What India lost when Parliament moved out of its old home

Sobhana Nair's "Housing the Republic" is more than an architectural history; it is a love letter to the old Parliament House, now known as Samvidhan Sadan, and the turbulent, imperfect institution that thrived within its circular walls. As a political science student and journalist who covered parliamentary proceedings, Sobhana Nair personally experienced the building's unique atmosphere.

Jairam Ramesh's foreword highlights the political transformation of India's parliamentary space, likening it to Joseph Goebbels' assertion about using the Reichstag "to use the arsenal of democracy in order to assault it with its own weapon." Sobhana delves into the Parliament House's evolution, narrating its journey from a colonial Council House to the heart of a republic.

Among the figures she profiles is Lord Hardinge, the architect of New Delhi's conception, who arrived in India 16 days after missing his London train, determined not to let the new capital resemble a typical British cantonment. The final design, a compromise between Edwin Lutyens' imaginative and idealistic vision and Herbert Baker's pragmatic approach, resulted in a circular corridor that Sobhana considers among the building's most democratic spaces—a place for informal politics, gossip, and tea breaks.

In contrast, the new Parliament, while spacious and well-equipped, lacks such personal spaces and an iconic central hall where party colors faded and public expectations briefly united rivals. The old chambers facilitated close proximity among members, allowing for real-time persuasion and cross-party debates in a lively environment.

The new building, however, isolates members in echo chambers, with cramped seating and divided spaces. While the new Parliament occupies a triangular site, maintaining visual continuity with the old, the human scale has changed, and informal closeness among lawmakers has diminished. Despite the new building's improvements, Sobhana emphasizes that architecture cannot safeguard democracy; it is the people who inhabit its chambers and claim the institution as their own who do.

The old Parliament's imperfections fostered a culture of friction and improvisation, while the new structure, while more orderly, raises questions about whether it deepens democratic life.