Click here for more...

Click here for more...

(ARCHIVE) Vol. XIX No. 13, october 16-31, 2009
The Fort’s tourist potential neglected
(By The Editor)

A recent rating by the National Geographic magazine has only Delhi marking it as a worthwhile tourist destination among all the cities in India. Chennai is, of course, nowhere in the list and may at best take comfort in the fact that it is one among many others that did not make it. The survey waxes eloquent in particular on the Red Fort which has been the symbol of Delhi’s historicity. Why does Fort St. George not have the same stature in Madras that is Chennai?

The rating should be occasion for some soul-searching by the State Government. Why is it that despite possessing one of the longest urban beaches in the world, being home to several historic structures including Fort St. George, and having perhaps the world’s longest music festival, Chennai does not count as a tourist destination? It is at most a tourist gateway, serving as entry to other destinations in the neighbourhood.

The Red Fort has been recognised as a world heritage structure by UNESCO. The sprawling campus has become the focus of all tourism plans in that city. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of Fort St. George. It is all the more surprising considering that just one year separates the two. The Red Fort was begun in 1638 while Fort St. George, albeit a far more humble structure and at that time with less pretensions to power, was begun in 1639. And if the former marked the zenith of Mughal power, the latter saw the beginning of colonial rule in India, leading to much of modern Indian history.

If the multiplicity of authorities controlling Fort St. George has been cited as a reason for its lack of upkeep and conservation, the same problem existed for long at the Red Fort too, with the Army controlling large swathes of the campus. But a will to push for the preservation of the place has resulted in the many departments working in tandem with a larger vision. In Fort St. George, most of the agencies follow their individual agendas. Thus, while the Archaeological Survey has created an information corner at Clive House, the Army has been busy in its barrack area. Sometime back there was a hue and cry about some heavy construction work undertaken by the Army in this precinct, but work went on regardless. The Government has, by way of its contribution, built one of the ugliest buildings right in the middle of Fort. On the other hand, the Fort Museum has seen some positive developments in recent years including the sprucing up of a gallery or two.

All this does not make for holistic development. The best option would be for all agencies to vacate the Fort once the Government does so on the completion of the new Secretariat and Assembly complex on Mount Road. Then the Fort ought to be given to the ASI which, in collaboration with the Tourism Department, ought to develop a blueprint for making the place a tourist attraction. This should include aspects such as public conveniences, sound and light shows, galleries and information kiosks. Above all, there should be an active involvement in publicising the place. If all this is done, we can even hope that the Fort may be declared a World Heritage Site by UNESCO. But are we anywhere near such an eventuality?

Nearly four decades ago a suggestion was made to develop a tourist circuit comprising Dutch Pulicat, British Fort St. George, Portuguese San Thomé and Porto Novo, French Pondicherry, British Fort St. David (Cuddalore), Danish Tranquebar and Dutch Nagapattinam – all offering sun, sea and sand too. But what’s happened to that idea? It’s time tourism looked beyond temples and other places of worship.

 

In this issue

Fort’s tourist potential...
Plea to save the beach...
A promise kept...
From the Aronda...
Bihar to Madras...
Historic Residences...
Other stories
 

Our Regulars

Short 'N' Snappy
a-Musing
Our Readers Write
Quizzin' with Ram'nan
Dates for your Diary
 

Archives

Back to current issue...