Kathmandu: As the smoke billowed out of its massive white columns and the flames leapt out of arches and the roof, the visuals from Singha Durbar in Kathmandu were shocking for the people at large.
The seat of Nepal’s power and prestige was devastated by the inferno, as if the anger of a generation fed up with years of corruption razed uncontrollably devouring whatever stood its way.
A nation watched with bated breath as reels, videos and pictures of Singha Durbar were circulated thick and fast on 9 September. The loss for many was immense as well as deeply personal.
Encapsulating the sadness of many, a heritage enthusiast from Nepal took to Instagram to express his grievance. Watching Singha Durbar burn, he said, was nothing less than heart-breaking. With the burning of history, he posted, the country lost not only bricks but “irreplaceable memories, records, and the last fragment of our history”.
“It’s time to reflect deeply, question your own morality, your silence, your passivity,” he further wrote.
But there were also many, who did not feel the enormity of the events unfolding that day. “It was just a building for us, it meant nothing. We wanted to see it in ruins,” recalled a protester, who was inside Singha Durbar.
The forces, the protester told ThePrint, did not stop them from entering the palace. “We were given a free pass.”
Also Read: Nepal’s Gen Z are out on the streets, again. This time as volunteers, picking up the pieces
Fire & fury
For a generation that has grown on a diet of social media, the events unfolding at the heart of Kathmandu were unprecedented. What many are unaware of is that a similar disaster had befallen on the palace earlier as well.
According to a report in The Kathmandu Post, most portions of Singha Durbar were destroyed in a devastating fire that broke out on 9 July, 1973. The only portion that remained untouched was the front courtyard.
There are conspiracy theories about how the fire started, and some say it was deliberate. In the aftermath, all the offices were shifted to other buildings, as is what’s happening now.
Then came the devastating earthquake five decades later in 2015. The quake that claimed about 9,000 lives and destroyed several landmarks including the Dharahara tower in Kathmandu, also damaged Nepal’s main administrative complex.
The National Reconstruction Authority led the rebuilding project that continued for 70 months. The Singha Durbar project cost Rs 870 million (Nepali rupees) with the renovation works carried out in two phases, according to the Authority.
In 2021, the three restored facades of Singha Durbar were inaugurated by the then prime minister K.P. Oli, who four years on became the target of the Gen Z protesters.
Like in the case of Bangladesh where the house of former prime minister Sheikh Mujibur Rehman was vandalised in February, the protests in Nepal also saw a similar trend wherein landmarks were targeted.
Supral Raj Joshi, a voice actor and an entrepreneur based out of Kathmandu, conceded that as a seat of government, Singha Durbar should not have been attacked.
But to take refuge in art and history, according to him, in the present scenario is like taking sides with historical oppressors.
“The palace was built around 122 years ago by slaved labourers. They spent millions of rupees on building this; at a time when poverty and hunger was rampant,” Joshi told ThePrint.
“In the first half of the 20th century, the regime was extremely exploitative and extractive. But it is hypocritical to call it only a piece of history and art. Someone should visit Singha Durbar’s legacy to understand the oppression.”
Built by Chandra Shumsher Jung Bahadur Rana, the then Nepal prime minister, in 1903, Singha Durbar originally served as the residence of hereditary prime ministers. The autocratic Rana regime was replaced by the Shah dynasty in 1951. The Shah rule ended in 2008 after the end of a protracted civil war in the country.
Not everyone, especially those from the field of history and architecture, subscribes to Joshi’s contentions.
“No, I don’t think arson and violence (like that was witnessed recently) should be construed as vengeance and such narratives don’t apply to making a long-term memory of a nation,” Sudarshan Raj Tiwari, a retired professor of Tribhuvan University who has extensively researched on temples, towns and urban culture, told ThePrint.
“Architectural monuments need to be more subtle, and monuments should be able to generate memory of moments in the mind of the beholder…buildings (having long-standing significance) should avoid a direct graphic display of meanings attached to finite moments like the present event (i.e., the recent upheaval).”
(Edited by Tony Rai)