Great-grandson of Edwin Lutyens criticises removal of Lutyens’ bust from Rashtrapati Bhavan

LONDON: The great-grandson of British architect Edwin Lutyens, Matt Ridley, has criticised the removal of the bust of his ancestor from Rashtrapati Bhavan.President Droupadi Murmu unveiled its replacement — a bust of Chakravarti Rajagopalachari, the first and last Indian governor-general of independent India — on Monday.Ridley, a science writer, posted a photo of himself on X next to Lutyens’ bust and wrote: “Sad to read that the bust of Lutyens (my great grandfather) is to be removed from the presidential palace he designed in Delhi. Here I am with it last year. I wondered at the time why his name had been removed from the plinth.”He posted a second photo of a replica of the bust on top of his bookshelf, saying: “For those suggesting I offer a home for Lutyens’s bust from Delhi, I already have a copy of it. It looks down on my desk as I write this. It was sculpted by Sir William Reid-Dick. I understand India’s wish to remove colonial statues but he was an architect, not a viceroy.”X user Oliver Lewis wrote: “This is genuinely appalling by the Govt of India. Lutyens designed the building and built for India probably the most fantastic Head of State ‘HQ’ anywhere in the world.” To which Ridley replied: “Agreed. Rashtrapati Bhavan is a more elegant, ingenious and imaginative building than Buckingham Palace, the White House, the Quai d’Orsay, the Kremlin or the presidential palace in Beijing. It carefully incorporates Buddhist, Hindu, Jain and Muslim architectural themes.”Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Priyanka Chaturvedi agreed on X, writing: “Many countries preserve the heritage and legacy of their nation’s lived history for generations to remember — the good, the bad and the ugly included to learn from — but in new India we are hell-bent on replacing it with shiny new glass domes or convention centres with no soul or cultural context.”X user Palash wrote: “Lee Kuan Yew chose NOT to remove Sir Stamford Raffles’ statue from Singapore despite pressure from many leaders in 1965. His rationale was simple — “Singapore cannot enter a new future with anger towards the past.”Former CBI director Mannem Nageswara Rao wrote an apology to Ridley on X, saying: “This zero-sum act is not decolonisation; it is petty vandalism of history.”But X user SagasofBharat wrote: “Your grandfather Edwin Lutyens wasn’t just an ‘architect’, he was a nasty racist. You should be happy Indians didn’t knock that bust of your grandfather off with a hammer.”