Why not a modern day symbol?

What is the "symbol" of Mumbai? The one visual that immediately tells the viewer that this is Mumbai?

For our filmwallahs, that symbol is VT (now CST) station, that Victorian pile that is much more than a railway terminus; it is shorthand for the dreams and aspirations of the hundreds of wide-eyed innocents who land in the city of gold.

The Gateway to India is another obvious one, as is Marine Drive. A foreigner may on the other hand consider Dharavi as more representative-Danny Boyle did and won several Oscars for his labours. And what about the Sealink, an example of Indian engineering (and Indian delays.)

All are fine, but not quite adequate. They have no international resonance like the Statue of Liberty, the Sydney Opera House or the Golden Gate bridge in San Fransisco. The Gateway is archaic and no matter what the heritage wallahs think, is an awkward reminder of our colonial days. Dharavi is an embarrassment and the Sealink is too new.

We need something that is culturally strong, unusual and futuristic and which will remain relevant and exciting for a long time.

This thought seems to have struck our netas too so that have come up with an idea to build a huge statue of Chattrapati Shivaji in the middle of the sea. The statue will be 309 feet high, taller than the Statue of Liberty which is 304 feet high.

Around the statue will be an entertainment centre, restaurants and many more fun things, so that a visitor can be kept amused for hours. Land will be reclaimed from the sea for
this purpose. The cost-a mere Rs 350 crores.

Immediately this move has raised the hackles of many, from architects who think this is a silly idea to the greens who think it is a dangerous and environment-damaging plan. Why another statue of the great man when we already have two prominent ones? Why in the sea?

Why this wasteful expenditure at a time when the state is reeling under a drought? The Shiv Sena and other opposition parties are in a bind-they cannot protest, since it involves Chattrapati Shivaji but they know that it is an election stunt. The Congress is congratulating itself on its cleverness.

But these objections - serious and valid no doubt - apart, the idea of a monument is not such a bad one. Many of the recognisable symbols of today were objected to and hated when they first came up.

The local politicians of New South Wales were appaled by the Opera House when it was being built and humiliated and sacked its Danish architect Jorn Utzon. Today it is a Unesco heritage site.

Several top names from the French cultural establishment, including Guy de Maupassant and Alexander Dumas wrote an "Artists Protest" letter rubbishing the project before construction began, with one of them calling it a "tragic street lamp." Today it is the world's most visited paid monument.

This does not mean that there should be no concerns about the Shivaji statue and it is a fact that our record of both, designing public art and maintaining it is shoddy. Plus there are the usual fears of it being a boondoggle, a public project that wastes time and money and an opportunity for scams. But the time has come to consider a public monument in keeping with our status as one of the world's great cities.

One cannot forever live in the past and must look at the future. One idea would be to build something that commemorates "the spirit of Mumbai", that much-abused cliché that still holds some relevance.

That can celebrate our never-say-die brio and also pay respects to all those who have died in various terrorist acts. It would be secular and non-partisan and the world's best designers can be invited to bid for it. Every Mumbaikar would welcome this. But then there would not be any votes in it, would there?