Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Recently, Mumbaiites have displayed great willingness to vociferously cry out their care for the city. A care for its invaluable physical fabric in the form of buildings, precincts, milestones, maidans, and other artefacts, all of which are commonly classified as built heritage8217;.This care, which stemmed from an attempt to raise the common man8217;s or citizen who is actually trying to earn his daily bread in this city of dreams8217; level of awareness towards the city8217;s built heritage, is more farcical than far-sighted. A motley band approach, if one were to examine the issue with insight.
Mumbai has always been the city with a future. In hindsight, it was always expected to do the worst and yet, we have not seen it in better shape. Mumbai has also been the city with a past. To look ahead, it is expected to become worse; hence many Mumbaikars have expressed their concern over the shape it is currently in.
The built form of Mumbai has always been consistent with its layered growth, leading to heterogeneity in the existing fabric. A reason for retaining its texture is this variety of form found in the cityscape, which gives the city8217;s different quarters their distinctive character. The image of eachearlier settlement forms an identifiable link with the city8217;s past. A past that was less heroic and more influential, from forts to colonial legacies and economic traits of this once ordained Cottonopolis of the East8217;.
Furthermore, when compared with the prevalent practice of our post-independence box-type architecture, coupled with the less-land and more people8217; phenomenon of skyscrapers or slums, this past was indeed hailed for being the leftover of a many course meal. What with all its intricacy of architectural detailing and ornamentation, dressed stone masonry and finish and of course, the fallout of the latest trends of Neo-Classicism from the West, the movement timed itself well.
All said and undone, this is the dilemma facing the future of Mumbai today. The leftover is actually being treated as the dessert course of the daily meal. Everybody who was put before the heritage canvas of the city appreciated the visual quality of its surface. Not many looked into the purse that kept it that way. Yetmany others saw that this canvas itself was a new form for investment 8211; the way to make a fast buck while the emotional desires of the actually concerned Mumbaikars were being sated.
For the caring citizen, the visual quality was the game, while for the developer, quantity was the claim. With the corporates involved in marketing their names and a new breed of experts seeking business and fame, the role of everyone wanting to sit in the chair of heritage conservation8217; was selfishly motivated. There is no respite from this and therefore, the city8217;s future is being gambled. The stakes are high and the game is yet on. While we have groups and delegations fighting in one spirit of protecting the city from the onslaught of adverse new development, what is more alarming is the blind eye they turn to actual areas of improvement within the existing quarters of Mumbai. In Khotachiwadi precinct for example, the buildings being repaired by the Repair Board have no semblance to the detailing of the original heritagestructures.
Or visit the maidans in south Mumbai8217;s Cross maidan and Azad maidan. They are visually blocked with the numerous plans of the A-Ward dumping sites east of M G Road and an expanse of Fashion Street stalls on the west road front. At the same time, Oval maidan is being fenced out8217; of the city in the name of beautification and security.
The conservation movement in Mumbai needs a holistic, equitable conscious effort for its continuity in the context of change. The current policy of think local and act local8217; cannot save the city as a whole. The NIMBY Not In MY Back Yard phenomenon has caught on in the city at large. Mere local activism cannot protect the city. It cannot unify the metropolis as one community. Rather, it fragments the city into islands of power 8211; those that can wield their influence and others that are not heard or looked at. If local groups, all voicing a common spirit, looked beyond their borders into The City as it stands to be known from afar,Mumbai shall have a future.
Without which even saving the past is futile. With the media also being sentimental in its outlook at built heritage, caring citizens are more than satisfied with a quill in the hand8217; rather than a feather in the cap8217;. This outlook of not looking beyond the nose could turn up buildings with actual layers which cannot determine the age of the design, its time, essence and place. In a building like Jindal Mansion on Peddar Road, the new addition has its face made-up to look ridiculously older than the old! If conservation is to be seen as the effect of the cause, then the cause has to address sensitivity and respect the sensibility of its time. At the city level, development policies have to be reviewed for their contribution to the cause and basic coordination between private and local groups themselves. The city8217;s implementing bodies and state government departments have to be reoriented through a meaningful discourse.
Before taking the movement to the grassroots, theconcerned citizen should view the built heritage as an objectively determined self and not as a selfishly determined object.8217; In our effort to save built heritage, we cannot afford to rebuild the past at the cost of future. If we did not heed the direction of the time ahead of us and continue to look at only that past, there will be neither the future nor the past and definitely not anything even remotely connected to the objective of conservation.
Harshad Bhatia is an urban designer and conservationist
