State of Art

As the controversy around Amol Palekar’s speech still rages, the Culture Ministry issues a statement saying it will honour the suggestions by NGMA’s advisory panel.

Two days after Amol Palekar criticised the Union Ministry of Culture for scrapping off the advisory committee of local artists at the National Gallery of Modern Art (NGMA), the ministry has now issued a statement clarifying, ‘Advisory Committees of NGMA Mumbai, Bengaluru and Delhi have not been dissolved. Their terms have ended recently (Mumbai and Bengaluru committee terms ended on 15 November 2018 and of Delhi on 17 January 2019). The committees are in the process of being reconstituted.’

On Friday, at the inauguration of the exhibition ‘Inside the Empty Box’— a retrospective on the memory of the renowned artist Prabhakar Barwe, as a guest-speaker Palekar took the stand against a supposed move that would increase the central government’s control over the gallery exhibitions. But as the clarification came about, the statement reads, ‘the recommendations of previous Advisory Committees (which are upto December 2019 for NGMA, Mumbai) will be honored and exhibitions of artists will be held as proposed. The new advisory committee will take a decision relating to future exhibitions.’

But amidst this criticism and clarification, a video recording of the curator Jesal Thacker and panelists repeatedly interrupting Palekar to stick to speaking about Barve went viral on the Internet. It also sparked a debate on strengthening breach of the freedom of expression and political censorship. And according to Palekar, the occasion was apt for him to address these issues. “My argument is, in fact, this was just the right platform to raise the issue because I was raising questions related to the NGMA. I mean, if I don’t raise questions on the workings of the NGMA at the NGMA, then where should I raise them? Should I raise them at a private dinner at the dining table?” he quips.

Jesal, who has been working on the project for more than ten years, clarifies that her intention to intervene didn’t come from a political standing, but just out of respect for the subject of her work. “I have been working on this show for years, and he didn’t understand my sentiment that I want the evening to be about Barve. And I am not opposing his views, and he is right where he stands but you can also see that Ministry of Culture has come up with their own statement,” she shares.

As a strong proponent of fighting censorship of any kind, Palekar viewed this as an act of censoring his expression and believes that such acts of censorships have increased recently, as he says,“I’d say censorship now is increased manifold as compared to earlier on. I have petitioned in the Supreme Court against censorship in cinema. In the Mumbai High court, I’ve petitioned against censorship in theatre. I’ve been fighting censorship all my life. And I will continue to do so.”

—With inputs from Subhash K Jha