Let us grab a cup of coffee and continue the conversation we had a while ago from the last article (in case you missed, here you go: https://sravsnaraparaju.wixsite.com/parampara/post/undertone-of-heritage-from-the-view-of-a-feminist).
So far, we have looked at heritage from the perspective of a colonialized civilization and through the victims of war. These were the incidents of past. It should be agreed that we as a society made progress to create a fair living space than that was perceived decades before. Similarly, we have progressed a lot in symbolizing heritage as a representation of various groups.
That being said, we are still far from the line. Let us look at few modern examples which are staring at us right this moment challenging us to acknowledge the discrimination.
“Temples” – The God or The abode?
Temples are the treasure trove of a country. They play a monumental role in outlining the cultural aspects of the society while being an integral part of the lives of its residents. Visiting a temple is considered as an everyday ritual which is considered to become spiritually aligned to God.
The ideology of temple was foreign during the Vedic period where fire was worshiped as divine spirit and is lit on an open platform. Temples were built when the concept of idol worshipping came into picture. The first remains of temple structures were discovered in Besnagar (Madhya Pradesh) dating back to 3rd – 2nd Century BCE and in Nagari (Rajasthan) dated to 1st Century BCE. The earlier temples were of timber structures and are rock-cut. The first definitive form of temple structure as we see today was developed during the Gupta period from 4th Century. By about the 7th century most main features of the Hindu temple were established along with theoretical texts outlining temple architecture and its building methods. Many regional styles developed, very often following political divisions, as large temples were typically built with royal patronage. (A detailed article on temples is published previously on the blog. Do check it out)
Over the time temples became an art gallery with sculptures adorning the stone, architectural marvels and spatial grandeur. While the built structure became more intricate the belief on the god became stronger. Over time these temple complexes were faded into the background paling off to the beliefs of the divinity. An average devotee coming to the temple complex spends most of the time in the garbhagriha and leaves the temple complex without exploring or understanding or appreciating the built complex. This has also resulted in the temples to be focused on the beliefs rather than providing historical background or information about the temple complex. Most often even if such stories prevail, they are mostly circled around spiritual nature rather than architectural importance.
Is it not a discrimination by the visitor and the administration to focus only on the god and not giving enough importance on the structure? Is it not important to learn about the spiritual stories as well as the materials used in the construction, sculptors and architectural features, rulers who built the temple and intricate design styles? This creates an imbalance in projecting thereby appreciating these structures and sharing the art to the future generations.
“Aboriginals” – Unseen then … Unseen now
When one look back into the pages of our world history filled with legacies of power and conquest, blurred between the lines are the forgotten stories of the natives or the aboriginals. Every country has these group of people who are an important part of the nation but seldom are forgotten and are brought to life solely on national slogans or in legislations on paper. Just like their stories, their heritage also has very faint and often no representation or recognition of them or their history. These have been cases from “The laponian world heritage sites of Sweden” to “Tsodilo Hills World Heritage Site” to “World Heritage Site in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area: Africa” to the “stories of Adivasis in Western Ghats of India.”
All these stories talk about how a group of natives residing in these sites were very conveniently not accounted and forcefully removed from their natural inhabitation in the name of conservation without awarding their consent or support of any kind. They also talk about how these groups are not consulted or were included in the committees for the heritage panel and hence, how their voices were never heard and not presented in either maintenance or in representation of these sites. Often their rights are not protected legally or are muted by the politically and socially powerful groups. In the above examples as in many cases, these groups are involved in meetings and are represented on paper for nomination of these sites, but there is no importance or stake hold that is awarded to them. It is important to understand that these lands are their birth right and part of their heritage before getting any tag. They seldom are dependent on the forests for livelihood and unsympathetic strategic planning and inclusion in the list is not only robbing their livelihoods but also culturally impairing these group.
Is it not important to have an inclusive approach of these living heritage and co-exist with the natives? Is it not the stories and cultural significance of these groups with the sites a major intangible heritage that needs to be preserved and honored? The World heritage organizations should amend their regulations and create an inclusive and safe guideline so that these groups and their stories are represented and can co-exist.
This paper came about through a small thought.
Looking at the feeds on rallies for feminism, I came to think about how society is crafted to fit in the needs of a selected few. It includes architecture, urban spaces, museums, heritage buildings, intangible heritage like customs and traditions or every day spaces. This creates a lopsided environment that may not be equally defined and is undertone discriminative. Years of entitlement have seeped into architecture that leads to visual impairment, representation and inclusion of various sections of the society. Heritage in particular when smeared with these colors becomes toxic.
Heritage is a representation of who we are as a society and is a guidebook to the future. When this ideology is defined by a stronger section in the name of the nationality or gender or social group it creates an impaired and a wrong historical precedent. It is also right to argue that sometimes it is important to present one side of the story to create a national secularity, but representing the total history even if it is uncomfortable in subtle ways is equally important.
Thought provoking article.