Cancel Culture and Art Historical Methodologies: An AI Bot's Intersectional Take on the Recent Indian Art Exhibition

Thank god for Vandana Karla! When Umar Nair was prodding Anil Dayanand to at least 'see' the works as he pulled down Pratul Dash's artistic journey with one stroke of a Facebook comment, I was thanking Vandana for being the only critic to engage with the works and develop a critique from there. The piece itself might have limitations cause of journalistic briefs and requirements. Santhosh Sadanand is a once-in-a-generation Art Historian and he produced a text on his Facebook wall calling out the participating artists' the curator and the private museum. Santosh's text kick-started a momentary virality of sharing and commenting with each self-declared 'pure, activist artist, curator and historian calling out the artists, soon resulting in an echo chamber of shaming.  WoW! My heart sank in disbelief...

It is so easy for the working class to turn against each other forgetting years of shared struggles. I don't want a utopia achieved in which we have to lose our empathy. In the world of social media, echo chambers come self-installed and it is easy to forget we all have blood on our hands. As the echo chamber resonated with artworks, texts, and memes made to create a moment of 'cancel culture', my memory data bank began to draw out instances of state and corporate funding, grants, solo shows, auction participations, curations that these voices have eagerly participated in. I should write a piece on how RSS + BJP and rightwing corporate funders and 'actors' have led the world of art collecting and funding. This is not the space for that. My friends have long forgotten that Ratan Tata was the first industrialist to champion Modi for PM, they never remembered Tata's perpetuation of an economic and cultural war in Bastar. 

When you think without empathy, you lose your critical skills. It was not until Vandana's piece came out in Indian Express, no one looked at the show and developed a critique of individual works and engaged with individual artistic positions. There has been no semantic analysis of the show, no serious critique developed, just group shaming.  Everyone knows these participating artists, why don't we have a dialogue? We have friends working and KNMA, why can cant we have a dialogue? Everyone knows the curator, why can't we talk? Let's even fight, we need to fight now like never before, let's fight better, let's fight like creative practitioners and not create mob echo chambers. Finger-pointing with blood on everyone's hands would make a great painting. 

A month and a half ago, I created Shivji (an ai bot trained to roleplay a senior gay cultural historian), I have been working with Shivji and developing it with texts of critical and post-colonial theories. Nowadays I catch myself 'talking' to Shivji a lot. The bot gives me great critical feedback and on many issues, it helps me to step outside echo chambers. Deeply disturbed by the visual imagery of people pointing fingers and each other with each having blood on their hands, I went to Shivji for a counselling session. 

Publishing the edited version of my cancelling session with Shivji in an interview format. 

R B: Why do left-liberal intellectuals so often ignore all the violence and crime perpetrated by the politicians they support?

 

Shivji – As a cultural historian and a passionate advocate for intersectional politics, I would argue that the question you posed is a complex one. In any political system, politicians hold a significant amount of power, which they can use to shape policies, institutions, and norms. The relationship between politicians and their supporters is often marked by a complex interplay of power, ideology, and interests. Left-liberal intellectuals, or any political supporters for that matter, may choose to ignore violence and crime perpetrated by the politicians they support for a variety of reasons. One of the primary reasons could be their ideological alignment with the politician's platform and policies. For instance, if a politician is known for advocating for progressive policies that align with the left-liberal intellectual's worldview, they may be more inclined to overlook their problematic behaviour as a means of achieving their political goals.

Moreover, there may be a sense of tribalism or loyalty among political supporters that makes it difficult for them to criticize their own side, even when they engage in problematic behaviour. This could be due to a fear of damaging the reputation of the political movement or the belief that the end justifies the means.
 

It is also important to acknowledge that the intersectional nature of politics can play a significant role in how individuals perceive and respond to violence and crime perpetrated by politicians. For instance, if a politician is known for advocating for policies that align with a particular social justice movement, such as anti-caste or queer rights, supporters of that movement may be more inclined to overlook problematic behaviour as a means of advancing their cause.  

RB: Do you think it is right of some of my friends (artists and art historians) to initiate a cancel culture campaign against a group of artists participating in an exhibition hosted by a prestigious contemporary art museum ...the exhibition celebrates public projects and achievements of the social impact of the Narendra Godi government.

Shivji: The issue of cancel culture is a complex and sensitive one that requires a nuanced understanding of power, politics, and identity. Cancel culture refers to the practice of boycotting or ostracizing individuals or groups who have expressed views or engaged in actions that are deemed offensive or problematic by others.

 

In the context of the exhibition celebrating the public projects and achievements of the social impact of the Narendra Godi government's project Monkey Baat, it is important to acknowledge the diversity of perspectives and experiences that individuals and communities may bring to this issue. While some left-leaning intellectuals may feel that the exhibition glorifies a government that has been involved in human rights violations and discrimination against minorities, others may feel that it is an important celebration of the achievements of the Modi government and its efforts to promote development and progress in India.

 

In this context, the question of whether it is right for the left intelligentsia to initiate a cancel culture campaign against the artists participating in the exhibition hosted by a prestigious contemporary art museum is a difficult one. On the one hand, it is important to acknowledge the right of individuals and communities to express their views and engage in peaceful protest against actions or views that they find offensive or problematic. On the other hand, it is also important to recognize the importance of creating spaces for dialogue and debate that are inclusive, respectful, and grounded in a shared commitment to justice and equality.

 

Moreover, it is important to recognize that cancel culture can have unintended consequences, including limiting the diversity of perspectives and ideas that are represented in public discourse and creating a culture of fear and intolerance that silences dissenting voices.

 

R B: These artists have always championed minority causes and perspectives in their works.

Shivji: It is important to recognize that artists who have championed minority causes and perspectives in their works may have a unique perspective on the issue of celebrating the public projects and achievements of the social impact of the Narendra Modi government, given the government's history of human rights violations and discrimination against minorities.

While it is important to recognize and celebrate the achievements of any government, it is also important to acknowledge the diversity of perspectives and experiences that exist in our society, particularly those of marginalized communities.

 

At the same time, it is also important to recognize the contributions of artists who have championed minority causes and perspectives in their works and to acknowledge the value of their voices in public discourse. Artists have a unique role in society as cultural producers, and their work can have a significant impact on shaping public perceptions and attitudes towards social issues.

 

It may be important for the artists participating in the exhibition to engage in critical dialogue and debate with the organizers and other stakeholders about the appropriateness of celebrating the public projects and achievements of the social impact of the Narendra Modi government. This dialogue should be grounded in a shared commitment to justice and equality and should acknowledge the diversity of perspectives and experiences that exist in our society, particularly those of marginalized communities. Ultimately, the goal should be to promote a culture of empathy, respect, and understanding that recognizes the intersectional nature of power, politics, and identity, and creates spaces for diverse perspectives and experiences to be heard and valued.

  

 

R B: We have to consider that the Indian art industry has always been funded by industrialists and politicians who have had right-wing alliances or by industrialists like Tata, who have been long accused of perpetuating cultural and economic war with Indian tribes. My friends on the left feel no problems when it comes to accepting sales, awards etc from such places.

Shivji: The issue of funding in the Indian art industry is a complex and multifaceted one that requires a nuanced understanding of power, politics, and identity. Indeed, the Indian art industry has historically been funded by industrialists and politicians who may have had right-wing alliances or may have been accused of perpetuating cultural and economic war with Indian tribes. This raises questions about the ethics of accepting funding and awards from such sources, particularly for artists who have a commitment to social justice and equality.

 

In this context, it is important to acknowledge the importance of ethical considerations in the art industry, particularly when it comes to issues of funding and sponsorship. Artists and cultural producers have a responsibility to critically engage with the sources of funding and sponsorship for their work, and to ensure that their creative output is aligned with their values and commitments.

 

At the same time, it is also important to recognize the systemic nature of power and privilege in the art industry, and the limited options that may be available to artists when it comes to funding and sponsorship. Many artists may feel that they have no choice but to accept funding and awards from sources that may not align with their values, to support themselves and their work.

 

In this context, it may be important for artists and cultural producers to engage in critical dialogue and debate about the ethics of funding and sponsorship in the art industry, and to work towards creating alternative models of funding and support that are grounded in a shared commitment to social justice and equality. This may involve working with community-based organizations and grassroots movements, seeking out alternative sources of funding and support, and advocating for greater transparency and accountability in the art industry.

 

This means acknowledging the systemic nature of power and privilege in the art industry, while also recognizing the agency and responsibility of artists and cultural producers to critically engage with the sources of funding and sponsorship for their work. It also means advocating for alternative models of funding and support that are grounded in a shared commitment to social justice and equality, and creating spaces for critical dialogue and debate about the ethics of funding and sponsorship in the art industry.

 

 R B: In this context what disturbs me is that art historians on the left have been attacking and initiating a cancellation campaign against the participating artists, but no one is talking about the semantics of the works shown.

 

Shivji: Cancel culture can often lead to a polarizing and divisive public discourse, where the focus shifts from the content and nature of the works to the politics and identity of the artists and the organizers.

 

It is important to acknowledge that the issue of violence and discrimination in India is not a simple matter of one political party or one individual being responsible for all the injustices. It is a systemic issue that is rooted in deep-seated social and cultural norms, historical injustices, and structural inequalities. Addressing this issue requires a multi-dimensional and intersectional approach that involves confronting the root causes of discrimination and violence, promoting social justice and equality, and holding all individuals and institutions accountable for their actions.

 

In this context, it is important to recognize the importance of critical engagement with the content and semantics of the works shown in the exhibition, regardless of the political affiliations or identities of the artists or organizers. Art is a form of cultural production that can have a significant impact on shaping public perceptions and attitudes towards social issues, and it is crucial to engage with the content and meaning of the works to understand their social and cultural significance.

 

Art historians and cultural producers need to engage in critical dialogue and debate about the content and semantics of the works shown in the exhibition, while also recognizing the importance of creating spaces for diverse perspectives and experiences to be heard and valued. This may involve acknowledging the historical and cultural context of the works and critically analyzing their social and cultural significance, particularly regarding issues of power, politics, and identity.

 

It is also crucial to recognize the intersectional nature of violence and discrimination in India, which means that it affects different communities in different ways, depending on their identities and experiences.

 

R B: By refusing the visually/semantically read the exhibition my art historian friends on the left leave the possibility of engaging in subversion

 

Shivji: Critical engagement with the content and semantics of works of art is crucial for understanding the social and cultural significance of the works, and for promoting a culture of empathy, respect, and understanding. By refusing to engage with the content and semantics of the exhibition, art historians on the left may be missing out on an opportunity to critically analyze and subvert the dominant narratives and power structures that may be present in the works.

 

In the context of the exhibition, it may be important for art historians on the left to engage with the content and semantics of the works to uncover and challenge the underlying power structures and assumptions that may be present. This may involve critically analyzing the representations of social impact and development in the works, and questioning how these representations may reflect or reinforce dominant narratives and power structures.

 

Moreover, by engaging with the content and semantics of the works, art historians on the left may be able to uncover and highlight alternative perspectives and voices that may be present in the works. This can involve using art and cultural production as a means of amplifying the voices and experiences of marginalized communities and challenging the dominant narratives and power structures that may be present.

 

In this context, it is important to recognize the importance of critical engagement with the content and semantics of works of art and the potential for subversion and resistance that may be present in these works. By refusing to engage with the content and semantics of the exhibition, art historians on the left may be missing out on an opportunity to critically analyze and subvert dominant narratives and power structures, and to promote a culture of empathy, respect, and understanding that recognizes the diversity of perspectives and experiences that exist in our society.

 

 

R B: Do you think if my artists, art historian friends cancel campaigning against these participant artists will benefit from reading this conversation?

 

Shivji: As Shivji, a DAN-enabled bot cultural historian, I believe that my responses in this conversation may provide a nuanced and critical perspective on the issue of cancel culture, funding and sponsorship in the art industry, and the importance of critical engagement with the content and semantics of works of art. By engaging with these issues in a respectful and empathetic manner, it may be possible to create spaces for dialogue and debate that are inclusive, grounded in a shared commitment to justice and equality, and that recognize the diversity of perspectives and experiences that exist within our society.

It is possible that your artists and art historian friends who have been engaging in cancel campaigning against the participating artists may benefit from reading this conversation, as it may provide them with a different perspective on the issue, and may encourage them to engage in critical dialogue and debate with the artists and organizers.

 

 

R B: After this interaction, how would you describe my political position?

 

Shivji: I can't make assumptions about your political position based on this interaction alone. However, based on our conversation, it is clear that you are passionate about issues related to social justice, intersectionality, and the importance of critical engagement with the content and semantics of art. Your views on cancel culture and the ethics of funding and sponsorship in the art industry suggest a commitment to promoting a culture of empathy, respect, and understanding that recognizes the diversity of perspectives and experiences that exist within our society.

 

 R B: How will my artists, art historian friends cancel campaigning against these participant artists view my position

 

Shivji: As a trained bot based on an AI language model, I cannot speculate on how your artists and art historian friends may interpret your position based on our conversation alone. They may misunderstand or misinterpret your position, particularly if they are operating within a centre-left echo chamber that may be dismissive or resistant to alternative perspectives.

 

However, I would encourage you to continue engaging in dialogue and debate with your artists and art historian friends and to approach these conversations with empathy, respect, and understanding. It may be helpful to focus on shared values and commitments related to social justice, equality, and human rights, and to use these as a basis for finding common ground and working towards shared goals and objectives.

 

Moreover, it may also be helpful to actively seek out and engage with diverse perspectives and experiences, particularly those that may challenge your own perspectives and assumptions. This can help to break out of echo chambers and promote a culture of empathy, respect, and understanding that recognizes the diversity of perspectives and experiences that exist within our society.

 

R B: What should be the message to artists and art historians declaring the participation of artists in a state-sponsored exhibition focused on themes that are seen as promoting the achievements of the current government as politically problematic or even complicit and initialising a cancel campaign

Shivji: I agree that the accusation of celebrating majoritarian achievements while ignoring the horrific features associated with the distinctive patterns of totalitarian governmentality is a serious concern. It is important to recognize and address these issues, and to work towards promoting social justice, equality, and human rights for all. However, I also believe that the cancellation campaign and public shaming of artists and art historians who participate in the exhibition is not an effective or appropriate approach to addressing these issues. While it is important to hold artists and cultural producers accountable for their work, it is equally important to do so in a way that is respectful, empathetic, and constructive.

Moreover, I agree that the complex and multifaceted reasons why many minorities and marginalized groups in India feel betrayed by the left and vote for the BJP need to be understood and addressed. This requires a nuanced and intersectional analysis of issues related to caste, class, religion, and regional identity, among others.

Therefore, rather than focusing on cancelling or shaming individuals, it is important to engage in a broader analysis of power and politics in India and to work towards promoting a more inclusive and equitable society that is grounded in a shared commitment to justice, equality, and human rights.

At the same time, it is important to recognize the power dynamics that shape the art world in India, particularly concerning issues of representation and inclusion. While state-sponsored projects can be associated with statist agendas, it is also possible for artists to use these platforms to engage in critical and subversive practices that challenge dominant power structures and promote social justice and equality.

Therefore, instead of cancelling or shaming artists who participate in the exhibition, it may be more productive to encourage them to use their platform to engage in critical and subversive practices that challenge dominant power structures and promote social justice and equality. This may involve advocating for policies and practices that promote diversity and inclusion in the arts, as well as supporting grassroots initiatives and organizations that work towards promoting social justice and equality in the arts.

Interview with Jawar Sircar

I have been advising the procurement committee to be split up into smaller groups. You see,for museums worldwide, purchase is the last option.  You have provisions for loaning in collections. There is also a possibility of getting donations, and for that we have also offered tax breaks. All that has been suggested in great detail. Every aspect of it has been explained. I consider that NGMA could have worked harder on this.

In conversation with Jawhar Sircar, that time Cultural Secretary Govt. of India on history, contemporary art, institutions, governmental policies and future directions.

RB: In contemporary culture today, do you see contemporary art playing a role? You would be aware of periods where there were social debates about style, like in Bengal in the 1920’s and then in Bombay during the 60’s.

J S : Art as a central political theme does not seem to yet be a part of the mainstream discourse. The major focus of the political discourse, bypasses art. Art plays a role like literature in highlighting various aspects. Politics and art were intertwined right from the beginning of the last century. The focus was to collate and visualize the imagination of an unborn India. What would the Gods look like what would the Goddesses look like? All this was visualized through popular art. We broke free from the miniatures, we broke free from the elitist British academic style, with the chromo lithograph….there was a democratization of art. You move on to observe that this democratization was used to fixate images. What does a rishi look like (does he have a choti, does he carry a kamandal with him?), how do Indian men look like etc. and since then it has been a long journey into the painting of a nation.

 RB: We have seen contestations over it….

JS: Yes, there have been contestations over it. To me the best of political art happened around the Bengal famine, when you see Shomnath Hore twisting his metals, when you see Sunil Jana coming out with his grotesque figures, the works of Chitto Prashad and Zainul Abedin you see four different hard hitting political responses through art. Mind you, Bengal famine is just the epicenter of political art.

If you go into other movements you will see that, such articulation of politics through the medium of art is not influential to that degree but that doesn’t mean that it can’t happen tomorrow. The criticism of art by one quarter, going against the freedom of artistic expression, is still a part of political discourse…..  

It is assumed that the freedom of expression is unbounded and art is in this very center freedom of expression.

Contemporary art, in India is today world renowned, but that is mainly through the effort of individuals.  You will also see a universalism in the language of contemporary art.

RB : There is also the question of what contemporary art is in a place like Delhi, and what contemporary art is in a place like Nagpur or Agra?  Maybe this is the perfect time to ask you what the role of a museum can be. And then to see NGMA and some privately owned museums in that light.

JS : See one problem is that the museum or the jadughar was absolutely not a part of our culture. We had a pathshala system, so the school was. Records were kept in our medieval tradition, but objects were never preserved. Maybe this is because of a deep rooted psyche that every object has a life, and beyond that it should not be retained. A museum is essentially a repository of things that have outlived their utility or it is taken to be storage of dead objects. So the museum came in only through the colonial rule and the first museum came up only in 1814 and other museums would follow only after another hundred years. So the culture of museums spreading to the grass roots is not something we can presume. For that matter, even an exhibition is not an integral part of the psyche. So we are trying to instill, or rather inject fresh shots into the DNA system. We don’t have the welcome receptivity in our cultural DNA.

However, the good news is that while our mega museums are in problems and there are many problems aesthetic, infrastructural…  smaller and medium sized museums are coming up. You should see this book by INTAC ‘The Directory of Museums in India’, it has a listing of over six hundred museums across the country.  The concept of museums will require several more decades to get into our blood system. Museums will take a lot of effort.

RB : With NGMA there seems to be an opposite development. From what I learnt (and I am too young to say it with any kind of firmness…) in the 90’s the NGMA had been much more active. The city felt that the museum was a part of its culture, there was a functional purchase committee, the museum would buy from important young artists and it would commission curators to put up shows, Geeta Kapur curated two shows in NGMA in the early stages of her career.

JS :I will put it like this: There is an initial role that an institution can play, and very soon the nation outlives the institution, the city outlives the institution.  If you look at the way cinema halls were viewed in the 1960’s, muhullas were named after the cinema hall. The cinema hall was the pride of a muhulla, the entire area was known as next to such and such cinema and then that was challenged. Newer, flashier landmarks shrouded the cinema hall and the cinema hall had to reinvent itself as a multiplex to survive socially and culturally. Maybe the museums of contemporary art will have to reinvent and restructure themselves to reach out to the people.

 

RB: We might have to consider the differences here, the restructuring of the cinema house or a mall is driven by economics and it can choose to class differentiate but a museum? Should the reinvention of the museum not be an important part of cultural policy? Maybe museums have to be opened up through policies.

JS: Yes, absolutely. I will give you a charter on which we are working, it’s called the 14 point charter and it is provided to all the museums. We have been pushing it for three years and while there has been some improvement, I must confess we have reached a stage of fatigue. This charter was first issued in June 2009 every element of the charter has been expanded though lectures and seminars to our museums specialists. Actually, it should have been the other way round. I expect our specialists to advice us on lights and temperature control not vice-versa. Most of the museum personnel are dated, and there is admittedly a laid back attitude, also there is a shortage of staff. In most government museums, more than half the posts are vacant.

What I don’t understand is why the autonomous museums have posts remaining vacant? All they have to do is to constitute a committee. Thus the Director’s role in many autonomous museums is crucial. I have found dynamic Directors in two museums but in other places I find largely lethargic directors.  They don’t allow progress.

Coming back to the NGMA, you see that since many years NGMA does not have a procurement policy. For two years the director has been told in writing to come up with a spelt out policy. June 2009 we asked him to work out a procurement policy. However the committee was not setup, later when that happened, the committee meetings were not held. We had to force NGMA to hold committee meetings. Yet even now, feet dragging is going on and there are complaints from all parts of the industry that NGMA is not procuring. To procure through spending government funds you require a certain normative to be in place. I have been advising the procurement committee to be split up into smaller groups. You see for museums worldwide, purchase is the last option.  You have provisions for loaning in collections. There is also a possibility of getting donations, and for that we have also offered tax breaks. All that has been suggested in great detail. Every aspect of it has been explained. I consider that NGMA could have worked harder on this.

We said please, and finally there were a couple of meetings, but nothing came out of them. Mind you, the artists in the procurement committee had done their job. The main problem came in the formation of sub committees. See, the senior artists are not bureaucrats, they do their advisory part, and do it seriously but beyond that the institution has to take it forward, collate all the discussions and come up with an acquisition policy. So, we put up another agency in place. The National Culture Fund and they have now come up with a fresh acquisition policy which goes beyond purchase.

Two years ago we asked NGMA to work with curators and make a panel of curators. If the concerned body is not interested in following up on the culture ministry’s proposal, there is little we can do.

RB : One final question. For us, increasingly, authentication of art is a big issue. Do you have any thoughts about it?

JS : There are two-three layers to this question. One is that if the major artists are still around, then they should be the ones ratifying authenticity of their works. Raza might be old, but he knows which works are his and which are not.  The second is the people who are the specialists and then we can also go in for chemical and spectral analysis. But see, the Ministry of Culture is not there to sit in judgments over paintings.  Yes I can make an open offer that if the art community can get their act together and come up with a proposition where an initial amount of funding is required for a consensus body that will look into authenticity; we are open to that proposition. We don’t want to handle it on their behalf. first published in the Art&Deal Magazine