Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Wah Taj!

Well, isn't this what we found splashed all across our television screens on the morning of the 8th. With the satisfaction of averting a self-dreamt national insult behind us, people went all out to celebrate (or so the media would have us believe) The most ironic thing that I find though within hours of declaring 'THE NEW 7 WONDERS OF THE WORLD', the same website now calls for 'THE 7 NEW NATURAL WONDERS OF THE WORLD' - a list that is to be announced on 8.8.08.

Probably this is something that is beyond what I think - in other words, it does not matter what I think about this...after all, everything is done and dusted and the list - a result of millions of votes from across the world - has been released. But I do question the validity of this list.

How do you define a wonder? This in itself is a very subjective question and the boundary lines which differentiate this question from others on many aesthetic and metaphysical issues are probably so blurred that I'd rather not go into this topic.

Of more interest to me is the nature of people who have voted in this poll. The obvious fact that most of the people who've voted haven't ever visited the monuments they have voted for. Can such a voter imagine the awe that must fill a devotee when he/she stands in the shadow of Christ the Redeemer atop the Sugarloaf mountain in Rio? Can such a voter feel the throb of a hunger for blood and savagery which a gladiatorial bout in the Colosseum would have elicited centuries ago? Can such a voter truly appreciate the ingenuity involved in building the Great Wall of China for the purpose of imperial defence?

Instead of a survey that weighed in these factors plus many more like architectural ingenuity and difficulty, significance and symbolism, we got a poll where heavily populated nations could dominate the voting and hence push forth their candidates.

All said and done, I feel that the bottom line remains as to how we can compare these great monuments and grade them as better than the other. How can we choose to honour some monuments and not others, despite the fact that they all stand for the same thing - the triumph of human creativity and ingenuity as mankind strove (as it still does) for a world that stands for comfort, beauty, love and happiness.

4 Responses:

Unknown said...

nicely put!

Nilanjana said...

very apt. the validity of the process is being questioned by almost everyone, but then again, it's one of those things that people know better than to rally against. I totally agree with you on the concept of wonder - i mean it may sound cheesy but to me that whole world, every tiny plant, every animal, every human being - is a wonder. fine pelt me with "stop your corny lines" but that's how i feel.

Anonymous said...

Well stated..The authenticity of the procedure is subject to doubts..
besides there is a very possibility that the site has done it for some financial gains via some modes..Same applies for the media..making money while playing with aesthetic issues and sentiments.Truly the wonders and legends are to be felt to the heart ..just hope that these results turn some tourist heads toward India if at all this attempt has gained popularity in other countries.

Anonymous said...

well..UNESCO agrees with you...and even though I duly voted and got others to do so as well..I agree with your viewpoint. You can't compare 'wonders', especially when you club together ancient,medieval and modern architectural history...I mean..when was the last time The Acropolis competed against the Sydney Opera House for a distinction?