Email
Print
ShareThe obvious way to look at the Taj Mahal is to gawk like a tourist. And, depending on your accent, say "Hey, isn't that just "beautiful!" Or, "I say, splendid little tribute to romance and all that, wouldn't you say?" Or "Aiga, kitee masta imarat hi ahe!" Or "Kuch bhi kaho. Aisi sundarta aj ke architect-sharkitect kabhi bana nahin payenge."
Having thus conformed to your type, you could then take the hand of your significant other, await your turn at the strategically placed bench, and having got there, get your picture snapped by one of the teeming professional photographers, to forever adorn your desk back home.
But if you are the difficult type, and want to assert your individuality even in a clichéd situation, what do you do? You could look at the ironies that confront you along the way. There's the inevitable commercialisation of what is universally regarded as the greatest monument to love.But it's an iniquitous commercialisation where a foreigner pays ten times the entrance fee you do, and is rooked by every hawker and shopkeeper.
Then there's the irony of the approach: the road leading to the most beautiful structure in the world, is the least beautiful. In fact, it's downright dirty and cramped and everything it shouldn't be. There's also a double irony if you come by a tourist coach from Delhi: there's one stop each way for refreshments, and both stops are at a MacDonalds. Fast food, fast franchise, before and after visiting the one and only, and slow, very slow building (the Taj took 20 years to build).
Alternatively, you could take the technical approach. "Why does the Taj work,?" you would then say. The building material of a near translucence is wonderful, but marble is hardly unique. The red sandstone used on the periphery is also a common material of those days. And is there something magical in its dimensions? The main building is a square of 186 feet, with a dome of 70 feet diameter and 120 feet height. The four slender minarets at each corner are 133 feet high.
On the surface, those numbers signify nothing. Perhaps Ramanujan would have found a pattern, perhaps not. Could it just be serendipity that they work so beautifully to create a wonderful symmetry? Look at the Taj's imitators -- Victoria Memorial or Bibi ka Maqbara -- and you will see what I mean. The latter has the very same elements as the Taj, butit looks almost ugly! So whoever the architect was, he goteach dimension just right. Which brings me to another way of looking at the Taj.
The grouchy way.
Grouse No 1: Why don't we know the name of the architect? The most perfect building in the world, and we don't know who designed it! All we know is that he was Turkish, but nothing more. Not even his name! For the Taj all the credit goes to Shahjehan. It's like saying that Chandigarh was made by Jawaharlal Nehru!
Grouse No 2 : If it's a monument to love, why did Shah Jahan build a mausoleum? Why a building after Mumtaj Mahal's death? Wouldn't it have been a true symbol oflove if he had built it while she was alive? After her death, the glory would only be his. "Wah, wah, Shehenshah"! they would all say. How much he must love her! What a sense of aesthetics he must have! What passion! What longing! What a man!
Grouse No 3: Mumtaz Mahal was not even 30 when she died, and she died in childbirth. If Shah Jahan really loved her so much, couldn't he have saved her a bit of child-bearing?
At the end of the day, after you have tried the cynical approach, the ironic approach, the engineer's approach or the grouch's approach, you are still left with this indisputable realisation: the Taj Mahal is beautiful, stunning beautiful. It's a monument to love all right. That's because everyone falls in love with it.
To vote the Taj Mahal to the new seven wonders, SMS TAJto 4567 or log on to www.indiainfo.com
