Restoring glory to India’s cultural heritage: An Italian case study- Part 1
Ten years ago, on a hot sweltering afternoon, a rickety dinghy boat ride, off the Arabian sea coast of India, was on its way to leave a profound impression on me. Of course, I had no idea back then. I was on my way to visit the Fort of Janjira, an impenetrable sea port in the state of Maharashtra, that sat on an oval rock, surrounded by water on all sides. The only way to get to the fort was by local dinghies running from a nearby village with the fishermen doubling up as boatmen for the few tourists the site received. In its heyday, the fort apparently had palaces, a mosque, and bastions (many of which still have intact canons). But now, with the sea basin eroding, the fort seemed to go down bit by bit each year.
Who built this? When? Why haven’t I ever heard of this? I kept asking everyone around.
The unspoken retort seemed to be, “what’s the big deal lady!”
The big deal to me was that here was a site nearly three centuries old, traversed by ancient Africans, Mughals and Marathas. Wasn’t that reason enough to celebrate it! This made me think of the umpteen symbols of civilizations, empires, religions, culture which grace the land of India. Each with its own legacy, story and symbolism.
Surely you know what I am talking about? Take for example the intricate baolis (stepwells) of Rajasthan, most of which in reality are now covered in sewage, or the ornate sculptures of our gazillion gods and goddess which are more often than not missing limbs. The gaps in Ajanta and Ellora’s carvings, the unfenced moss-strewn historical tombs, the empty museums… the list goes on and on.
With every passing year, these paintings, caves, monuments, sculptures, museums grow one year older in wear and tear. It is not hard to imagine a time when the future generation are unable to identify what lays before them, and hence erase it altogether.
In a population of 1.35 billion and almost equal gods and faiths, it is true that we have a lot to preserve. But can anything be done for these symbols of culture to be the shining beacons of art, literature, education that they were hoped to be when they came into being.
We all get it; we all feel it but where do we start?
I looked to a country where the passion for food, family and drama matches our own- Italy.
And I discovered that Italy had the same problem as us, but they were on their way to a solution.
Ten years ago, Rome’s famed Trevi fountain was decaying, discolored by years of wind and smog, cracking under the pressure of millions of tourists and the general wear and tear of 250 years of existence. The state of disrepair of this 300-year-old monument culminated in 2012 when pieces of the fountain’s ornamental cornice started crumbling after an unusually cold winter. The government sanctioned emergency repairs worth €320,000, only to reveal more problems requiring urgent maintenance. This forced the cash-strapped local government to turn to the city’s local businesses for funding.
The fountain had undergone small repairs in the past, under Rome’s Ministry of antiquities, but they knew that they now needed a much bigger and fuller restoration than a piecemeal stitch in time. This meant time, an enormous sum of money and help beyond the local government. That’s when Fendi stepped in.
Fendi wanted to get involved, saying on its website that it was a way for the company to give something back to city. It added that the Italian capital (of Rome) has been a big “part of Fendi’s creative heritage. The design house agreed to pay for the crumbling fountain’s crucial maintenance in exchange for the right to affix a branded plaque next to the fountain for four years. 17 months of restoration work later which cost them around 2.2 million euros, the iconic Trevi fountain opened its waters to public again in 2014.
Fendi CEO Pietro Beccari called it a “gesture of love” to Rome.2 Since then, under the “Fendi for Fountains” project, the design house has donated an additional €280,000, as of 2019, for the cleaning and restoration of four more significant fountains in Rome.
I found this was amazing. On further digging, a barrage of similar examples opened to me.
In 2014, Salvatore Ferragamo, another Italian luxury goods company, rooted in Florence, pledged €600,000 to renovate part of Florence’s most famous museum, the Uffizi Gallery. The donation allowed the museum to remodel eight rooms within a year, which will then house 50 works dating back to the 15th century. “We wanted to do something that would improve the city, to contribute to the Uffizi and Florence, and we were looking for a project that would be long lasting,” said company president Ferruccio Ferragamo.
Following in the footsteps of Salvatore Ferragamo –Gucci, another famed Italian label, contributed €340,000 towards the restoration of a series of ten 16th century tapestries in Florence.2
To celebrate the jewelry company’s 130th anniversary in 2014, Bulgari donated €1.5 million towards the revamping of the famous Spanish Steps. The restoration work, which got underway in October 2015, focused on the cleaning, reinforcement and protection of all the stone surfaces, including the functional recovery of the steps to ensure safety.
Perhaps the greatest precedent was set by the design house Tod’s, when they undertook five-year project costing 25 million euros to restore the mighty Colosseum. Tod’s CEO Diego Della Valle says the brand’s donation was money well-spent. “I’m a very proud Italian, and my group too,” he says. “It’s because of love for one of the most important Italian monuments — representing Italy all around the world. When we are able to contribute, why not?”
The refurbishment of Venice’s Rialto Bridge by the fashion tycoon Renzo Rosso, Prada’s preservation projects in Venice and Milan… the list continues. These are just some of the examples of how Italian fashion houses took it upon themselves to save their heritage.
How did all this come about? It couldn’t possibly all be altruistic with nothing to gain for such a competitive industry. And simply following a trend or not wanting to be left behind can’t be reason enough to part with millions.
One of the incentives that possibly contributed to the surge of brands’ contributions is Italy’s tax breaks. In July 2014, the Italian government introduced the Art Bonus tax cut and passed legislation to allow businesses, individual donors or cultural institutions to claim a tax credit — equal to 65 per cent of their charitable contributions made in favor of public cultural heritage. This was at a time when the state was struggling to cut government spending following the financial crisis and had slashed arts funding in 2012–2013. Using this as an opportunity to bring in much need reforms, in 2014, Dario Franceschini the then Italian Minister of Cultural Heritage and Activities, presented a strategy to streamline the bureaucracy, reorganize the ministry of cultural heritage and invest in enhancement of these monuments.
The strategy recognized five main gaps and dysfunctions in the current way of working of the Ministry. These gaps were apparently highlighted by many sides and many times.
1. The first being the lack of integration between the two areas of the Ministry, culture and tourism;
2. Secondly the multiplication of command lines and the duplication between center and periphery (in India’s case the states);
3. the congestion of the central administration budget, compounded by the cuts made in recent years;
4. the lack of autonomy of Italian museums, which was limiting their potential;
5. and finally, delay in innovation and training policies.
Almost all of these, sound like they could hold true for India too, isn’t it!
From there on, the Italian reform was built primarily to solve these five “nodes” and address each one. Their first step was to cultivate full integration between culture and tourism: this was done by imparting skills to regional directorates regarding the promotion and enhancement of their cultural landmarks. It was integrated with tourism by working to invent itineraries and cultural routes to be proposed to national and foreign travelers.
Next, they tacked the simplification of peripheral administration; along with modernization of the central structure; bringing efficiencies in management, whilst keeping the focus on tourism. The Italian museums were empowered by giving more power and autonomy to the museum directors and transitioning them to a ‘manager’ mind-set. innovation, training and enhancement policies for the staff were introduced.
In a bold move, a fresh approach to recruitment was taken to attract top international talent including foreigners. Each head was expected to lead Italy’s cultural reform, maximizing their institution’s monetary potential without expecting help from the cash-strapped government. They were pushed to find newer creative ways to optimize internal revenue streams and attract private investment at the same time.
In 2016, the Italian government announced a major investment of €1 billion in cultural infrastructure. Most of this was towards lesser known museums and smaller sites that lay in crumbles and did not get much tourist traffic. The government hopes that although the cost of the project is high, the money will be recovered through tourism, as the newly-restored locations will open to tourism for the first time.
Raising an eyebrow, the Ministry also welcomed foreign donations towards preserving their cultural heritage. “Our doors are wide open for all the philanthropists and donors who want to tie their name to an Italian monument,” Italy’s culture minister, Dario Franceschini, said in an interview. “We have a long list, as our heritage offers endless options, from small countryside churches to the Colosseum. “Just pick.”
While private-public partnerships are common in many countries, in Italy (and perhaps likewise for many nations), the government has traditionally been responsible for maintaining historical sites. Opening to foreign donations could lead the general society including historians and preservationists to worry about what was being offered in exchange.
For instance, in Fendi’s case, it earned a high-profile fashion show event over the Trevi fountain as well as a branded plaque next to it for four years. In celebration of the Colosseum’s restoration, Tod’s organised a light show and musical concert within the arena. Critics complain that companies have exploited cultural sites by commandeering them for elaborate dinners or the display of luxury advertisements. Yes, it’s true that in some cases they got kickbacks, but isn’t that small change to pay for bringing back these sites to life?
What learning can we derive from Italy’s example that could be relevant to India? Cultural reform cannot be the responsibility of a government alone, neither can it be driven solely by civilian participation or for that matter private patronage. So, it is highly unlikely that it is just one area we need to look at but rather a structured and phased approach with clear priorities can help us.
So then how can we move to restore, preserve and enhance our own precious cultural heritage for the future generations? I tried to break down the strategy used by Italy into smaller buckets of change, for India.
Watch out for them in Part 2 of Restoring glory to India’s cultural heritage: An Italian case study.
