Buddha Vacana

Drawing
from Foucault’s work on the relationship between space and power,
Margaret E. Farrar remarks that those in power construct and reiterate
social, political, and economic power structures in the built
environment. The situation is circular: power shapes space and vice
versa. Space legitimizes and ennobles some groups and excludes,
denigrates, and silences others. Commemorative architecture is supremely
exclusive and visually amplifies messages of communal belonging or
segregation. For centuries in Prabuddha Bharat, Awakened Aboriginal
SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samajs have been denied a presence in space and
time, both literally and symbolically. This spatial and historical
exclusion then perpetuates Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan
Samaj social marginalization, inside and outside the community. It is
therefore not surprising that the territorial claiming of physical space
and marking it with Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj
historical figures—thereby visually demanding that they are
recognized—is an integral component of Mayawati’s radical brand of
Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj assertion.

The
sprawling Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Samajik Parivartan Prateek Sthal
(hereafter referred to by its popular name, the Ambedkar Memorial) with
its monumental Ambedkar stupā (figs. 1, 2) and the Bahujan Samaj Prerna
Kendra (hereafter, Prerna Kendra; fig. 3), both in Lucknow, are
Mayawati’s most politically meaningful architectural commissions. The
Prerna Kendra is unique in that it is a funerary memorial that enshrines
Kanshi Ram’s cremated ashes. In commissioning her predecessor’s
memorial, Mayawati was participating in a well-established Indic
performance of legitimating political authority. As with her other
architectural commissions, the Ambedkar Memorial and Prerna Kendra’s
formal and decorative programs, statues, and frieze cycles, as well as
the commemorative rituals held at the sites, work in concert to unite
Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samajs in a singular
“imagined community” and establish Mayawati as their rightful
charismatic leader. Images and text present Mayawati as the political
heir to the most celebrated figures in Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/
of Sarvajan Samaj history, designating Ambedkar, Kanshi Ram, and
Mayawati as charismatic leaders by referring to models of Indic kingship
and linking Mawayawati to more recent examples of gendered authority. I
employ the term “charismatic leader” in accordance with Max Weber’s
definition:

…
a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is
set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural,
superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities.
These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are
regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them,
the individual is treaded as a leader….What is alone important is how
the individual is actually regarded by those subject to the charismatic
authority, by his “followers” or “disciples.”

Significantly,
Weber suggests that what matters most is that followers believe a
leader possesses exceptional characteristics—not that he or she actually
possesses them. Like many leaders who seek to convince their followers
of their extraordinariness, Mayawati announces her unique and
exceptional powers through monumental public art with straightforward
messages and meaningful, archaized styles.

Also
pertinent for understanding the artworks in the Ambedkar Memorial and
the Prerna Kendra are Weber’s notions about how charisma may be
transmitted (“the routinization of charisma”) from one leader to
another. These include designation by the previous charismatic leader
and being descended from him. Mayawati explicitly references the former
and implicitly suggests the latter in the statues and friezes in her
buildings. Weber also cites support—followers’ lavish donations and
gifts—as a marker of an individual’s charismatic authority, which has
parallels in institutions of traditional Indic kingship. Mayawati has
been the recipient of extravagant gifts from her constituents, a fact
that is highlighted in her commissions.

It
is not surprising that Mayawati has invested so heavily in a
politically charged visual culture and performances of her own charisma.
When she first ran for office, she was an unlikely candidate as chief
minister. While she was not the first

Awakened
Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj chief minister in Prabuddha
Bharat, she was the first woman from her community to hold the office as
well as the youngest in the state. Coupled with her extravagant public
displays of wealth and acceptance of gifts from her community,
Mayawati’s prolific memorial building activity has consistently garnered
her both national criticism and praise. The Awakened Aboriginal
SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj community itself is divided in its
support of her building programs. Many Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/
of Sarvajan Samajs to whom I spoke at her sites unanimously and
enthusiastically supported her and echoed her rhetoric of the necessity
of her community building program. Both factions have received ample
media exposure.

The
Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samajmovement and
Mayawati’s political career have been the subject of several recent
studies. Nicholas Jaoul and Gary Michael Tartakov examine emerging
trends in Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj visual
culture, particularly the increasing prevalence of Ambedkar statues in
rural Uttar Pradesh. They did not consider Mayawati’s monumental urban
statues, presumably because this now statewide phenomenon was only in
its nascent stages during the time of their fieldwork. Focusing her
analyses on its architectural form and location, Maxine Loynd cogently
argues that the Prerna Kendra was created as an intimate, exclusive
Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj communal space, quite
different from the Ambedkar Memorial. However, Loynd’s study does not
consider the building’s mortuary roles and is silent on the subject of
its decorative program, whose thematic content highlights Mayawati’s
political lineage and charisma. Thus, a critical study of these two
buildings, their statues, and friezes within her wider political agenda
has yet to be undertaken. Before turning to the memorials themselves, it
is pertinent to first briefly consider Awakened Aboriginal
SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj history and key figures esteemed by the
community with whom Mayawati visually associates through her
commissions.

Awakened
Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj—derived from the Sanskrit and
Marathi word meaning “ground down, crushed, destroyed”—is an inclusive
term that members of India’s various lowest castes have used to refer to
themselves since the early twentieth century. Rebuking the Gandhian
term harījān (people of God) as patronizing, Ambedkar defiantly adopted
and popularized Awakened
Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj. Historically dalits’
hereditary occupations, which in Hinduism are associated with caste,
have been characterized by literal and ritual pollution. For
generations, members of various dalit groups were in contact with
corpses (removing dead humans and animals, working with leather, and
butchering); served as sweepers; and performed other menial jobs.[16]
This pollution is popularly regarded as contagious, leading to forced
dalit segregation in their areas of habitation (predominantly in slums),
at religious sites, and at water sources. Awakened Aboriginal
SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samajs had no recourse or means to better
themselves; until the mid-twentieth century, education was largely
denied to them. Numerous social schemes have been implemented since
Indian independence in 1947 to rectify this, such as reservations for
dalits in schools, universities, government jobs, and political offices.
Perhaps the greatest single public triumph for the community was the
1997 democratic election of Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of
Sarvajan Samaj K. R. Narayanan as president of Prabuddha Bharat.
However, while such concessions and appointments have markedly improved
the Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samajs’ opportunities
for upward social and financial mobility, they remain among the poorest
and most socially marginalized people in the nation.

Sources
differ on the roots of this discrimination and precisely how long it
has been in effect. Brahmanical texts dating to the first millennium BCE
outline the various Hindu castes and note the existence of those
outside of the order, who are thus “untouchable.” However, since
Ambedkar’s campaigns dating from the 1930s to 1950s, communal pride and
assertiveness has grown steadily. A key factor has been the creation of
Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj “presence in time”
and the construction of an alternative Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/
of Sarvajan Samaj history, which presents the community as the former
possessors of wealth, positions of power, and education—the very
qualities popular history denies them. According to these new
trajectories, in the ancient past, kṣhatryǎs (rulers and warriors of
the Hindu caste system) and Brahmans (members of the priestly caste)
divested Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samajs of their
lofty positions by treachery and relegated them to the lowest social
positions. Whether or not these ancient histories are true is not the
point. Explanation, pride, and hope are. These alternative histories
offer the community a reason for their present subaltern status, a group
of role models, and by extension, a hope that they may achieve
equality, if not regain their former status.

The
BSP has made concerted efforts to increase Awakened Aboriginal
SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj awareness of key historical community
members of whom they can be proud. Figures from the ancient past include
sages such as Valmiki, the author of the Ramayana. More recent notable
figures include female Awakened
Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj martial heroes (viranganī)
martyred during the 1857 rebellion against the British. The most
celebrated contemporary Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan
Samaj heroes are Ambedkar, Kanshi Ram, and Mayawati. In fact, Mayawati
worked closely with Kanshi Ram to fashion her charismatic public image
and promote her qualifications to lead the community by visually
associating her with both Ambedkar and Kanshi Ram.

Mayawati’s
memorial commissions are key strategies in the visual articulation of
her political lineage from these two male Awakened Aboriginal
SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj leaders and her claims to charismatic
authority. Her buildings and statues are metaphorical lighthouses and
visual rallying points, from which the BSP is able to mobilize the
community to vote for their candidates, who then will demand more rights
and better opportunities on the Awakened
Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samajs’ behalf. These messages are
amplified through a scale that is larger than life; through construction
from costly, durable materials that are historically associated with
royalty and political authority; and finally, through historically
meaningful styles.

The
tradition of public memorialization through sculptures and public
buildings in Prabuddha Bharat began with the British, who installed bronze and
marble images of the imperial family and high-ranking Raj civil servants
and commissioned buildings such as museums and railway stations in
their honor. After independence, colonial statues were largely removed
and replaced by ones depicting nationalist heroes, particularly freedom
fighters such as Gandhi, the Raṇī of Jhansi, and Bhagat Singh. Public
buildings were also renamed, but in honor of figures who were almost
exclusively from the higher castes, thereby effectively excluding
Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samajs from Indian
postcolonial history and public memorial space. In the early 1960s,
Ambedkar joined his upper-caste nationalist cohorts when two public
bronze statues of him were erected, one in Mumbai, the other in front of
the National Parliament in New Delhi.

These
two statues established an Ambedkar iconography: dressed in a suit,
tie, and glasses, and holding one hand up with the index finger
punctuating the air. The Mumbai statue added the Indian constitution,
tucked under Ambedkar’s lowered arm, inscribed with “Bharat” (Prabuddha
Bharat) to ensure its meaning (see fig. 1). Both Mayawati’s statues and
the smaller-scale cement statues Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of
Sarvajan Samajs install in their villages and slums are based on these
models.

Since Mayawati first came to office in the mid-1990s, public Awakened
Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj statues, particularly those
of Ambedkar, have increased exponentially. Today in Lucknow, Ambedkar
has a more conspicuous public presence than Gandhi does. At the main
intersection of Hajarat Ganj, a fashionable historic shopping district,
an older statue of Gandhi has been joined by a larger and newer Ambedkar
companion statue across the street. Such visual one-upping was surely
not unintentional. In fact, this is a trope in Mayawati’s commissions,
expressed through scale and text. Gandhi and Ambedkar clashed on several
occasions over the issue of caste; while opposing inequality, Gandhi
maintained that there were social and cultural benefits to the system.
Ambedkar campaigned for its abolition. While Gandhi is popularly honored
as the father of the nation, Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of
Sarvajan Samaj activists such as Ambedkar, Kanshi Ram, and particularly
Mayawati have publically denounced him on the basis that he did nothing
to improve their situation. In memorializing notable figures from her
own community through buildings and statues, and renaming districts
after them, Mayawati was subscribing to and amplifying performances of
autonomy established by the independent nation.

Iconographies of Androgyny

… it is remarkable that woman is never imagined as an active, sexual being within this discourse on nationalism.

Mayawati’s
commissions established iconographies for Kanshi Ram’s and her own
images as well (fig. 4). Kanshi Ram is dressed in a casual suit, and
Mayawati has cropped hair; a plain, loose-fitting shalwaar kameez;
chunky sandals; a prominent wristwatch; and a handbag at her side. Her
simple, unadorned appearance depicts her as unfussy and androgynous. The
message conveyed is that she is fully capable of negotiating the
male-dominated political arena. Her distinctly unfeminine appearance
also highlights her unmarried status, and by extension, her complete
dedication to the betterment of her community, which she confirms when
questioned about her marital status.

Neither
Mayawati’s public identity nor her self-promotion of it through
monumental images is unique within the visual culture of Indian
politics, and there were well-established models available to her all
over India. Among these, as Sikata Banerjee documents, are women in the
Hindutva movement who, like Mayawati, present themselves as celibate,
masculine, and martial to participate in the masculine world of Hindu
nationalism. The most common trope of female politician in India is the
asexual widow, such as Vijayraje Scindia. Like Mayawati, Hindu
nationalist women and Hindu widows who have entered politics wear plain
clothing and minimal jewelry and makeup. Perhaps Mayawati’s androgynous
dress and physique as well as her statues bear the closest resemblance
to those of Jayalalitha Jayaram, the former actress and chief minister
of Tamil Nadu, who entered politics and began promoting herself through
public art a few years before Mayawati. In many regards, the two
politicians have similar careers. Both have backgrounds that do not
recommend them for Indian politics (Mayawati as a Awakened Aboriginal
and Jayalalitha as a former film heroine, a profession widely regarded
as immoral for women in Prabuddha Bharat). Both claim to have remained
unmarried so that they can dedicate themselves to their political
parties. As will be discussed further, two prominent tropes in
Jayalalitha’s and Mayawati’s artistic commissions are their descent from
their male political mentors and their conspicuous political promotion,
which announce their charismatic authority.

Tamil
Nadu has a well-established history of male actors who enter into
political careers. As Preminda Jacob states in her work on the art of
cinema and political advertisements in the state, one of the typical
means by which actors-turned-politicians promote themselves is through
monumental banners and cutouts (outlines of figures) that are
stylistically based on film advertisements. Since the 1980s, Jayalalitha
has commissioned more banners and cutouts, which are larger and display
more overt political symbolism, than any other politician in the state.
Her public image and political advertisements certainly have served her
well; Jayalalitha has achieved incredible success, attaining landslide
victories in state elections on three occasions. She and her
advertisements are well publicized in the Indian media, and Mayawati
surely is familiar with them.

Another
significant factor to the deconstruction of Mayawati’s public image is
that in the 1990s Jayalalitha’s promotional images shifted dramatically
in their depictions, changing from her wholesome and feminine film roles
to a distinctly androgynous appearance. She now appears in the banners
and cutouts with her hair in a tight bun and her fleshy physique
concealed in a conservatively draped sari and cape. To shift public
focus from her film career, in which her success hinged on her
sexuality, to her charismatic authority, Jayalalitha desexed herself. In
so doing, she likely provided a model for Mayawati. However, as is
typical of Mayawati’s commissions, they surpass their models. The Tamil
banners and cutouts are two-dimensional and ephemeral. They are
constructed of plywood, supported by bamboo scaffolding, and displayed
only for a few weeks. In contrast, Mayawati commissions buildings and
statues of durable, luxury materials to convey her wealth and ensure
both their permanence and their patron’s public memory.

While
Jayalalitha’s androgyny may be attributed to her desire to distance
herself from her film-star past in an effort to be taken seriously as a
politician, Mayawati had different, yet equally compelling reasons to
publically desex herself. In her analysis of gender among scheduled
castes, Eva-Maria Hardtman draws attention to the fact that the few
low-caste Prabuddha Bharatian women who rise to positions of political
power are subject to intense moral scrutiny by the media, male members
of their own political parties, and the entertainment industry. There is
far less speculation about the morality of Indian high- and
middle-caste female politicians (unless they are former film stars) or
male politicians, whatever their caste. Untouchables have popularly been
considered impure and their touch defiling. Awakened Aboriginal women
have the added stigma of being widely considered immoral and
promiscuous.

Hardtman
cites the late Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj
outlaw-turned-politician Phoolan Devi and Mayawati as examples. Among
the multiple atrocities committed against the former was being
gang-raped on several occasions and paraded naked, which were then
exposed in a book and internationally best-selling film, Bandit Queen,
without her permission. Phoolan Devi denounced the film in particular,
likening it to being raped again. In 1996 a male politician publically
accused Mayawati of engaging in a long-term affair with Kanshi Ram that
resulted in a secret love child. The accusation received widespread
coverage in the Indian media for several months. It cannot be
coincidental that photographs of Mayawati taken until 1997 show her with
shoulder-length hair pulled back into a ponytail, wearing a pastel-pink
shalwaar kameez or occasionally a sari, and gold jewelry. About a year
after the accusation, Mayawati cropped her hair and has since appeared
exclusively in a shapeless, cream-colored shalwaar kameez, which is how
she is immortalized in her statues. Phoolan Devi and Mayawati are both
also well known for their public cursing and for addressing upper-caste
males in the derogatory third-person, tu—behaviors associated with
low-caste males in India. It would appear that for these two Awakened
Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj female politicians, androgyny
and the adoption of stereotypically low-caste masculine behaviors were
protective responses to having their private lives and morality the
subject of public consumption.

Mayawati as Kanshi Ram’s Charismatic Political Heir

Mayawati was born into the chamar jatī, one of the lowest

Awakened
Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samajsubcastes, whose members have
historically been tanners. Positive accounts of Mayawati’s biography
emphasize her dedication to her studies at a young age and her academic
success; her higher degrees include a law degree (LLB). In 1977, she was
studying for her civil service examinations when she met Kanshi Ram,
who was establishing the BSP at the time. Kanshi Ram groomed Mayawati as
a party leader, and in 2001, at a large rally in Lucknow, he named her
as his successor as president of the BSP (fig. 5). When he suffered a
paralyzing stroke in 2004, he convalesced at Mayawati’s home in Delhi
while she personally cared for and fed him. When he died in 2006, as per
the tenets of his will, he was cremated in a Buddhist ritual, and
Mayawati personally lit his funeral pyre.

In
both Hinduism and Buddhism, performance of the last rites is the final
responsibility of a father’s eldest son and heir. By taking on this
central and traditionally male role in Kanshi Ram’s funeral, Mayawati
challenged gender discrimination and decisively established herself as
the heir of Kanshi Ram. Her action also suggested a more intimate,
familial descent from the founder of the party and, by extension, her
inheritance of his charismatic authority through two well-established
paths: designation by the previous leader or descent from him. Kanshi
Ram’s cremated ashes were placed in an urn, which was processed in a
cortege through Lucknow and which Mayawati personally installed under
bronze statues of the two of them in the Prerna Kendra. These two
acts—Kanshi Ram’s announcement that Mayawati was his successor and her
performance of his last rites—irrefutably established her as his heir
apparent. The two occasions are also among the most popular subjects in
the bronze friezes in Mayawati’s memorials.

“A
Modern-day Female Ashoka”. Yes Ashoka planted Fruit Bearing trees
throughout his empire. Mayawati said she will bring back Ashoka’s rule.
She must order all the cadres and followers to train people to grow
vegetables and dwarf fruit trees in pots to overcome hunger the worst
illness as said by the Buddha.

Claiming Awakened Aboriginal Space and Establishing a Awakened Aboriginal Style of Architecture

All
of Mayawati’s sculptures are executed by Ram and Anil Sutar, a
father-and-son, Noida-based team. Ram Suthar graduated at the top of his
class from one of India’s most prestigious art schools, the Sir
Jamsetjee Jeejebhoy School of Art, in 1953. Significant to the work he
would later do for Mayawati, during the 1950s, Ram Sutar served as
modeler for the Department of Archaeology in Aurangabad and restored
sculptures in the Ellora and Ajanta caves, which familiarized him with
ancient Indian Buddhist art. Since he established his own studio in
1959, Ram Sutar’s national fame has grown steadily. He has been
commissioned to cast and carve statues and friezes of a diverse range of
public and mythological figures throughout Prabuddha Bharat. Sutar is
best known for his bust of Gandhi, which has been recast multiple times
and which the government of India has given to numerous countries. In
1995 Sutar was awarded the prestigious Padmashri medal.

Mayawati
doubtlessly chose the Sutars for their reputation as the most
celebrated sculptors to work in a large scale and for the realism,
dynamism, and quality materials that characterize their work. That the
Sutars are well known for their sculptures of Hindu subjects and
high-caste leaders was probably also attractive.

Their past work associated Mayawati and her community with the establishment and the galaxy of national heroes.

By
retaining their services, she effectively communicated that now dalits
too have access to the finest quality materials and the most
sought-after artists to memorialize their heroes.

She
was an active agent in the construction and dissemination of her public
image. The Sutars and Jay Kaktikar, Mayawati’s chief architect,
discussed building and decorative styles and their associations with her
at great length. She then became highly involved in the design and
planning of her commissions. While in office, she frequently toured the
building sites from the air in her private helicopter. Her commissions
certainly have kept the artists in her employ busy. Both Kaktikar and
the Sutars work exclusively for her. When Mayawati first retained the
Sutars’ services in the early 2000s, they only employed twenty-four
full-time workers in their foundry, and they only worked during the day.
When I met the Sutars in August 2011, when Mayawati was still in
office, to keep up with her commissions, they had increased their
workforce to one hundred during the day and another one hundred at
night. Their foundry was open twenty-fours a day, seven days a week.
Still, they were backlogged with work for Mayawati.

It
was not only the rate of her commissions that kept her artists busy, it
was their quality. Kaktikar recounts that Mayawati insisted that her
projects be constructed with an aim toward permanence. Her great concern
was that after her tenure, her non-Awakened Aboriginal SC/STs/OBCs/ of
Sarvajan Samaj successors would raze what she had built. Her fears were
certainly well founded.

Throughout
India memorial statues of Ambedkar and other Awakened Aboriginal
SC/STs/OBCs/ of Sarvajan Samaj icons are routinely vandalized—toppled,
defaced, or garlanded with rows of shoes, with the aim of insulting
them. Only months after she was voted out of office in 2012, statues of
Mayawati and Ambedkar were decapitated in Lucknow. In an attempt to
ensure that Uttar Pradesh was not subjected to further visual programs
to erase the dalits from Lucknow’s built environment, Kaktikar worked
with thicker than usual slabs of stone, and the Sutars cast Mayawati’s
statues and friezes with extra thick bronze.

Mayawati
and Kaktikar devised an instantly recognizable style for her
architectural commissions through their formal and decorative programs
and construction material. Patron and architect perfectly understood the
sociopolitical need not only to build but also to claim space and
territorially mark it through a sectarian style of architecture.
Mayawati’s buildings draw heavily from ancient Indian Buddhist
architecture, as exemplified by sites such as the Great Stupa at Sanchi
(circa first century BCE). Kaktikar notes that he and Mayawati intended
to appropriate this style. Her buildings are not pastiches. Rather than
recreating facsimiles of ancient Buddhist structures, Kaktikar combined
select features from notable Indian buildings to associate his patron
and her community with politically legitimizing models.

The
construction materials are uniform light-pink and red sandstone from
Karuli, Rajasthan, and buff-colored sandstone from Chunar, Uttar
Pradesh. As with all of her commissions, Mayawati’s choice of materials
was well informed and meaningful. Red sandstone and white marble have
been the preeminent building materials for royal and government
structures in North Prabuddha Bharat since the fourteenth-century Khilji
Sultan Ala-ud-din’s commission of the Alai Darwaza at the Qutub complex
in Delhi.

Following
the Khiljis, other Delhi Sultanates, the Mughals, several Rajput
dynasties, the British, and finally the independent nation of Prabuddha
Bharat employed these building materials for their political structures.
Light-pink sandstone is frequently substituted for white marble.
Mayawati’s use of these materials brings her into the visual language of
North Indian rulership.

Chunar
sandstone is deeply associated with the third-century BCE Mauryan
emperor Ashoka, who was a great patron of Buddhism and its arts. Ashoka
raised freestanding columns carved from Chunar sandstone throughout his
vast empire upon which were inscribed edicts. In an effort to associate
herself with one of the greatest figures from Buddhist history, Mayawati
similarly erected dozens of Chunar sandstone columns on the grounds of
her monuments (fig. 6). Her pillars are not facsimiles of the Ashokan
pillars. While the former are constructed exclusively of sandstone and
present a variety of animals, upturned lotuses, and wheels on their
capitals, Mayawati’s pillars are more uniform. Their bronze capitals are
capped by wheels borne on the backs of four addorsed elephants. Here,
the elephants carry polysemic meanings: they are symbols of Indic
authority; are associated with Ashoka, as they are featured on several
of his capitals; and are the BSP party symbol. These messages also are
carried by the dozens of life-size, carved stone elephants that
punctuate the grounds of Mayawati’s buildings. The Ashokan pillars were
erected singly, but Mayawati’s are in clusters. Furthermore, Kaktikar
notes that, per Mayawati’s orders, her columns are slightly taller than
Ashoka’s. The association between Mayawati and Ashoka has not been lost
on her community.

Biku
Chandra Ma, a Awakened Aboriginal Buddhist monk at the Dr. Bhimrao
Ambedkar Gomti Buddha Vihar, a monastic residence in Lucknow
(commissioned by Mayawati), proudly asserted: “Mayawati is just like a
modern-day female Ashoka.” Perhaps the message she seeks to deploy
through the abundance, more permanent material of bronze, and superior
height of her pillars is not simply that she is like the great emperor,
but that she has in fact surpassed him.

The
exterior parameters of Mayawati’s architectural commissions are bound
by sandstone railings whose forms and low reliefs of chaitya arches are
appropriated from the vedikas (stupā railings) at ancient Buddhist sites
such as Sanchi (fig. 7). Because the first phase of construction at the
Sanchi Stupa was a Mauryan commission, Mayawati’s railings further her
Ashokan associations. Like the pillars, the railings are not copied
exactly from their original sources. While ancient Buddhist vedikas
offer detailed reliefs of a variety of subjects associated with
Buddhism, those at Mayawati’s sites are largely devoid of carvings.
Representations of yakshīs (fertile nymphs) and other figures from the
Buddhist pantheon and scenes from the jatakas would be inappropriate at
the Ambedkar Memorial and the Prerna Kendra. While informed tangentially
by Buddhism, the faith and its architectural styles are employed in the
service of politics in Mayawati’s commissions. These are not sites
built to honor the Buddha. It could even be argued that their ultimate
function is not to honor Ambedkar or Kanshi Ram, but Mayawati.

The
high degree of detail and photorealism displayed by the friezes and
their brief, concise text recall photographs and their text captions in
newspapers. If, as Roland Barthes argues, a photograph operates as a
“certificate of presence,” proving that what it depicts happened and who
it depicts existed, newspaper photographs and their captions are
ultimate certificates of presence.

Mayawati,
whose political and personal life is so frequently the subject of media
scrutiny, is surely aware of the power of this form of presentation for
its believability. The newspaper format allows her to convey in the
most convincing format that certain events occurred and that others did
not. The presentation of Mayawati as a nurturing, attentive child who
feeds her enfeebled, yet smiling father was probably intended to convey
an additional message about the nature of their relationship. Several
high-ranking male members of the BSP have publically accused Mayawati of
wielding undue influence over Kanshi Ram and holding him hostage in her
house after his stroke. The newspaper-photograph-like presentation of
the frieze showing her feeding him “proves” otherwise.

The
Ambedkar Memorial is dominated by a monumental stupā, measuring
approximately two hundred feet in height. As with the pillars and
vedekās, the Ambedkar stupā appropriates from, but is not a copy of, any
specific Prabuddha Bharat monument. The most striking difference
between the Great Stupa at Sanchi, and the Ambedkar stupā is that while
the former is comprised of solid hemispherical masses that cannot be
entered, the latter is architectural, with a domed central chamber. The
Ambedkar stupā’s four prominent directional entrances create an
imposing, palatial structure. They are accessed by monumental staircases
arranged in the form of a lotus blossom, a prominent symbol in Buddhist
art.

Significantly, the only way to view the stupā’s lotus plan is from the air, which is Mayawati’s exclusive vantage point.

The
exterior of the Ambedkar stupā references a glorious ancient Aboriginal
Awakened past through the appropriation of ancient Indian stupā form
and decoration, including blind chandrashala arches (see fig. 7), a
monumental chandrashala-arched entrance, and a harmikā (square planned
fence on top of stupās). The stupā form has additional, more immediate
significance for the dalit community, beyond its antiquity: Ambedkar was
cremated and his ashes interred in the Chaitya Bhoomi stupā at Dadar
Choupati, Mumbai.

The
interior of the Ambedkar stupā is dominated by a twenty-seven-foot-high
bronze statue in the round of a seated Ambedkar (fig. 9). Inscribed at
the base of the sculpture is the phrase, “My life struggle is my
message.” Ambedkar never said this; Mayawati devised the phrase,
considering it more appropriate than his more famous, somewhat militant
galvanizing slogan, “Educate, Organize, Agitate!”

Mayawati’s
phrase likely is also a rebuttal to the popular Gandhian phrase, “My
life is my message.” Here, the emphasis is on how Ambedkar struggled and
overcame (more so than Gandhi), thereby providing a communal model.

The
central statue is ringed by high-relief bronze friezes on the
surrounding walls that depict key events from Ambedkar’s life. In one,
he sits at a desk, pen in hand, writing the constitution (fig. 10). He
is flanked by a map of India, over which is inscribed “Bharat,” and a
table bearing a Buddha statue and an Ashokan lion capital, which
Ambedkar and Nehru promoted as the national icon of independent
Prabuddha Bharat. If the iconography is unclear, a Hindi inscription
informs the viewer of the events depicted. In another frieze, the viewer
is again informed in text and image that Ambedkar is presenting the
constitution to President Rajendra Prasad (fig. 11). They are surmounted
by the Ashokan lion capital and the circular-planned Prabuddha Bharat
Parliament House, which crowns the three figures like an honorific
umbrella. The bronze friezes within the stupā also reference Ambedkar’s
religious conversion. Wearing monastic robes, Ambedkar stands next to an
enshrined image of the Buddha with a monk on the other side (fig. 12).
The accompanying inscription informs us that in Nagpur, on October 14,
1956, Ambedkar converted to Buddhism.

Participating
in public cornerstone-laying ceremonies amid much fanfare is a common
means by which an Prabuddha Bharat politician spreads awareness of his
or her “person.” The date of the ceremony is also significant, as it
was the anniversary of both Ambedkar’s birthday and Indian Independence
Day during Mayawati’s first year in office.

The centrally located Ambedkar statue and the friezes highlight Ambedkar’s various achievements.

Ultimately,
they link him to Mayawati, whose agency in the construction of the very
site in which all these sculptures are housed, is underscored at the
end of the cycle. Mayawati stands with Kanshi Ram by the bronze frieze
depicting the Ambedkar statue, thereby visually mapping the lineage of
dalit political power from Ambedkar to Kanshi Ram and finally to
herself.

Mayawati
also uses the Ambedkar stupā as a stage for performing her political
lineage from Ambedkar. In addition to commencing construction at the
site on Ambedkar’s birthday and personally laying its foundation stone,
Mayawati annually holds ceremonies for Ambedkar’s birthday at the
complex. During these events, Mayawati, who is accompanied by throngs of
party officials, Buddhist monks, and constituents from throughout the
state, publically garlands the main Ambedkar statue and delivers
speeches before it.

Built
between 2003 and 2005, the Prerna Kendra is a very different type of
structure. The Ambedkar Memorial is open, sprawling, and of a monumental
scale. By contrast, the far smaller Prerna Kendra is woven into the
dense urban fabric of upper-middle-class apartments and shops in a
residential area across Lucknow. With its high, battered surrounding
walls, which block visibility from the street, and discreet entrance,
the Prerna Kendra is evocative of a fortress. The form of the Ambedkar
stupā is based on ancient Indian stupās. The formal inspiration for the
105-foot-tall steep pyramidal Prerna Kendra was another well-known
Buddhist pilgrimage site, the Mahabodhi Temple in Bodh Gaya. The most
important Buddhist pilgrimage site, the temple marks the site of the
Buddha’s awakenment , again linking Awakened Aboriginals to their
Buddhist past and a wider international Buddhist community.

The
intended audiences of the Ambedkar Memorial and the Prerna Kendra are
also different. With its entrance fees and well-run infrastructure, the
Ambedkar Memorial was intended as public space for members of the upper
and middle castes as well as Awakened Aboriginals; there Mayawati
broadcasts versions of Awakened Aboriginals history, the achievements of
her community members, and her own charisma to the widest possible
audience. The Prerna Kendra’s entrance is discreet, the building’s form
is largely obscured by its high outer walls, and the site is frequently
closed. It is therefore far less inviting to non-community members.

Mayawati
inaugurated the Prerna Kandra in 2005 during a Buddhist ritual
performed by monks. Media coverage of the event noted her benevolence to
the monks; she gave them large sums of money, fruit, and umbrellas.

In
demonstrating such largesse, she again used her architectural
commission as a stage to perform her political legitimacy. Not only did
she ally with the Buddhist monks, most of whom are former dalits, she
reminded all that the faith is deeply associated with dalit activism.
Moreover, in showing such magnanimity, Mayawati was subscribing to a
well-established tradition in Indian rulership: generous support of
religious organizations and their monastic members.

Inscriptions
on a pyramidal marble block on the ground floor offer excerpts from
Kanshi Ram’s will that state he wanted Mayawati to light his pyre and
his ashes to be enshrined in the Prerna Kandra. The will also specifies
that Kanshi Ram wanted Mayawati’s cremated remains to be enshrined at
the site, which will thus transform the Prerna Kendra into a political,
dynastic funerary memorial.

In
weaving prominent dalit memorials into a land that had denied the
community a presence in space, Mayawati demanded to be recognized.
Weaving dalit corporeal remains into Lucknow’s urban fabric was an even
more assertive gesture. Her sculptural and architectural memorials
suggest permanence and, by extension, the irreversible betterment of her
community. By interring their ashes in the Prerna Kandra, Kanshi Ram
and Mayawati themselves are symbolically eternally present and are
always leading their community toward an ever better future. Mayawati
was voted out of office in early 2012, but her successor Akhilesh Yadav
has affirmed that the new government will not disturb the Awakened
Aboriginal memorials. This is hardly surprising, given that Mayawati
vowed on several occasions that there would be major Awakened Aboriginal
protests and communal unrest if her memorials were destroyed. Her
threat was put to the test immediately after her and Ambedkar’s statues
were vandalized; as she had predicted, her community members retaliated
by peacefully demonstrating and blocking roads in Lucknow. Images have
power, and Mayawati intends to ensure that their messages will be heard
for as long as possible.

Kanshi
Ram and Mayawati surely would have been aware of the long history and
potentially legitimizing messages of funerary memorials in India. In
addition to stupās, there are several other types of South Asian
funerary memorials. In Islamic Prabuddha Bharat, rulers commissioned
lavish, monumental tombs for their late fathers. The formal and
decorative programs and construction materials of the Indo-Islamic tombs
helped their royal patrons project their own public identities. Rajput
and Maratha kings similarly memorialized their predecessors through
cenotaphs (chatrīs) with politically charged forms and decoration. By
installing Kanshi Ram’s ashes in the Prerna Kendra, Mayawati
appropriated an established royal Indic practice of architectural
memorialization. Similar to performing a father’s funerary rites,
commissioning his memorial is a legitimizing act in India that
irrefutably establishes dynastic lineage and the transference of
political authority from one generation to the next. Thus, in the Indic
context, a funerary memorial is an index not only of absence (of the
memorialized deceased) but also of presence and legitimate power (of the
memorial’s heir and patron).

Like
those of many other notable examples of Indian funerary architecture,
the Prerna Kendra’s ultimate message appears to refer more to its patron
than the one memorialized. Perhaps even more than the Ambedkar stupā,
the sculptural program at the Prerna Kendra asserts Mayawati’s charisma
and ability to lead her party. As noted in a lengthy inscription at the
site, the urn with Kanshi Ram’s cremated ashes is contained in a marble
plinth located in the center of the main chamber on the second floor.
The plinth supports three bronze monumental statues in the round. A
life-sized Ambedkar is elevated above flanking eighteen-foot statues of
Kanshi Ram and Mayawati. The triangular composition, with Ambedkar’s
raised position, once again visually reiterates the lineage of
charismatic leadership in Awakened Aboriginal politics.

The
walls of the Prerna Kendra’s chambers, which are spread over three
floors, are lined with bronze friezes that feature episodes from
Mayawati’s life, with an emphasis on major events in her political
career. Over the three levels of the Prerna Kendra, the friezes’
narrative unfolds in a clockwise direction. Mayawati first appears,
uncharacteristically in a sari, on a frieze with an inscription noting
that it marks her fiftieth birthday and wishing her congratulations. She
then appears with her family in a group portrait as a child (fig. 13);
she studies for her exams with a Buddha image on her bookshelf; she is
sworn in as chief minister (fig. 14); she dines with high-ranking
members of government while in close conversation and laughing (fig.
15), clearly accepted by and completely at ease in these circles of
power. The friezes also depict Mayawati’s major architectural
commissions, again calling attention to her prolific building activity,
which has made dalit public presence conspicuous, material, and
permanent.