Opinion Restoration drama

Turkey and Iran are fortunate to have been able to retain traditional systems of building repairs and maintenance. But even in the UK,where the approach to conservation is understood to be conservative,examples like the £12 million project aimed at returning portions of Stirling Castle to “how they looked in the mid-16th century” are now finding support,finances and visitors.

So why are the great monuments in India treated as archaeological ruins to be preserved in the ramshackle condition that decades,even centuries,of neglect have left them in? Why are we allowing our iconic buildings to look like ruins,turning away the public,killing the interest of schoolchildren and depriving our craftsmen of employment? Why do more people visit the Baha’i temple in Delhi than the Qutub Minar or Humayun’s Tomb? Why are our conservation policies influenced by those whose ideas are in turn influenced by the romance of an English landscape,dotted with follies?

India has over seven centuries of recorded conservation tradition. Feroz Shah Tughlaq took great pride in repairing buildings built by earlier dynasties and is famously known to have replaced the damaged top floor of the Qutub Minar with two of his own design. Traditionally,craftsmen would have been responsible for repairs,annual or periodic. With the British,traditional systems of patronage were destroyed. Archaeologists and engineers took over the preservation of a small proportion of historic buildings,yet without the generations of experience that the craftsmen had.

Master craftsmen are today seen breaking stone for road construction,refusing to pass on valuable skills to future generations. Architects in India,mostly trained in modern architecture,prefer building in concrete,steel,glass or machine-cut stone,rather than having to work with craftsmen who do not understand drawings. With building crafts not even enjoying government support,craftsmen have little choice.

Conservation is today a multi-discipline profession; on the team,besides skilled craftsmen,are required conservation architects,archaeologists,engineers,historians,geologists,managers,designers,amongst others. When a 16th century monument is repaired,using lime plaster and replacing missing or damaged stone portions,these parts or even the whole building loses its patina. However if the gur,belgiri,crushed urad dal,egg white or any of the dozens of additives are mixed properly in the lime mortar and the stone hand-chiselled as the original was,not only will the building get a fresh lease of life,the patina will return with a few monsoons.

Despite surviving craft skills,much,if not all,of our heritage does not benefit and our buildings suffer from inappropriate repairs. In the recent past,when those with responsibility for conservation have employed traditional craftsmen and returned important buildings to their rightful condition,opposition has come from those familiar only with art or object restoration. Delhi’s cocktail party circuit shakes its head in disapproval and the discussion remains limited to bytes in the press.

Surprisingly,even architects,whose training should have left no room for misunderstanding on the correct approach to repairs,have joined the chorus with suggestions that building conservation learn from “the restoration of paintings,(where) flaked surfaces of antique paintings,are applied with colours that are sympathetic to the surface patina and not newly mixed original colours which may clash” — clearly disregarding that the “value of architectural heritage is not only in its appearance,but also in the integrity of all its components as a unique product of the specific building technology of its time”. A “technology” seen practised in India.

Conservationists follow the Burra Charter’s guidance that “restoration and reconstruction should reveal culturally significant aspects of the place”,but “only where there is sufficient evidence to reproduce an earlier state of the fabric”.

Buildings,unlike paintings,are exposed to the weather,and cannot be treated like objects on display in a museum. Conservation should aim to ensure cultural significance is retained — possible only when the intention of the original builders is respected,not the aesthetic opinion of those who hold our society’s microphones.

The writer is a conservation architect and project director of the Aga Khan Trust for Culture express@expressindia.com