Whose aesthetic is it anyway?
This news that district officials in Assam have decided to “replace” a statue in Guwahati of Mahatma Gandhi created by one of India’s finest sculptors, Ramkinkar Baij, because it presented a “distorted image”, set off a chain of thought.
I was sharing this with a non-artist cousin and it lead to a conversation that is crying to be reproduced just for the sake of hearing what the so-called “common man” thinks of artists and artistic expressions. This is by way of tonguefirmly-in-cheek type of humour and no offense is meant or intended.
Cousin: So the Guwahati fellows think that the 1970 Gandhi statue is disproportionate! Good of them to wake up after so many years!
Self: The BJP MLA from Guwahati Siddhartha Bhattacharyya even went on record to say: Look at the disproportionate hands and feet. They do not resemble those of the Mahatma in any manner. His face is distorted, as is the pair of glasses. That is why we have decided to dismantle it and place a new statue there. Cousin: Then what is the problem? Self: But it is art and art cannot be tampered with for it belongs to the world and even not to the person who bought it – even the buyer can’t reproduce it commercially without taking permission from the artist.
Cousin: You mean even if we don’t want it, we are saddled with the pain of looking after it?
By now self was getting a little hot under my collar: Yes, but why wouldn’t you want it?
Cousin: I might have a difference of opinion about its aesthetics?
Self: You mean the same way some women wear blingy embroidered clothes and soufflé gowns and I disapprove of their aesthetics? Just as they must be disapproving of my arty type clothes?
Cousin: Exactly! Don’t deflect my attention. Let us talk about this sculpture. Why should it not be demolished to make space for a new one? Look at the picture, there is a stack of bricks behind his leg to keep him propped up. The brick prop is looking rather ugly! It must be in dire need of restoration! Remember in 1970 there was no fiberglass in use? So the cement statute must be falling apart. And it rains so heavily there. Besides, if it falls on people you will cry negligence!
Self: Then restoration was the answer. Why replace it?
Cousin: Why not? Why is everything you guys create so sacrosanct? Self getting indignant: Because this statute has been made by Ramkinkar Baij! He was a great artist, a father figure of contextual modernism. The iconic and monumental sculptures of Yaksha and Yakshini that stand outside the RBI building in Delhi are also Baij’s work.
Cousin: So? Does it mean that every work an artist creates has to be great? Even if the people who have to see this sculpture everyday think it is disproportionate?
Self: Every art created will not necessarily be great. But art isn’t about looking for similarities. And that’s the point, it is an interpretation, and a perspective. If it is indeed a Baij sculpture, it is a priceless work of art. If there has been any distortion, it is because the statue was whitewashed with lime in the early years. Later, coats of plastic paint four times a year — Independence Day, Republic Day, Gandhi Jayanti and Martyr’s Day were the norm it seems. Distortion or damage can’t be ruled out.
Cousin (amidst much chuckles): You mean the safediwalla is to blame!?! Then work on sensitizing and better looking after your art, than bleating later. From what I recall, even during his time not everyone appreciated his art. His imagery was different from the “usual” Bengal school. And Tagore supported him and so his works are there in Shantiniketan. So if Tagore had not supported him, he too would have been languishing in a garret!
Self (ignoring the last barb): There are reports that a collaborative project between the university and the National Gallery of Modern Art to recast Baij’s works in bronze, to ensure longevity, is in “the final stages”.
Cousin: You mean another art institution is already creating a Gandhi statue to replace it? Then why are we fighting! Let us get on with demolishing this Rakhi left-over mithai.
That was the most brilliant suggestion in case I didn’t want to come to a point of fisticuffs, and as we chomped, I couldn’t help but think about all those replica-oriented people whose figurative aesthetics are exactly that – replicas. So how does one explain that what is known as distortion in so-called normal parlance, too is a valid and artistically accepted point of perspective. But in a society where there is growing intolerance and lines drawn as to what constitutes political correctness, whose aesthetics will prevail?