Latest update November 2nd, 2024 1:00 AM
Oct 29, 2024 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom
…Peeping Tom
In Georgetown, where it can be scorching hot most days there lies a respite from the heat and humdrum of everyday life—the Georgetown Botanical Gardens. But this sanctuary of flora is now at the center of a curious debate, one that opens questions about purpose, preservation, and the precarious tilt of change.
The current government, with the classic sweep of the eraser that accompanies their tenure, stands ready to give the Gardens what one might call a “facelift.” But what does this mean, exactly, for a space so rooted in botany and history?
The term botanic itself derives from botany, that age-old science dedicated to plants and plant life. Our Botanical Gardens began, not as some whimsical decoration, but as a purposeful establishment for the study of native flora and the introduction of economic plants from other tropical regions. It was 1877 when the Royal Agriculture Society successfully petitioned the colonial Court of Policy to create what would become Georgetown’s very own haven of horticulture. Seventy-eight hectares once used for sugar production were transformed into a grand vision: a repository for Guyana’s natural heritage, a laboratory for agriculture, and, yes, a peaceful escape.
From its inception, the Gardens were meant to be more than just a park; they were a place of learning, conservation, and national pride. Planation Vlissengen, a colonial sugar estate, became the nucleus of the Gardens, nestled from Vlissengen Road to Sheriff Street and beyond, encompassing nearly 200 acres. A far cry from what some may consider an “exhibition piece,” the Botanic Gardens was dedicated to the study of flora, and for generations, it has hosted an intricate display of tropical beauty, complete with ponds, water lilies, and the unforgettable palm-lined pathways.
Under the watchful eye of early curators, the Gardens evolved with careful intention. When Trinidadian botanist Mr. H. Prestoe and Mr. John Frederick Waby arrived to develop the grounds in the 1870s, they poured their knowledge into the project, laying out the Gardens as a living museum of plants. The talented Mr. George Samuel Jenman took over in 1879, traveling far and wide across Guyana to collect and identify over 8,000 species of plants, all carefully labeled. Additional ponds were dug to aid the land’s irrigation, flowerbeds took shape, and pathways were carved. Between these curators’ hands and nature’s cycles, the Botanical Gardens became both a refuge and a resource for agricultural knowledge.
The Garden’s grand avenues was crisscrossed by “kissing bridges” and shaded by towering palms. And here lies the importance of Mr. Jenman’s vision. He was more than a curator; he was a bridge between the native flora of Guyana and its people, a task he took on without fanfare or spectacle. A forward-thinking horticulturist, he dedicated 23 years as the first Superintendent of the Gardens until his death in 1902. His legacy is visible in every bend and bough of the Botanical Gardens.
By the 1940s and ’50s, these lush, palm-lined avenues became one of the most frequented place in the city. A bandstand provided musical entertainment on some days. The Garden’s appeal stretched across demographics: it was a peaceful walk for some, a trove of knowledge for others.
This, however, is where the problems began however. A lot of additions to the Gardens led slowly to a deviation from its original purpose. It became picnic grounds, a place where lovers could spend some time together or where families would go to relax. Cars parked deeper into the Gardens in which amorous activities took place. A zoological park and other buildings were added.
The one person who recognized the dangers of what had happened over time to the Botanic Gardens was former President David Granger. In October 2019, the Guyana Chronicle reported that the then-President proposed changes that would have honoured the Gardens’ original spirit. He envisioned a “living library” of Guyana’s trees, where every species, from mango and guava to the thousand shades of the greenheart, crabwood, and purpleheart, would stand on display for future generations. His was a vision rooted in heritage and education, maintaining the Gardens as a place of natural learning.
Today, the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) government has taken a markedly different approach. Their plans hint at something far less ambitious and far more performative—a makeover that seems to relegate this botanical jewel to a supporting role in a spectacle.
In what can only be described as a dazzling bout of amnesia, they appear poised to abandon the Gardens’ legacy in favour of creating a mere attraction. Such transformation, it seems, would see the Gardens’ long-standing mission uprooted, replaced by superficial ornaments and activities aimed at momentary amusement.
What does it mean, really, to turn a place like the Botanical Gardens into an “exhibition”? In its essence, an exhibition is fleeting—a display that demands little more from its audience than a glance or a cursory appreciation before moving on to the next point of interest. An exhibition does not compel one to ask questions, to understand, or to learn in the way a botanical garden should. Imagine a future where the next generation of Guyanese children no longer stroll through these gardens in search of Guyana’s diverse plant species, but instead encounter pathways lined with aesthetic embellishments designed to please the eye without nourishing the mind. Imagine the loss of purpose and identity.
The trouble with the government’s current plan is not just the seeming dismissal of the Gardens’ heritage; it’s the short-sightedness. When one considers the vast ecological wealth of Guyana, the importance of a botanical space like this becomes evident.
As a country endowed with vast natural resources, Guyana has a responsibility to preserve the spaces where its ecological legacy can thrive. To turn the Botanic Gardens into an exhibition is to undermine not only its purpose but its promise. It is to erase the tireless work of men like Mr. Jenman, who devoted their lives to creating a space that was, at its core, for the people of Guyana and their natural heritage.
The government might do well to revisit Mr. Granger’s vision, one that respects and builds upon the Gardens’ legacy as a living repository. Such a plan would honour the Gardens’ botanical spirit, ensuring that each tree, each flower, and each bridge remains a part of Guyana’s educational repository.
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)
(A dazzling bout of amnesia)
October 1st turn off your lights to bring about a change!
Nov 02, 2024
Kaieteur Sports- Today promises to be an exhilarating day of football action as the Petra-Courts Optical Pee Wee Under-11 School’s Football Tournament crowns its 2024 champions at the Ministry of...…Peeping Tom Kaieteur News- In every democracy worth its salt, the press serves as the watchdog, the thorn in the side... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – There is an alarming surge in gun-related violence, particularly among younger... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]