It is my conviction that for any art to hold its own, it is crucial to have its sahitya or textual content.
It is my conviction that for any art to hold its own, it is crucial to have its sahitya or textual content. What would classical music be without its bandishs or compositions and the various treatises written about it What would dance be without its sahitya In the same way, what would contemporary art be without its criticism I feel one of the reasons that Indian art has not been able to establish its credentials — economic and artistic —in the global arena is its lamentable lack of worthy criticism.
I wonder if it is merely a case of fast-depleting space in the various media that hankers for ‘events’ rather than any serious assessment of an artist or artiste’s aesthetic journey Admittedly there will be likes and dislikes — going by the aphorism that if there is a view, there will be viewpoint. But I think one of the greatest intellectual sins is to use knowledge to mislead audiences.
Most arts are perceived to be in the realm of the rarefied stratosphere of the unfathomable. Many feel the need for ‘decoding’ the arts. It is almost as if their emotional connect needs a rationale of the intellectual kind. I know many readers who may not attend or be able to attend concerts, recitals and exhibitions, but will read what is written about it. It is their way of remaining in touch with the arts or perhaps use it as cocktail conversation. But regrettably, instead of bringing arts closer to its audiences, most art writers end up juxtaposing gobbledygook to the level of unravelable nonsense.
It is no surprise then that a lot of so-called critiques end up further alienating the audience.
In a situation when audiences need to be quietly nudged to understand the nuances of artistic merit, if a knowledgeable writer uses his scholarship to make it more obtuse, it is sad moment. This complete lack of space in the print media for serious art writing, including criticism, has resulted in a weird situation.
There is creation of art but there is no contextualisation or serious criticism that can position the art in the global space and connect.
This needs to be explored in its innumerable dimensions and its impact over time.
The idea should be to trace this journey to explore and understand the role of the artists, the galleries, museums and critics. It is a rather sad comment on our sense of history when art writing is not taken seriously or preserved and shared with its present creators and audiences.
Over the years, fearlessness that should be the hallmark of a critic, is no longer a trait that is admired. I refer to fearlessness that comes naturally with conviction and honesty. If there is space, there will be writers and vice-versa. But many a times plain merit goes unassessed when not spotlit!
But having said that, the flip side is also true: The newspaper higher ups also need to back honesty. Having been privy to situations where artistes and artists thanks to their high profile proximity to newspaper owners and editors (who too have their favourites) bitterly complained to ensure that critics were unceremoniously dumped overnight, one can’t completely blame critics is they don’t want to stick their neck out. After all retreat is the better part of valour sometimes! Many critics have also withdrawn from the battle to stay alive to fight the war!
Dr Alka Raghuvanshi is an art writer, curator and artist and can be contacted on alkaraghuvanshi@yahoo.com
