Tourism. The ASI is the custodian and protector to the fort. However, it is not enough to erect a blue signboard and declare that a heritage site is 'protected' . It is important to work upon the problems in a scientific, historical and aesthetic manner. Historic and aesthetic objectivity is crucial. This implies that no subjectivity is introduced while interpreting history or the physical nature of a given site. The fort today is depressing and dirty. The floor of the Diwan-e-Am is coated with unswept dust and the tall sandstone pillars are transformed into shades of dusty brown. The marble pillars and the pietre dura in the Diwan-e-Khas, and the interiors of the Rang and Khas Mahals have lost their beauty. There is a lack of transparency in the operations of the ASI, in a profession concerned with conservation which demands openness and accountability. Certain things have been done at the Red Fort which are baffling, to say the least. On the rear side of the Diwan-e-Am is a facade with six pillars above it. In reproductions of this facade taken ten years ago, (refer to Travel to Landmarks, The Red Fort, Delhi, by Louise Nicholson, 1989) it can clearly be seen that the original front was of sandstone. Yet a decade later, the sandstone has been replaced by cement plaster arches and squares. To replace original material with a modern substitute is contrary to conservation ethics. And where is the removed sandstone facade? Will that remain an unanswered question in the way that one wonders about the original Makhrana marble blocks that have disappeared from the Taj Mahal? Similarly, the mahals of the Red Fort provoke many questions, provide no answers and reduce a trained outsider to total perplexity. Ten years ago, the outer walls of the Moti Masjid were pink, and today the walls are white, as are also the walls of the royal hammams, whitewash over original stone. How can this be called the Red Fort when so much within it has been turned white? An ugly, presumably late Victorian marble tub sits atop a clumsy white platform in front of the garden of the Rang Mahal. The Red Fort has seen many invasions but the invasion of the ASI and the Tourism Department is probably the worst. Plastic chairs dot the green facing the Diwan-e-Khas, old floors have been pulled apart to accommodate wiring, ugly sandstone boxes have been lined up near the long platform that supports the mahals and the Diwan-e-Khas, with barriers and barbed wires everywhere. With the crowds that visit the fort, one can understand the need for some barriers. No doubt, vulnerable interiors that the visitor is not allowed to see need to be protected from the breath of countless humans and the dust that their footwear brings along. The dust? When so much of everything is already coated with it? A cynical reaction naturally follows: Do the barriers and the guards protect the palaces and their vanishing beauty or the ASI with their lack of professionalism and sensitivity? What is clearly required is a management and a conservation plan which is drawn up by architectural conservators, historians, scientists and architects. Serious research and investigation into past records and accounts in books need to be done in order to understand the entire sequence of events that have brought the Red Fort down on its knees. Extensive photography and documentation, an understanding of the original palaces and gardens need to be acquired. Crowd management has to be taken seriously whereby more of the Red Fort can be seen without harming the interiors. The task is not easy but it has now become imperative that conservation in India is handled seriously, or else, in a very short time, there will not be much of our heritage left to be proud of. hindustantimes.com