The past in India, as the past anywhere else in the world, is often linked with undesirable memories. The trick is to mould the past in constructive ways that takes us into the future in harmonious ways. Then, there are occasions when a past has to be imagined, created out of nothing, merely because an entirely new idea does need to be shown as if it is deeply rooted within society.
Is remodelling the Central Vista in New Delhi a good thing or bad? ... How can you change such a beautiful part of our colonial legacy, asked many architects, town planners and history buffs. At least one commentator even seemed to curse Modi, asserting that such grand projects always resulted in the downfall of their originator. Most of the criticism revolved around the need to preserve history, no matter that much of India suffered great horrors in colonial times.
....
When Hanumanthaiah took over as the chief minister of Mysore, he discovered that the engineers were planning to construct a barrack like cement concrete structure for the new Vidhan Soudha. He fired the entire team despite the harsh rebuke that Nehru sent him. “I will not have this cement concrete modernist architecture to mar the honour of the state,” he would inform journalists who questioned him. They are eyesores, he would say, dismissing the modernists who were busy admiring the construction of Chandigarh.
....
Hanumanthaiah took a personal interest in ensuring that all work was done on time and was of an exceptionally high quality. Nehru absolutely disliked the design of the Vidhan Soudha for being so closely linked to the historical past. That gave Hanumanthaiah’s critics the necessary leverage against him. As the building got completed, Hanumanthaiah came to be targeted by his critics over the expenditure incurred in its construction. By April 1956, the 12-member Estimates Committee of the State Assembly, presided over by NC Nagaiah Reddy, said in its report that an inquiry by engineering and financial experts was ‘desirable to detect wastage’. Nagaiah Reddy was careful with words — ‘for guidance of future administrators’.
In an India where charges of corruption were routinely weaponised, this was code language for saying, let us target Hanumanthaiah. And that is precisely what happened. In a very censorious tone, Nagaiah Reddy noted: ‘It is evident that considering the utility of the building, it was unnecessary to have invested public money on architecture, decoration and other excessive comforts’. A subsequent inquiry by a retired high court judge said that the Special Engineer, Muniappa, who had been given charge of the project, had no previous experience of executing a large project. Justice Deo listed the approach roads to the Vidhan Soudha and the gardens surrounding it as examples of wasteful expenditure undertaken. ‘Unproductive works worth Rs25 lakh’, is what he concluded.
....