The irony is that the MTDC spends Rs 10 crore for the upkeep of these white elephants while the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) spends Rs 1 crore on the original Unesco world heritage sites.
Built at a cost of Rs 125 crore, the two replicas Ajanta Visitors Centre and Ellora Visitors Centre were meant to allow curious tourists a closer look at the treasures inside.Ajanta contains fabulous murals while Ellora is home to India's greatest collection of Hindu sculptures.
Officials now admit that footfalls at the replicas barely cross double digit numbers on any given day . Now compare this to the original caves.“An average of 2,500 people visit Ajanta caves and about 5,000 visit Ellora caves each day during the tourist season,'' says Madan Singh Chouhan, superintending archeologist, Aurangabad circle, ASI.
There are good reasons for this lack of tourist interest. For one, the replicas look nothing like the real thing. “I thought it was a factory when I saw it from a distance. It is really ugly and out of sync with the landscape,“ says Ashoke Sarkar, senior professor with BITS, Pilani, who visited the caves recently .
Second, the fake structures are built very close to the caves -the Ajanta replica is 4km away from the original and the Ellora duplicate a mere 500 metres away . “Why should tourists from distant places visit a duplicate cave?'' asks Amol Basole, secretary of the Aurangabad Tourist Guides Association. “It would have been better if the replicas were set up in Aurangabad or another metro.'' The low footfalls mean that there is hardly any revenue generated to meet the maintenance cost. “We have given the maintenance contract for the visitor centres for Rs 6 crore.Then there is the additional monthly expenditure of Rs 10 to 15 lakh on electricity and other utilities,'' says Pandurang Kulkarni, senior regional manager, MTDC.
Experts say there is a bigger worry -there is extensive use of thermocol, an inflammable material, in the replicas. A layer of thermocol, fitted in wire meshes and layered with Ferro cement, has been set on the concrete base of the visitor centres. The idea was to recreate the rough look of a cave wall. Thermocol has been used to create walls, pillars and ceilings and various figurines.
“Despite its advantages, polystyrene is brittle and flammable. It could also attract rats,'' says Prof Ram Mane of the department of chemistry, Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University. Satish Soni, joint managing director, MTDC, defends the use of thermocol. He also asserts that it was not the only material used to build the replicas.
The pioneers of the Ajanta Ellora Development Plan say they had conceptualized something very different. “The replicas have nothing to do with the original plan, which was simple and stayed close to the old style,“ says Dev Mehta, former man aging director of MTDC and the brain behind the plan.
State INTACH co-convener, Mukund Bhogale, says the interpretation centre was a good concept.“But the replicas are a disappointment. The way they were executed, the way material like thermocol was extensively used, it doesnt give a good feel or experience to a tourist.'' One of the reasons why the replica seemed like a good idea was that visitors to the caves were never allowed to get too close to the priceless and fragile art works inside or photograph them. But visitors to the replicas too are asked to stay away from the installations.
Kishor Nikam, a photographer, shot more than 2.5 lakh images of the original painted caves for the replicas. These were then printed on sandpaper canvas and meticulously pasted on the concrete walls. Nikam defends the MTDC's decision to not allow photography inside the replicas because flash light could cause his images to fade in 10 to 15 years.But he too concedes that his work would have had better exposure if it was displayed some distance away from the old caves.
No comments:
Post a Comment