A Window into Narendra Modi's Symbolic Politics — The Central Vista Redevelopment Project

Narendra Modi’s decade-long tenure as the prime minister has been marked by the creation and repetition of several catchphrases about himself and his governance. Ranging from Modi as the 21st century leader of the Global South, India as the Vishwaguru, ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat,’ ‘Surgical Strike,’ ‘Namami Gange,’ and ‘Vocal for Local.’ Aakar Patel, in his book Price of the Modi Years, has called it “governance by catchphrases… a clever name, often a dazzling event with little follow-up and not much thinking.”

A similar case emerges for the Central Vista redevelopment project, which seeks to convey Modi’s perception of himself as a leader who belongs to the people, correcting the course of history and strengthening Indian democracy. These begin to become evident in the inauguration speeches and site visits. Modi is portrayed as the project’s driving force; his cadre, consisting of architect Bimal Patel and then urban affairs minister Hardeep Singh Puri, play significant roles. Both in their public interviews — something Modi rarely does himself — and discussions defend the project, Patel focusing on logistical narratives and Puri on the political narratives surrounding it. Together, they bolster Modi’s image, commending his active involvement in the project.

In September 2022, Prime Minister Modi inaugurated the Kartavya Path (the renamed Kingsway). The inauguration speech was marked by strong nationalist undertones, as evidenced by the recitation of Tamil poetry and emphasis on citizens’ duty to contribute to the national cause. His speech hinted at a larger political project, linking the renaming of the Rajpath to the Kartavya Path and the Bose statue to his “ panchpran” or five vows, which focus on developing India, removing markers of colonial heritage, fostering pride in national history and unity, and invoking a sense of duty among citizens.

Modi glorified and appropriated Bose in his speech, making him another object to criticise the Congress party. In the speech, he stated:

“If India had followed the path of Subhash Babu after independence, what heights would the country be at today. Unfortunately, this great hero of ours was forgotten after independence. His ideas, even the symbols associated with them, were ignored.”

His purpose to delegitimise the Congress and show Jawaharlal Nehru’s leadership as a continuation of colonial rule is quite evident in his rhetoric. The statue was an attempt to appropriate leaders whom the Congress party may not have duly honoured in its historical narrative — and to identify himself with a different genealogy of leaders such as Bhagat Singh, Sardar Patel, Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, and now Bose. 

Modi’s association and involvement also belie his populist tendencies. The videos of his surprise visits to the site and engagement with construction workers or during speeches, referring to them as building not just a structure but a nation, was an attempt to glorify and romanticise them. In conversation with workers, Modi asked them about COVID-19 vaccination status, whether they received both doses and if they had access to ration. Both instances were attempts to glorify and legitimise controversial policies undertaken by the regime.

The ‘celebration of the labourer’ showed the ways in which Modi connects to and celebrates the ordinary Indian. The reality of labourers on site differed as they lived in shipping containers near the site. His ‘connection with the citizenry,’ in this case, the labourers, and his articulation of the project as ‘significant for the nation’ cannot serve as a justification for the haste, lack of procedure, and weakening of institutions and policies that the project entailed. Thus, several questions need to be asked, not only about his narratives but also about whether the project is meant for strengthening democratic structures and practices or create a nationalism that centers on Modi? Whether this is the one way elected leaders could provide socioeconomic growth and support the citizens during the pandemic?

The project faced backlash from academics, planners, historians, architects, and citizens with concerns regarding the lack of discussion around it, the choice of the architect, the money spent, and the modified policies.

The regime responded with rebuttals to articles and press conferences but the most fascinating was the section they added to the Central Vista website of “myths and realities of the project.”

Alpana Kishore has refuted most of the “myths” highlighted on the website in her research. Calling criticism by the citizenry a “myth” shows the emphasis on perception — of Modi and the project — and the larger approach that Modi has undertaken in dismissing criticism. The “reality” of the project is that it is futuristic and modern, a “generational infrastructure investment project,” which, as per the tender, means “it shall be a legacy for 150 to 200 years at the very least”.

The renderings also hint at the futurism of the project filled with completed buildings — even though no winners have been announced for projects due to lack of adequate responses — and green cover. The top-down photos show no crowds of people, food stalls, or vehicles that can otherwise be seen in the vicinity throughout the day in the present moment. The writing on the wall becomes very clear about whose legacy is being referred to and where the citizens fit into the picture.

Modi’s cult of personality is not something he has built on his own. His cadre has played an essential role in echoing the idea that he is the driving force involved at the most minute level.

In the case of Vista, the chief architect, Patel, and then urban affairs minister Puri, played complementary roles in legitimising the project and strengthening his image. Patel has become a starchitect under the current dispensation. His partnership with Modi began in Gujarat with the Sabarmati Riverfront Project, which was part of the image-cleansing post-2002 riots.

Since Modi became prime minister, Patel has received major projects such as the Kashi Vishwanath Dham Temple Corridor and Sabarmati Ashram Project — in places where the regime has dominated the political discourse — and also received the Padma Shri in 2019, the same year the project was announced. Patel’s firm, HCP, has a turn-key setup where all aspects of the project, including the interiors, legalities, and approvals, are outsourced to them. Thus, Patel will take accountability for demolishing the buildings based on logistics, dismissing the historical significance. He attempts to justify the project, emphasising how HCP follows a “problem-solving approach”. He answers most questions by saying the project is not about creating history but “doing what needs to be done.” Patel’s arguments show political lopsidedness with his criticism of Nehruvian design, stating that the post-independence changes to the site “lack scheme and thought”. 

There is deliberate ignorance and utter disregard for how the site evolved over the last 75 years, and its architectural legacy. Patel’s website states:

“Additional buildings were built post-independence, to meet the demands of time without an overarching architectural vision for the Vista.”

The demolishing of the bhawans might hold some validity — there are times when retrofitting and maintenance become difficult — but due to the lack of public discussion and Patel’s work in Kashi, there seems to be a logistical approach that completely dismisses the historical significance. His explanation is full of jargon and emphasises logistical futurism and modernisation using words such as “state of the art” and “transport oriented”. His articulation resembles the regime’s language, “putting the citizen at the center” — even though citizenry was not part of the decision-making process — and “recognising the Indian spirit,” which they claim has been ignored by previous political parties in power.

Coincidentally, the design supposed to symbolise decolonisation and the beginning of ‘Amrit Kaal’ uses a design rejected by Herbert Baker from the early decades of the 20th century — a triangular building instead of a circular building — for the parliament building. On the HCP’s website, the description of the Central Secretariat states:

“All the works planned on the Central Vista are designed to be mindful of the Vista’s original layout and its architectural character.”

Thus, contrary to the claims, the project is rooted in the colonial notions of power and architecture.

Meanwhile, Puri acted as the strongman, condemning the project’s critics and complementing Patel’s stance. In press conferences, he addressed the petition against the redevelopment project written by former IAS officers, architects, and urban planners, calling them “educated fools” and “disgrace to the country”.

He further undermined the impact of the pandemic (the press conference was taking place during the peak of the second wave of COVID-19) and praised Modi’s handling of the crisis. Puri accentuated Modi’s role and personality cult, showing how actively the prime minister was involved in the project and how he had worked relentlessly on the policies and programmes and located the project in the larger ecosystem, connecting the redevelopment project to the “successful” GST initiative and the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan. He vilified the critics, especially the ones who belonged to the Congress, connecting them to the toolkit narrative, calling them anti-nationalists, and referring to the lack of changes made to the site as “incompetency of the party in power for the last seventy years.”

Furthermore, while discussing memorials of Congress leaders, he stated they are “not my figures” and the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP’s) “parampara” is against those ideals. In an India Today conclave, Patel and Puri were interviewed together. It was evident who answered which question — and what kind of questions were asked hinted at a more grim reality of the media — and how they responded by sticking to a script about progress, efficiency, invalidating criticism, and Modi being the force behind the project.

Patel and Puri repeatedly highlighted Modi’s decisiveness and efficiency, which hinted at a governing style that prioritises symbols and solutions over nuanced and granular approaches. Notably, a democratic model that runs on one man’s decisiveness can undermine consensus-building and accommodate different views.

In the case of the almost 100-year-old Central Vista, which saw the framing of the Indian constitution and the first Indian government to take office, we must pause and question the fact that Patel and Puri repeatedly highlighted Modi’s decisiveness and efficiency, which hints at a governing style that prioritises symbols and solutions over nuanced and granular approaches. Do we want to follow an approach that emphasises efficiency and decisiveness or care and consideration for not only the history but also for the people who use it every day, whose livelihood depends on it? 

Also read: Narendra Modi’s Conquest of Delhi Through Architecture

Prime Minister Modi inaugurated the new Central Vista on May 28, 2023. Controversy surrounded the day, from the absence of President Droupadi Murmu to the arrests of wrestlers protesting against the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) president accused of sexual harassment, and it had almost been a month since violence in Manipur began.

The date coincided with the birth anniversary of Savarkar — a picture of his was put inside the new building to which all MPs paid tribute — and a day after the death anniversary of Nehru, the first prime minister of independent India. The event thus encapsulated the state of Indian democracy — the weakening of state institutions, the suppression of dissent, and the legitimacy of right-wing narratives of history which need to be connected to the changes in school textbooks, the rise of vigilante groups, and the massive development projects undertaken by the regime.

These trends became difficult to overlook on May 28 but have since become the norm over the last ten years; the redevelopment of the Central Vista studied through the elements of narratives, speeches, and actors involved reinforce the larger changes in the framework of statecraft. The capital city redevelopment is about a larger reimagination, intangible reinventing of the state, secularism, history, and democracy, which is made physical and visible.

Sameer Bajaj majored in Political Science at Krea University and has recently completed the Urban Fellowship at the Indian Institute of Human Settlements. He is keenly interested in Indian politics, urban history and global south theory.