A Brief History of Modern Indian Art
Discourses in post colonialism were an important breakthrough which assisted scholars in positioning 3rd world art and aesthetic at par with the European and western art. It brought forth myriad issues and politics which throughout governed art history. It in fact brought a parallel historiography and an alternative voice which blatantly questioned euro-centrisism and ethnographical framework. Throughout the history if one goes through the scores of writings from late 19th century till present time on Indian art one can sense a bias reading of our culture. There has been some worth mentioning shows in west curated by Asian art historians Rasheed Araneen, Geeta Kapoor, Partha Mitter, Tapati Guha Takurda who have attempted to bring before western audience a definition of art which has its own trajectory. In brief we can say one can’t get a similarity and the same model of western art historiography while we attempt to write on our art and its growth, since it had pursued different routes in different historical juncture.
Our modernity’s story starts from colonialism. Often westernization was seen as synonymous with modernization. The realization that our artist acquired was not natural but one that was acquired language. The aesthetic sensibilities and norms of making in traditional
With the establishment of British rule all local patronages collapsed and our artist had no other way to escape the British hegemony. So the language they acquired made these artist distanced from their own reality and changed the way they perceived or visualized the world before the advent of the British. It was so well hammered in not only the artist mind but also gradually it changed our viewer’s choice. Ironically the common middle class loves realism which was based on the renaissance model and later the photographic. Thus when we talk about Indian modernity we need to talk about colonialism, its authority, subjugation and growing demand of certain kinds of works which the dominant colonizer and the local elite catered to. So its not just we get reflection of imperialism in political and social history but also in the changes that happened gradually in art and culture. Also it created a viewership and desire for this kind of art and language. If we talk about art and aesthetic before colonialism we find a very interesting variety. We see in lot of regional centers a different play of perspective, coloration and poetic interpretation. So we see that there is no parallel between west and Indian art. In the west one “ism” or movement emerged in conflict with the previous “ism”.
Revivalism was the 1st movement which resisted the westernization and emphasized on a conscious art thinking. It considered the colonial rule as destroying our identity and criticized colonial standards of judging Indian art. They emphasized that Indian art should be judged on the basis of its own standards within Indian tradition. They questioned western writers who considered Indian art to be monstrous and to be in a primitive stage and lacking scientificity, by emphasizing the spiritual, conceptual aspect of Indian art. Shantiniketan was formed during colonial time rejecting modern western education because it alienates man from nature. Important artist of this schooling were Abaniranath tagore, Benode behari mukherjee, Nandalal bose, Gaganeranath tagore, Ramkinker baij. Since they wanted to revive Indian art style they were termed as revivalist. So, to appropriate tradition became the criterion for aesthetic practice for the revivalists. It was a kind of nostalgia or longing for the past. Thus a new non western language or style was emphasized which helped the Indian artist to break free from the colonial pedagogy. This affected a lot of places all over the country but it doesn’t mean it was the only medium which was seen. Simultaneously one can see existence of academic realism, the hybrid style i.e. indo European style which was preferred mode in lot of other institutes established by British and also there was greater popularity of Ravi Varma realism in
The 40’s and 50’s generation celebrated the independence and modernity. They gave importance to themes like uncontaminated rural life in joyous manner. One can find a parallel between Nehruvian ideas of progress and modernity, industrial revolution and these artistic practices. These artists were called the progressives. They were influenced by Parisian modernism i.e. impressionism, expressionism etc. All these artists were affected by international trends but they abandoned the academic realism. In 1942/47/48 all over
But the 60’s generation rejected westernization and again raised the question of national identity or Indianity. The significant artists are J.swaminathan, kcs paniker K.G Subramanyam. They were more concerned with the past and living tradition (i.e. folk and tribal art). It was during this time that Geetha kapoor publishes her essay in a magazine called Virschik edited by Bupen and Gulam Mohamed sheikh and used the term indegenisim for the 1st time in the content of postcolonial
But K.G.Subramanyam, an eminent artist, historian, ideologue and a theorist brought a critique on this essentialist definition of Indian art as spiritual and brought a heterogeneous character of it in his work Even he celebrated the eroticism and also in his 70’s work, particularly the murals he emphasized the connectivity of art with society by criticizing the violence on women and children in Bangladesh. He also gave importance to traditional art and craft. It was he who started an art fair in
70’s generation particularly when we talk about works of Gulam Mohamed sheik, Bupen kakhar, Arpita singh are more multi layered and complex. There is an emphasis on a new kind of realism which brought in local environment with more preference to pluralism and eclecticism. Like in works of gulam sheikh we see influence of mughal paintings. They openly borrow from varied sources. The exhibition “place for people” held in new
Mid 80’s felt the impact of a group which named themselves radical painters and sculptors association. This lasted only from 1985-89. Krishna kumar, Alex Mathew, Puskin, Madhu
90’s was an important breakthrough in Indian art with lot of artists directly talking about art and activism. With the demolition of Babari masjid, a 16th century mosque in Ayodhya on dec 6th 92 there was a fractured secularism. There was an emphasis on existing in fragmented world. In varied modes artist found this expression –performance/ installation/ video. There were more metaphors of wound/ violence like that of Rumana hussain’s performances and installations, vivan’s installation memorial 1993 are worth mentioning . Sibu natesan futulity of devices, Surendaran nairs mestopese02 represents the age of false hood by use of highly complex allegories which talks about violence secrecy/ deviousness etc.
One can sense from the mid 80’s the move away from idealistic attitude towards society to a very dystopian vision of the world of unpredictability. This can be seen in all aspects of dealing whether talking about violence or globalization or global warming. Some artists take a very humorous mode, while other a very pessimistic, even some adopted the aestheticised idiom which celebrate bizarre and pain at the same time. So at one level we see there is a preference for an idiom which is ambiguous and open-ended with multiple meaning generations and on the other there is humorous directness in some artist work. Thus we get a mixed picture on one hand some artist focus on local problem and don’t attempt to universalize it; on the other hand they talk about a specific problem and then universalize it.
The recent art scene is varied and there are no well defined ideological categories these artists fall into. There are some artists who deliberately want to maintain an indigenize style but with a difference from the 60’s generation by bringing in more of local issues to discussed. One cant just fix them in limited binaries of east and west or tradition and modern of earlier generation. One can sense more of cultural nomadism as artists are not at all bounded by single style or tradition, genre of particular country or to only high art. Also there is a growing preference of new media like viedeos, digital art, installation, site specific art, performances etc. Thus there is interdisciplinary approach towards art.
The sources are varied ranging from internet, bill boards, comic strip, and animation. Artistic act today traverses both within the peripheries of the fixed notion of commodity productions and also sometimes outside it. The ambivalence of our globalised world is that of the commodity enterprise which has overpowered every attempts to resist it. Whether one constantly stay in guilt and celebrate it or reject consciously its modalities one is cornered at certain instant to fall within its ambit of commodification.
Rollie Mukherjee
Artist& Critic,
No comments:
Post a Comment