Beyond Le Corbusier and the modernist city: reframing Chandigarh's World Heritage legacy

Transcription

1 Planning Perspectives ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: Beyond Le Corbusier and the modernist city: reframing Chandigarh's World Heritage legacy Manish Chalana & Tyler S. Sprague To cite this article: Manish Chalana & Tyler S. Sprague (2013) Beyond Le Corbusier and the modernist city: reframing Chandigarh's World Heritage legacy, Planning Perspectives, 28:2, , DOI: / To link to this article: Published online: 21 Nov Submit your article to this journal Article views: 428 View related articles Citing articles: 1 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at Download by: [University of Washington Libraries] Date: 11 January 2016, At: 13:53

2 Planning Perspectives, 2013 Vol. 28, No. 2, , Beyond Le Corbusier and the modernist city: reframing Chandigarh s World Heritage legacy Manish Chalana a and Tyler S. Sprague b a Department of Urban Design and Planning, College of Built Environments, University of Washington, Box , Seattle, WA, 98195, USA; b Department of Architecture, College of Built Environments, University of Washington, Box , Seattle, WA, 98195, USA The heritage of Chandigarh, India is a complex subject. While widely acknowledged by academic and professional communities worldwide as a significant work of modernist architecture and urban design, Chandigarh s specific temporal, geographical and cultural contexts complicate efforts to get the city inscribed on United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization s World Heritage List. This article outlines the persistent attempts by both local and international organizations to achieve this inscription, efforts that have not yet been successful. Relying on historical scholarship and fieldwork, the authors reassess the value of Chandigarh s heritage both in terms of historical significance and contemporary planning. By addressing the complexity and scope of the design and planning process, embracing the inhabitation and appropriation of the city, and fostering an appreciation of modern architecture, Chandigarh can develop a more localized understanding of heritage yet one that can be appreciated worldwide. Keywords: Chandigarh; modern heritage; UNESCO; World Heritage List; Le Corbusier; preservation planning Chandigarh: Four years after its inception, the city s dream of making it to the UNESCO world heritage list has been put to sleep. (Times of India, Chandigarh, April 18, 2011) The heritage of Chandigarh the first large-scale planned city of independent India has been a subject of debate in recent times, but particularly since 2006 when India included it on the Tentative World Heritage List (WHL) maintained by UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization). Chandigarh had previously been recognized by the international historic preservation community, including organizations such as Docomomo International (the International Committee for Documentation and Conservation of Buildings, Sites and Neighbourhoods of the Modern Movement), as possessing exceptional historical value. 1 Following the Tentative WHL it seemed likely that Chandigarh would eventually be inscribed on the main WHL. However, this has so far proven not to be the case, as after 5 years of discussions and application, the administration of Chandigarh union territory (UT) decided to no longer pursue World Heritage status for the city, a decision that was controversial and seen by some as a political failure on the part of the territorial government. In this work we explore the process of nomination of Chandigarh on the Tentative WHL and the process by which the city participated in and abandoned seeking World Heritage status. We Corresponding author. chalana@uw.edu # 2013 Taylor & Francis

3 200 M. Chalana and T.S. Sprague also trace the city s attempts in recent times to position its legacy and define the scope of its heritage. Collectively, these efforts reveal fundamental concerns surrounding the complexity of defining heritage and framing the legacy of this modern, post-colonial city in a rapidly urbanizing and globalizing context. In the end, we argue that to fully appreciate the heritage of Chandigarh, its legacy needs to be reframed and its heritage conceptualized more broadly. Founding the modern city Let it be the first large expression of our creative genius flowering on our newly earned freedom. Jawaharlal Nehru (Speech upon first visit to Chandigarh site, April 2, 1952) 2 The city of Chandigarh was created after India s independence from Great Britain in Independence also marked the partition of British India into the two nations of India and Pakistan, with the historical Punjab region divided between the two. Lahore, the erstwhile capital of Britain s Punjab Province, became part of Pakistan, leaving Indian (East) Punjab without a capital city. The first Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, saw this loss as an opportunity to create a new capital city for the Indian state of Punjab and, in doing so, create a city symbolic of independent India and the values of the new nation-state. As a modern secular city, Chandigarh would through its architecture and urban form reflect the ideals of modernity and embody a faith in the citizens to rise above religious and political differences. Planned from scratch on gently sloping agrarian plains at the foot of the Himalayas, the city was developed through a complex process involving numerous parties and interests. It was Figure 1. Capital project Chandigarh Members of the European and Indian teams. Source: Photograph (217A), from the permanent collections Chandigarh architecture museum, sector 10 C, Chandigarh. Courtesy of Vikramaditya Prakash.

4 Planning Perspectives 201 Figure 2. Plan of new capital Punjab. # FLC-ADAGP. initiated by the American team of Albert Mayer and Matthew Nowicki; after Nowicki s death in a plane crash, the city s development passed to a European team led by Le Corbusier, Maxwell Fry, Jane Drew and Pierre Jeanerret; a number of Indian architects, including M. N. Sharma, A. R. Prabhawalkar, U. E. Chowdhary, J. S. Dethe, B. P. Mathur, and Aditya Prakash, among others, played important roles as well. All told, the planning and design of Chandigarh took over 15 years and involved specialists from three continents (Figure 1). 3 On many fronts, its development continues to this day, expanding and always facing new challenges. For instance, the city has grown to engulf multiple villages that follow much more organic layouts, requiring planners to find ways of integrating these within the city s highly modernist grid that derives much of its meaning through order (Figure 2). 4 For all these reasons, Chandigarh s planning and design history is nuanced and complicated, and yet is clearly significant on several fronts. The value of the city, as both a modernist design experiment and an expression of nationalist and utopian ideals, is evident in the multiple ways the city can be examined though the lenses of Indian politics around independence and partition, the Nehruvian quasi-socialist nation-state ideologies, grand ideals of modernity, and the convergence of the Western-modern and the Eastern-traditional design and planning paradigms. Sixty years ago, the city was a harbinger of modern design and planning for the Indian subcontinent, one that Nehru proclaimed would be unfettered by the traditions of the past. 5 The idea of Chandigarh continues to be a commonly evoked symbol for those reflecting

5 202 M. Chalana and T.S. Sprague on the meaning of a modern India in a globalizing world. All of this is reflected in the various ways that the city s inhabitants and leaders view and frame its legacy and heritage. The World Heritage pursuit The highest designation any historic site can receive is an inscription on the World Heritage List ( WHL ), the most globally recognizable indicator of heritage value. The inscription process is a collaboration between state parties and UNESCO the world s largest global cultural agency. Through the WHL, UNESCO legitimizes a select group of natural, cultural and mixed sites from around the world as possessing heritage value surpassing all others. As expected, the nomination brings with it prestige and privileges, including exclusive access to funding and expertise for developing management plans for the site. Additionally, the recognition brings alluring possibilities of global tourism dollars for the State Party and the site s community. 6 Chandigarh is a unique contender for the WHL; in the Indian context it is still considered a new city, and outside of academic and professional circles its modern heritage is not considered to have much historical value. In a country dotted with cities and monuments that date back many centuries or sometimes millennia, this 60-year-old city continues to be considered modern. Even within academic and professional circles, notions of preservation are sometimes seen as conflicting with the modernist values on which the city was founded. Despite these viewpoints, many design and planning professionals and particularly those directly involved in the making of the city, have long argued that as an iconic modernist city created by an international team during a period of political change for citizens of democratic India and the post-war world, Chandigarh embodies the global, humanitarian awareness that UNESCO promotes (Times of India, Chandigarh, April 18, 2011). 7 One of the first efforts by professionals to seek heritage status for monuments of Chandigarh occurred at a conference commemorating the city s golden jubilee in 1999; a motion to nominate the Capitol Complex 8 on the WHL was put forward, but rejected. 9 Thereafter, discussion on World Heritage nomination for Chandigarh continued informally, and through UNESCOsponsored events in the city, the first of which took place in 2003 and covered topics of modern heritage. 10 By 2006, a more formal application began to take shape when the Parisbased Le Corbusier Foundation took the initiative of putting together a transnational nomination on the Urban & Architectural Work of Le Corbusier for UNESCO. A collection of built works of Le Corbusier from seven countries (Germany, Argentina, Belgium, France, Japan, Switzerland, and India), this nomination, sponsored by the French Ministry of Culture, aimed at preserving his legacy as an influential twentieth-century urbanist. Chandigarh, Le Corbusier s only realized urban-scale project, and the only non-single-building site in the collection, was to feature prominently in the application. Through meetings and agreements, representatives from the Le Corbusier Foundation built alliances with administrators in Chandigarh, hoping to position the city as a significant part of the transnational UNECSO nomination. 11 From the very beginning, the legitimacy of Chandigarh as a UNESCO World Heritage Site was rarely questioned on either academic or administrative levels. The process involving declaration of its Outstanding Universal Value by satisfaction of at least one criterion aligned easily with the previously recognized significance of the city. To be considered World Heritage, sites must demonstrate Outstanding Universal Value from a variety of points of view, including scientific, anthropological, and aesthetic. This is defined to mean cultural and/or natural

6 Planning Perspectives 203 significance which is so exceptional as to transcend national boundaries and to be of common importance for present and future generations of all humanity. 12 The site is only considered to have Outstanding Universal Value if it meets one or more of the 10 established criteria, and meets conditions of integrity and/or authenticity, and is adequately protected and management to ensure its safeguard. 13 Indeed the proposed nomination would have served multiple purposes for different interested parties. For the Le Corbusier Foundation, it ensured that a global cultural agency with the repute of UNESCO would be entrusted to preserve Le Corbusier s built works legacy. For Chandigarh, the World Heritage inscription would further its international appeal and tourism revenues. 14 For UNESCO, inscribing Chandigarh on the WHL would further its ongoing Global Strategy to be more balanced in its approach to representing world cultures, geographic areas, and time periods. 15 As a first step, the Chandigarh Department of Tourism (in association with faculty at the Chandigarh College of Architecture (CCA)), successfully listed the Urban and Architectural Work of Le Corbusier in Chandigarh on the Tentative WHL in The application identified the city s original development ( Phase 1, comprising Sectors 1 30) as the Historic Core, and highlighted select architectural sites and urban ensembles as examples of Le Corbusier s mature work (Figure 3). In refining the statement on Outstanding Universal Value, the application argued that Chandigarh forms a significant link for establishing [Le Corbusier s] incomparable global contribution to the development of urban planning, architecture and building technology in the twentieth century. 17 The application noted satisfaction of three criteria (i) masterpiece of human creative genius, (ii) interchange of human values, and (iii) outstanding example of architectural and civic design. The nomination document focused on Le Corbusier in all three criteria as the central subject worthy of listing. Often acceptance on to the Tentative List Figure 3. The crown jewel of Chandigarh s historic core Capitol Complex. Image shows the Secretariat building in the Capitol Complex. Source: Photo by Manish Chalana.

7 204 M. Chalana and T.S. Sprague can be highly political, but Chandigarh was quickly accepted. This ease, and the lack of discussion surrounding its value, seemed to indicate that inscription on the main WHL was likely. After acceptance on the Tentative WHL, UNESCO showcased Chandigarh in a prominent international conference on modern cities in September 2007, presented alongside and on par with Brasilia, Le Havre and Tel Aviv. These three cities, all already inscribed on the WHL, were positioned as models of urban preservation for Chandigarh to follow. 18 This comparison suggested UNESCO s growing confidence in Chandigarh s heritage value and willingness to assist in the inscription process. Several high-ranking administrators from Chandigarh attended this conference with the aim of understanding the process of a formal WHL submission for their city, and the required detailing of specific heritage values for the creation of a Conservation Management Plan. The conference underscored the importance of building connections between these iconic modernist cities and their potential to establish a dynamic relationship within the framework of UNESCO. 19 This event guided the preparation of Chandigarh s formal WHL nomination dossier, as part of the Transborder Serial Nomination of the Urban and Architectural Work of Le Corbusier (Times of India, Chandigarh, December 21, 2007). Released on 22 October 2007 by the Chandigarh Department of Tourism, this dossier revised the earlier Tentative WHL submission, narrowing the scope of the nomination to The Modern Historic Core of Chandigarh. The application defined the heritage of the city in two hierarchical but complementary zones: Core Zones I and II. Core Zone I comprised the buildings and urban spaces around the Capitol Park (including Capitol Complex, Sukhna Lake, and Rajendra Park), the Cultural Complex (including the Government College of Art, Museum and Art Gallery) and the Leisure Valley all works largely attributed to Le Corbusier. Core Zone II was defined as the Urbanism of Phase 1, which included the urban design and planning elements of the Phase I city (Sectors 1 30), such as the basic layout, the generic sector system and road network, the landscape design, and the various urban controls. The dossier excluded certain areas such as the historic greenbelt, which, although part of Le Corbusier s Master Plan, were seen to not fulfill prescribed conditions of authenticity and integrity. 20 This division of the city into heritage zones was an early attempt to organize the heritage of Chandigarh to better integrate preservation goals with planning and development. The dossier argued that the historic integrity of much of the urban form in the city remained intact maintaining the original form and design of Le Corbusier s vision. The architectural ensembles, despite additions of some new structures and a few unsympathetic interventions also maintained their authenticity of function and use, and were generally in a good state of repair. 21 These arguments, framed to meet with UNESCO s historic integrity and/or authenticity criteria, would create new points of contention as the nomination process progressed. 22 In December 2007, UNESCO organized another event, this time a workshop titled Site Management and Urban Conservation Workshop in Chandigarh, India. 23 Both local and international experts and agencies participated, including the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) India s national preservation agency. 24 The goal of this event was to build local capacities in the management of historic urban landscapes, and to share expertise around heritage conservation and management. The workshop discussed major challenges to the protection of Chandigarh s heritage, engaging issues of rising property values and pressures on urban infrastructure related to India s fast growing economy, while recognizing the value in evaluating Chandigarh s heritage potential at the present time. 25 Final recommendations included allocation of more government

8 Planning Perspectives 205 resources to conservation efforts, more data collection and assessment projects, a participatory decision-making process, and awareness campaigns to create a sense of heritage pride amongst the younger generation. The events concluded that while Chandigarh s urban history was clearly significant, many steps must be taken to develop successful strategies to manage its heritage. This examination of the city s administrative capacities raised significant questions about the feasibility of managing heritage at a city scale as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. 26 Given the non-governmental nature of UNESCO, and the relative autonomy of the Indian states from the central government, this management burden would ultimately lie with local agencies and the UNESCO recommendations could do little more than provide suggestions and guidance. Still, local support for pursuing the WHL was growing, as seen from favorable newspaper articles expressing the city s readiness for world recognition (TheEconomicTimes of India, December 30, 2007; Chandigarh Newsline, September 6, 2007). 27 However, the process hit an administrative block before the final clearance (Hindustan Times, Chandigarh Edition, February 18, 2008). 28 As part of the submission process, the national Home Ministry had been asked to review the legal issues surrounding the nomination, and in the process realized that concurrence was needed from not just the UT Administration (the government of Chandigarh), but also from the two neighbouring states of Punjab and Haryana to which the city simultaneously serves as capital (Times of Chandigarh, May 7, 2008). 29 The application was thus required to pass through three different bureaucratic processes, a sequence which created large delays resulting in the passing of the 2008, January 31 deadline. However red-tapism was not the only problem, since two threads of opposition were growing within a larger community set against the city s pursuit of the World Heritage designation. First, there was an increasing belief among the design and planning elite that Chandigarh should not be so widely presented as only Le Corbusier s city, something the transnational nomination had obviously encouraged; rather, it should acknowledge the other architects and planners who had played major roles in its development (Chandigarh Tribune, December 27, 2007). Some of the surviving architects/planners even protested against their exclusion from the UNESCO nomination, and engaged in an open debate with representatives of UNESCO on precisely who did what in the planning of the city. Second, there was growing concern that the city s Department of Urban Planning had not been involved at all in the UNESCO nomination process. Anticipating the citywide impacts of the nomination on the future growth of the city/region, planners felt that the Department of Culture and Tourism alone was ill-equipped to address issues of urban heritage. As a growing city, with global aspirations to expand its information technology industry, many felt that the UNESCO nomination ought to be integrated with the larger planning and development vision for the city. The various local governments thus remained reluctant about the city s chosen path to the WHL, which played a role in the bureaucratic slowdown and their lackadaisical attitude in supporting the effort (Times of India, Chandigarh, September 17, 2008). The transnational nomination decided to press forward without Chandigarh, renamed as The Architectural and Urban Work of Le Corbusier, Argentina, Belgium, France, Germany, Japan and Switzerland. Submitted in January of 2008, the nomination came up for review at the 33rd UNESCO meeting in June The collective works of Le Corbusier were determined to be ineligible for inscription on the WHL, as they failed to demonstrate Outstanding Universal Value to establish the profound influence of Le Corbusier on twentieth-century architecture. 30 Providing further explanation, in an apparently veiled reference to Chandigarh, the draft

9 206 M. Chalana and T.S. Sprague decision encourage[d] the State Parties to continue work on the global coordination mechanism among the sites associated with Le Corbusier, as being beneficial whether or not these sites are inscribed on the World Heritage List. The recommendations included reconsidering the basis of the nomination in order to focus attention on the building and urban plans rather than their architect [emphasis ours]. 31 Meanwhile, Chandigarh decided to seek World Heritage nomination on its own, but missed the application deadline for two consecutive years. 32 In addition, discussions on the existing conditions of heritage sites and structures brought issues of historic integrity to the forefront. UNESCO defines historic integrity as a measure of the wholeness/intactness of the historic site to express clearly its Outstanding Universal Value. Locations of crumbling or stained concrete, incongruous additions and alterations, poor maintenance and general neglect, all pointed to the various ways in which Chandigarh s historic fabric had been compromised. 33 It was argued that such violations would not be looked upon favourably by UNESCO (Indian Express, August 26, 2009). Former chief architect of the city, and one of the members of the Indian team that worked on the creation of the city, M. N. Sharma, criticized the UT administration for neglecting the heritage while pursuing ambitious tourism plans (Hindustan Times, Chandigarh Edition, October 27, 2009). The transnational nomination was revised and resubmitted in 2011, again without Chandigarh. The new dossier The Architectural work for Le Corbusier, an outstanding contribution to the modern Movement, France, Germany, Argentina, Belgium, Japan, Switzerland removed the word urban from the title to make it clear the focus was exclusively architectural. However, it was once gain determined unmeritorious, bringing discussions of the absence of Chandigarh to the forefront. The International Council on Monuments and Sites explained that the absence of urban works by Le Corbusier and some building complexes, including those in India resulted in the negative reception of the application (Domus Magazine, October 23, 2011). The Le Corbusier Foundation justified the omission of Chandigarh by the absence of any preservation legislation that protected the city s heritage, one that UNESCO expects from state parties prior to WHL. While Chandigarh may still lack the required regulatory framework that protects it heritage, this interpretation masks the greater issues behind the Foundation s attempt to force the city s heritage to fit into a framework defined solely in terms of Le Corbusier s individual legacy. Meanwhile, after months of uncertainty about the status of the nomination process, the UT administration revealed at the end of 2010 that it would no longer seek individual World Heritage status for the city. The once seemingly assured inscription of Chandigarh on the WHL now lay in serious doubt, tangled in a web of bureaucratic processes, international controversies, and local squabbling. These did not stem from major opposition to the concept of Chandigarh s historical significance, but they did entail some formidable challenges in defining the city s heritage to reflect both its complex history and contemporary planning realities. Rethinking Chandigarh s legacy and heritage The exclusion of Chandigarh from the transnational nomination offered an opportunity to reassess its legacy and heritage. After years of attempting to fit the city s heritage into a Le Corbusier-focused framework, the myriad forms of conflict and resistance that arose indicated a richer and more nuanced historical significance. Chandigarh, as a modern Indian city, began to craft its own approach to conceptualizing its heritage and legacy, rooted in the knowledge

10 Planning Perspectives 207 and experience of those who live there. In 2010, the city created the Chandigarh Heritage Conservation Committee (CHCC) to oversee identification, documentation and preservation of the architectural heritage of Chandigarh (ProKerala News, June 4, 2010). Instead of focusing exclusively on the criteria and process for UNESCO World Heritage designation, the Committee decided to first take proactive local measures to safeguard the city s heritage. The CHCC has already made two fundamental shifts in the heritage definition process. First, they have decided to seek heritage beyond Corbusier (Times of India, Chandigarh, September 19, 2010). In understanding the city as a collaborative work, the Committee recognized the contributions of other European designers and Indian architects as integral to the heritage of Chandigarh. Second, instead of focusing on the entire original Phase 1 of the city, their approach would use a sites-and-precincts framework for demarcating historic properties associated with the original master plan (Indian Express, February 7, 2010). The Capitol Complex and other buildings by Le Corbusier would be given the highest importance, with buildings by his European associates graded next. The proposed heritage by-laws would impose building height and floor-area-ratio controls in both the original and second phases of Chandigarh s development, Sectors 1 47 (Chandigarh Tribune, January 4, 2012). These developments indicate some advancement on the preservation planning process a growing awareness of the various ways that urban heritage can be positioned and presented. In this expansion beyond the framework defined by the Le Corbusier Foundation, the city of Chandigarh has engaged a more robust planning process at the local level, indicating alternative approaches and hinting towards untapped potential for further progress. By examining the nuanced past and present of Chandigarh valuing the local, on-the-ground reality of the city over sweeping historical narratives other definitions of the city s heritage and legacy become apparent and new issues emerge. Three primary issues that must be addressed are: (1) an expanded definition of authorship, (2) a negotiated understanding of the heritage spatial scale, and (3) acceptance of inhabitation and appropriation as contributing to historical integrity and or authenticity. We turn to these in greater detail in the following sections. The legacy of multiple authorships While Le Corbusier is widely recognized as the lead author of Chandigarh, there were many individuals who played significant roles in the making of the city but who have not been appropriately recognized. As with all planning processes, in Chandigarh, the plan negotiated between multiple agencies and is not the creation of a single author...[and] more diverse than its architect-centered discourse suggests. 34 With a project of Chandigarh s scope, extending over thousands of acres and with initial construction spanning over 15 years (The New York Times, March25,1956), 35 the individual claims of authorships covering everything from the master plan to individual building designs are necessarily complex. This complexity is rooted in the involvement of at least three distinct groups of designers: the American, European and Indian teams. As part of the initial planning thrust, the American team of Mayer and Nowicki developed the first master plan for Chandigarh in The Mayer Plan, as it has come to be known, engaged the modernist urban planning concepts of the mid-twentieth century. With inspiration from the planner Clarence Stein, the plan utilized the superblock, or the large, self-contained neighbourhood unit (later called sectors), and organized the city around a hierarchy of circulation routes. However, Mayer s Plan was never explicitly realized. After Nowicki s tragic death

11 208 M. Chalana and T.S. Sprague in an airplane crash in August 1950, Mayer discontinued work on the Chandigarh project. 36 After an international search, Le Corbusier was selected to take over the project and he created the more famous Corbusier Plan. This plan ultimately retained the original framework of the neighbourhood units and the urban open spaces from the Mayer s Plan, along with identical locations for specific sites such as the Capitol and the City Center. Subjected to the same regulatory and site conditions, both Mayer and Le Corbusier reached similar conclusions, suggesting that the plan included many other site considerations in addition to individual creativity. As a result, much of the Americans overarching vision for Chandigarh was reflected in the Corbusier Plan. 37 In fact, it has been argued that there is little substantial difference between the two [Mayer and Corbusier] plans. 38 Indeed, site selection for the new township was conducted by the Indian team, headed by Chief Engineer P. L. Verma, a task that involved the detailed consideration of numerous site conditions including location, access, linkages, water supply, site gradient and setting. After much deliberation, the current site was selected in 1948, which then provided the base for both the Mayer Plan and the Corbusier Plan. As has been argued in the Tentative WHL application, the most distinguishable features of Corbusier s Plan are the attributes of its response to the site and the setting, including the topography, layout, open spaces and views. 39 These urban features rely directly on the site that the Indian team was instrumental in selecting. The Tentative WHL dossier intentionally downplayed the Americans and Indians role in creating the framework for Chandigarh s master plan, as well as the other forces that guided its creation; it credited Le Corbusier entirely for aspects of the master plan like the superblock and the circulation system, which were very similar to the earlier Mayer Plan. This dossier is hardly alone; Le Corbusier continues to receive nearly all accolades for the master plan and the vision of a modernist city in India. 40 Although the CHCC has challenged the categorization of the city exclusively as Le Corbusier s legacy, their efforts have still not extended credit to Mayer and Nowicki, nor to P. L. Verma and his team. This ambiguity of authorship extends beyond the Master Plan. The European team members working beside Le Corbusier (Pierre Jeanneret, Maxwell Fry, and Jane B. Drew) fulfilled numerous creative roles in the design and execution of the city. For example, they functioned as senior architects on the majority of the Category Homes, ranging from large villas for high-ranking government officers to the humble quarters of the peons (Type I XIV). In addition, the European team took the lead on several projects, including Kiran Cinema (Fry); Punjab University Campus master plan and Gandhi Bhavan (Jeanneret; Figure 4); and Sector 22 master plan and low-cost housing (Drew). Like the American team, the European team members other than Le Corbusier himself made little appearance in the transnational dossier to UNESCO. Unlike the Americans, they have begun to receive some recognition in the developing work of the CHCC, although still less than the amount that their contributions merit. On all of these projects, the European team was also supported by the Indian team, who were more familiar with the ground reality contributions that are in all likelihood the most underappreciated. Existing scholarship on Chandigarh have mostly reduced the works of the Indian team to back-up support, 41 even as they played critical roles that began first and lasted longest in the Chandigarh Project. In addition to site selection, the Indian team also worked with the European team or independently in developing site designs and infrastructure development for various projects. Le Corbusier welcomed these significant roles, assembling a large number of young Indian architects to take on increasing responsibility. 42 For example,

12 Planning Perspectives 209 Figure 4. Gandhi Bhawan, Punjab University Campus, sector 14 Chandigarh. Designed by Pierre Jeanneret, member of the European team on the Chandigarh project. Source: Photo by Manish Chalana. B. P. Mathur worked closely with Pierre Jeanerret in developing a low-income housing typology, and Aditya Prakash collaborated with Jane Drew on developing Type VI houses and the General Hospital in Sector In his design for the Sector 2 Sweeper Homes, Jeet Malhotra adopted aspects of brick-vaulted design of the Maison des Péons (Figure 5), an unrealized Model Village for low-income employees whose layout and design are attributed to Le Corbusier, but which likely had heavy input from Jane Drew given her central role in the design of low-cost housing in the city overall (Figure 6). 44 In many, if not most, of the cases of Indian contributions, authorship in fact remains highly contested to this day; individual buildings and sites were almost always assigned a European as lead architect, even when members of the Indian team played critical roles in the design development process. In recent years, Indian architects have been working actively to claim their legacy, but it can be a difficult process when the official record may differ from their own personal accounts, or not exist. For example, Le Corbusier is widely credited as the architect of the government museum and art gallery (GMA), which was completed after his death in The UNESCO nomination dossier claimed, Though the design of the Museum was finalized during his lifetime, the building was constructed after Le Corbusier s death. 45 However, the Chief Architect of the city, M. N. Sharma, under whose supervision the building was constructed, claims to have developed the design and construction drawings from a rough plan and concept provided by Le Corbusier (Figure 7). 46 Though similar to a museum in Ahmedabad credited to Le Corbusier, the Chandigarh museum has unique features and details, but a lack of documentation makes it impossible to determine the specific designers (Figure 8). On this subtle distinction hinges the authorship of the building a discussion that overshadows the broader reality of the building as a collaborative work.

13 210 M. Chalana and T.S. Sprague Figure 5. Maison des Péons, Chandigarh, India, # FLC-ADAGP. Another case involves the main building at the CCA. This building was modelled after the Government College of Art (GCA), which was designed by Le Corbusier who was assisted by Aditya Prakash. The GCA s novel design is composed of standardized but flexible studio modules spanned by swooping concrete beams, with large clerestory windows that allow north light. These studio modules are then arranged around a central courtyard. This design concept was later applied to the site conditions at CCA and executed under the supervision of Aditya Prakash, then principal of the College. Prakash revised the proportioning module to better situate the building on the site, and worked out specific details. In the transnational dossier both GCA and CCA have been attributed to Le Corbusier with no mention of Prakash. To what degree should Prakash be credited for these works? These are some of the authorship issues that continue to remain unresolved with various projects in Chandigarh. This complexity of authorship and the intimate working relationship between the Indian architects and Le Corbusier had been omitted from the WHL dossier to not distract from Le Corbusier s contributions. While CHCC s work has extended the framework of heritage to include some specific works of Indian modernists (such as the vernacular Rock Garden of Nek Chand, government schools in various sectors, and private dwellings) (Chandigarh

14 Planning Perspectives 211 Figure 6. Sweeper houses; category homes: Type XIV, modelled on Maison des Péons by Jeet Malhotra. Source: Photo by Manish Chalana. Tribune, January 4, 2012), they have not given much consideration to the contribution of the Indian team directly involved with the major buildings of the Chandigarh Project. A lack of clear historical records makes the process even more difficult. The ambiguity of authorship on projects plays out at an additional level that should not be ignored. As with all design projects, the process in Chandigarh often consisted of the lead architect developing a concept for a particular building, providing anything from a site plan to a sketched section or elevation, and then passing off the detailed design work to more junior architects. Sometimes that process entailed Le Corbusier handing off to other European architects, or to one of the Indian leads. But frequently it would have entailed one of the senior Indian architects passing the design work along to one or more junior Indian architects whose identity has since been forgotten. Although this process requires considerable design creativity at all levels of the design and development phase, authorship is generally assigned to the lead irrespective of the degree of their involvement in the project. But just because the names and specific contributions of all of the junior architects are difficult to discern, does not mean that their collective contributions in countless ways to the artistic vision of Chandigarh should be underestimated or overlooked. Since only more recently some senior Indian architects are being acknowledged for their work on projects in Chandigarh, it is no surprise that they also ignore this more nuanced aspect of the complexity of authorship. However, being more explicit about this ambiguity can have a drastic effect on how the design of the city is perceived and remembered. 47 Expanding the spatial scale of heritage Much of the difficulty in defining Chandigarh s heritage comes from understanding and engaging its large spatial realm. From dense urban living conditions, to the more rural greenbelt,

15 212 M. Chalana and T.S. Sprague Figure 7. Art gallery, Chandigarh, India, Le Corbusier s sketches. # FLC-ADAGP. from intimate houses to the expansive Capitol plaza, Chandigarh s urban heritage exits on a variety of spatial levels. From the initial debates on nominating the Capitol Complex as a World Heritage Site in 1999, to the successful Tentative WHL in 2006 and unsuccessful WHL inscription in 2007, and on to the creation of the CHCC in 2010, much has changed in the way the scale of heritage is defined in spatial terms. The initial discussions on heritage focused largely on the monuments of the city as exemplary examples of architectural designs. However, by the time Chandigarh was nominated to the Tentative WHL in 2006, the spatial scale had already expanded to include much of the first phase of the city s development. This was largely due to the efforts of UNESCO s outreach

16 Planning Perspectives 213 Figure 8. The GMA, sector 10 C, Chandigarh. Project modelled on Le Corbusier s sketches by M. N. Sharma. Source: Photo by Manish Chalana. through workshops and conferences. This approach engaged the urban context of the heritage recognizing it as integral to the city s overall historic character in addition to the monuments. As the city was being prepared for the transnational dossier featuring Le Corbusier s architectural and urban works, some of the same ideas of urban heritage were employed in proposing aesthetic controls on the urban form to maintain the overall character of the city. These discussions also extended to include open spaces such as the Lake Precinct and the Leisure Valley. However, it did not include the historic greenbelt (or the periphery) of the city an integral feature of Corbusier s plan. There is a general consensus among design and planning professionals that the periphery has been all but depleted by multiple non-green land-uses, and by that logic, lost its historic integrity (Hindustan Times, March 28, 2009). 48 In contrast to the spatially expansive definitions of heritage employed in the WHL process, the CHCC has opted to focus on a select sampling of historic sites and districts. Although the CHCC proposes to retain the height restrictions of buildings along certain transportations arteries such as the V4, V5, and V6, it does not engage in any discussion on the framecontrol an aesthetic legislation that defines the building form within a structural frame, 49 which gives the city a distinct urban character recognized as Chandigarh-style countrywide (Figure 9). The original frame-control legislation was developed by the European team with the intention to unify the built fabric of the city. Due to pressures of development, this legislation has recently been relaxed, and that has led to the dismantling of the frame that takes away from the cohesive urban image of the city. While the CHCC proposes to control the heights of the structures, it does not propose to maintain the historic frame-control requirements an apparent concession to the changing aspirations of the residents. The exclusive focus on height control

17 214 M. Chalana and T.S. Sprague Figure 9. The urban fabric of Chandigarh as a result of the frame control legislation. Source: Photo by Manish Chalana. is a rather conventional one, but understandable given the low levels of support for a blanket historic city legislation. In the process, however, the CHCC has had to make the shift from framing the city as heritage to just framing the heritage of the city. While this reduction opens the door to significant alterations, it also recognizes the need of the city to develop and change, as it has done since its inception and as it will continue to do in the coming years. Setting the spatial scale for heritage designation in Chandigarh has thus become as it so often does everywhere a negotiation between past significance and future growth. Appropriation and inhabitation as not detrimental to historic integrity and/or authenticity Understanding change in the context of Chandigarh, as a modern Indian city, becomes vital to any heritage discussion and legislation. Chandigarh designed and constructed according to largely western ideals has over the years been appropriated and inhabited in very Indian ways. For example, multiple families now reside in plots that were demarcated for singlefamily use. Informal commerce has infiltrated much of the city, converting interstitial spaces into vibrant areas of activity. Sections of the historic greenbelt now have multiple non-green uses. Sites that were not part of the original master plan, such as the folk-art Rock Garden, now feature prominently in the urban landscape and are much more appreciated by residents than the city monuments, which are spatially distant, inaccessible and exclusive. The Capitol Complex originally designed to house just one government body has been modified to accommodate two (Punjab and Haryana), resulting in a necessary overcrowding of offices in the Secretariat and a split security system in the Assembly. Likewise, the increased openness of the courts to the general public has required an expansion from the Le Corbusier buildings to the east. These additional buildings, food vendors, and parking create a vastly different spirit and feeling than Le Corbusier might have envisioned for the site. Yet, everywhere in the city the vibrant street life operates with an intimate involvement with the built environment. Vendors attach cloths and rope to built structures to form their own makeshift enclosures. Sidewalks and passageways are appropriated as commercial

18 Planning Perspectives 215 spaces for selling food or produce. Pavement curbs are taken from the street and stacked to form work surfaces and vending stalls. Chai stands and tandoori ovens populate open spaces. Such inhabitation and appropriation of spaces to suit changing needs is fundamental to urban life a process that must involve the ability to modify one s own surroundings. 50 Indians have a term for this way of adapting and making do jugaad and see it as a fundamental part of their national character, a major point of pride. Le Corbusier s city serves as a successful Indian urban space because of these jugaad inhabitations that occur on a daily basis, not despite them (Figure 10). The CHCC shied away from engaging the urban fabric fully in its heritage scale largely due to the unpopularity of blanket heritage legislation that was seen as anti-development. In addition, the appropriation and inhabitation of the city was seen as at odds with the historic integrity and/or authenticity as conceived in much of preservation practice. Although the Nara Document on Authenticity (referred as Nara Document) recommends using locally specific, social and cultural values in determining authenticity, State Parties have been slow in integrating its vision. 51 Using the precepts of Nara Document, authenticity can be determined using a combination of site criteria including form and design, materials and substance, use and function, traditions and techniques, location and setting, and spirit and feeling. 52 In the Indian context the inhabitation and appropriation of Chandigarh is authentic as it truly reflects the spirit and feeling of a functioning Indian city. 53 If the historic value of the city is assigned simply to Le Corbusier s original plan frozen in time, it may become difficult to reconcile the appropriation and inhabitation of the city with its historic integrity and/or authenticity. A conflict will arise between the image and intentions of the original design as a set of static forms, and the actual inhabitation of them. Instead, if historic value is assigned to Figure 10. Informal market space as manifestation of jugaad inhabitations, sector 26, Chandigarh. Source: Photo by Tyler Sprague.

19 216 M. Chalana and T.S. Sprague Chandigarh as an evolving modernist Indian city and because it is a successful urban centre within an adaptable urban fabric (and not just a collection of buildings) then there is little conflict. This can occur, but it requires both the heritage leadership in the city to embrace this perspective, and then considerable efforts to successfully communicate to residents that heritage preservation will not devalue and will not end their varied and contemporary and uniquely Indian ways of inhabiting their own city. Continuing challenges: valuing modern architecture in the Indian context Expanding the working concepts of heritage to include a broad definition of authorship, a wide spectrum of built environment scales, and an understanding of appropriation and use is important in defining the heritage of the city. Yet in order for these issues to become part of Conservation Management Plan, an underlying appreciation of Chandigarh as modern heritage must be widely embraced by the local population. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Located in a country with monuments that date back 3000 years, Chandigarh faces the particular challenge of justifying its heritage to the local population. Less than 65 years old, Chandigarh is a product of the recent past; its modern heritage is less of a detached historical reference, and more of an engaging reflection on recent historical changes. For many people, modern architecture in the Indian context is not removed enough by time to command historical appreciation. Although global organizations like Docomomo (dedicated to the documentation and conservation of buildings, sites and neighbourhoods of the modern movement) have been promoting a broader understanding of the history of the modern movement, in India such appreciation does not extend widely beyond the academic and professional realms. Efforts to generate this appreciation in Chandigarh specifically have met with some success, but the rest of the country is another matter. Complicating under-appreciation of modern heritage further is the fact that in India, modern architecture and urban planning are associated with the post-independence decades, which were shaped by Nehruvian quasi-socialist reforms that emphasized heavy governmental control and state-monitored commerce. Such policies impacted numerous facets of urban development and shaped the character of Indian cities. In the recent decades of neoliberalization, however, Nehruvian policies have fallen out of support, and are commonly seen as regressive, hindering economic growth, and to be avoided in the future (Economic and Political Weekly, May 7, 2005). The perception of modern architecture in India, and especially Chandigarh, as a manifestation of socio-urban experiment thus carries strong emotional and political baggage. 54 Finally, modern architecture in India remains neglected not just culturally, but legally as well, as heritage legislation in the country rarely offers protection status for sites that are less than 100 years old. 55 Even today, much of the built heritage from the era of the British Raj continues to remain underappreciated and neglected. This cut-off date makes it exceedingly difficult to argue for the preservation of modern heritage of Chandigarh. The lack of local protection for Chandigarh was one explanation given by the Le Corbusier Foundation for the unsuccessful inclusion of the city as part of the transnational nomination. Perhaps heritage legislation in India will change in the future to include sites from the recent past as part of national heritage. Until then, it falls to local jurisdictions to craft protection legislation to safeguard the legacy of the modern movement in India. Fortunately, the enactment of heritage bylaws proposed by the CHCC, while incomplete, is a big first step.

20 Planning Perspectives 217 Chandigarh s history is still being written Since the listing of Chandigarh on UNESCO s Tentative WHL in 2006, the understanding of what Chandigarh s heritage is and how it might be preserved has drastically changed. Expanding beyond the restrictive framework imposed by the original transnational Le Corbusier-focused WHL application, Chandigarh is beginning to embrace its heritage on its own terms. The recent work of CHCC has begun to extend the legacy of the city beyond Le Corbusier and embrace multiplicity of authorships, but more work is needed to understand the complexity of authorship in the city not diluting the significance of the work, but reinforcing the collaborative nature of the city s planning. Embracing a flexible spatial scale, has allowed the city to adapt to future changes, but more flexibility may be required. Historic preservation planning may be faced with the difficult decisions between past significance and future growth, but take comfort in knowing that an appropriate balance can be achieved. Also, an understanding of inhabitation and appropriation of the city as not undermining historic integrity and/or authenticity will allow a new type of heritage to emerge one blended and evolving with the contemporary city. And finally, most challenging of all, the city needs to encourage local engagement with the preservation planning process, and encourage an active appreciation of the city. Signs are appearing that heritage awareness is emerging from the local community. In February of 2010, dissatisfied with the administration s inability to identify and protect historic sites a group of community activists organized to claim their city s heritage, as an act of civic pride. The group identified two foundation stones large cubicle blocks of concrete (roughly 6 feet a side) with impressions and inscriptions that commemorate important events in the course of the city s creation. In Sector 9, one block marks the position where Jawaharlal Nehru viewed the layout of Chandigarh on 2 April Another block in Sector 35 marks the initiation of Chandigarh s Phase II development by M. S. Randhawa on 25 December These stones were placed with the intent of marking Chandigarh s growth as a city, yet had been largely forgotten and abandoned (Figure 11). Figure 11. City s foundation stone site, abandoned and forgotten, was cleaned up by Chandigarh citizens as part of civic pride. Source: Photo by Anurag Theodore Bhateja. Used by Permission.