The National Museum in New Delhi has for years, stood emblematic of the country’s heritage, culture, and diverse history. Now with proposals to dismantle and relocate it as part of the government’s ‘modernizing’ initiative, several stakeholders, ranging from art historians to young scholars, have started raising concerned eyebrows asking why this monumental structure is suddenly being demolished. Central to their questions are the core issues surrounding the preservation of India's cultural treasures and moreover, the call for greater transparency throughout the decision-making process.
To put the history of this building, located in Janpath, New Delhi, in context; the National Museum was built in the wake of a New India in 1947, with the foundation stone laid by then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru himself. This museum now holds “approximately 2,00,000 objects of diverse nature, both Indian as well as foreign, and its holdings cover a time span of more than five thousand years of Indian cultural heritage”. It is also a home to numerous objects on loan from prominent museums worldwide, including the British Museum in London, the Patna Museum, the Chennai Museum, and the Indian Museum in Kolkata. But apart from being a very important marker in the nation’s history, this building designed by Ganesh Bikaji Deolaikar, it is also architecturally grand and brilliant with its nostalgic, old-age charm. Hence, all together, the decision to tear it down remains really unclear and concerning.
The decision to move the National Museum is part of the Modi government’s expansive Central Vista Redevelopment Plan (CVRP). Historically, these initiatives have included a number of changes like the renaming of Rajpath to "Kartavya Path," an overhaul of the India Gate lawns, and the inauguration of a new triangular Parliament building. Hence, the worry regarding the relocation is also about the potential alteration of the museum's narrative and displays. With the predominant shift towards glorifying Hindutva in India's history that the country has witnessed in the past few years, there are questions about whether the museum's content will be manipulated to align with this agenda. The current government’s extremely strong ideological stance brings in questions like: will historical elements that narrate histories of Mughal India, Gandhi, Ambedkar and also the history of a multicultural and multi-religious India find a place in this new structure? More precisely, central to these concerns is the issue of inclusivity and representation: whether all Indian citizens, irrespective of their diverse backgrounds, will find their stories and histories adequately represented in a narrative that has high chances of becoming polarized and partisan. The new museum in Raisina Hill , that is set to be called “Yug Yugeen Bharat” (timeless India), thus raises serious suspicions regarding the potential omission of certain historical facts, the disregard for specific communities, and the sidelining of various cultural narratives.
Recently university students and young individuals have launched public petitions against this relocation, attracting thousands of signatures. There is a growing demand for transparency and accountability from the authorities, with particular emphasis on the ministries of housing and urban affairs and culture. The National Museum is ultimately an institution belonging to the citizens of the nation. Thus, it becomes essential for the public to seek answers to questions such as the very reason behind the museum's relocation. The government as of now has not provided much clarity or addressed the concerns of the public. Some arguments for the new building have termed the old structure as ‘colonial’ or ‘Nehruvian’. Union Housing and Urban Affairs Minister Hardeep Singh Puri has argued that these structures represent “colonial ethos that the country was subjected to”. But the other side of the argument has countered this by saying that if the structures at Raisina Hill are heritage sites and not colonial structures, then why does that not apply for the building of the National Museum? If repurposing the North and South Block is possible, why can’t we look for an option to preserve the museum building?
In many ways, this issue transcends the boundaries of mere historical discourse and public advocacy; it also points at the importance of preserving a nation's cultural identity and the shared narratives that really weave together its fundamentals of diversity. Hence, the potential transformation of the National Museum, within the framework of the Central Vista Redevelopment Plan, serves as a microcosm of the broader issues of historical interpretation and cultural inclusivity, which are fundamental to the ethos of a democratic and pluralistic India.
ความคิดเห็น