The City as Colonial Fetish: New Delhi and the Cultural Politics of Imperial Space, 1911–31

Sunday, January 9, 2011: 8:30 AM
Wellesley Room (Marriott Boston Copley Place)
David A. Johnson , University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC
This paper is part of a larger manuscript project that examines the intersection of early twentieth-century imperial culture, imperial politics, and Indian nationalism as reflected in the colonial built environment at New Delhi, built by the British between 1911 and 1931. It argues that the building of New Delhi represented a multifaceted vision of the late colonial state where colonial reforms that were intended to give Indians greater political freedom simultaneously bound them more closely to the British Empire. As Indian resistance to British rule became greater in the twentieth century, British officials began to think of new ways to assert Britain’s colonial authority in India. At this critical moment and as the pre-eminent symbol of British imperial rule in India, New Delhi superbly displayed a double narrative of promised liberation and continued colonial dependence. Like some totemic fetish, Britain’s last imperial capital in South Asia represented a new model of imperial hegemony based not simply on coercion, as many have argued, but on the ability to create desire for further colonial rule. Purposely weaving the new capital into the fabric of the past, town-planners laid out broad avenues radiating from a central government sector that ended in vistas of much older and decayed Indian imperial ruins.  One was led to visualize and read the historical flow from Indian ‘despotism’ to British ‘enlightened’ administration in India.  In particular, New Delhi’s placement next to ‘old Delhi,’ a Mughal city built by the emperor Shajahan, offered India two possible futures. New Delhi’s highly controlled urban planning—best represented by its strict geometric road grid and large government structures surrounded by parks—was juxtaposed against Shajahanabad’s meandering and densely packed streets and neighborhoods. The message was clear: New Delhi’s vision offered renewal and health; Shajahanabad represented chaos and disease.
Previous Presentation | Next Presentation >>