We are on the same Boat Brother: Probir Gupta

     

In the dystopia of Jihadist contemporaneity, the history of Judaism in India offers Gupta a ray of hope...a beautiful constellation of memories and histories through which one can celebrate alterity and propose (a) new humanism(s). Jews of India, (unlike) the Jews elsewhere, have had a peaceful history and though, economically they have never been able to match up with their Euro American  counterparts, they have led a happy life here, living comfortably with Hindus, Muslims and Christians[1].  In the year 2006, Gupta painted the famous ‘The Bene Israel Family[2]’ (Acrylic and iron oxides on canvas). This Bene Israeli[3] community rose to prominence and thrived in the Indian sub continent, at a time when Jewish communities faced persecution in Europe. The distorted pink background draws on the history of the Holocaust whilst the Bene Israel family emerges from this background in indigenous attire, as native Indians of the subcontinent. Along with this, there was another canvas ‘Islam the Caretaker of the Bethel Synagogue[4]’.

 This beautiful reality was dismissed as whimsical myth making by his American white audience. As a response Gupta comes up with a deeply researched and layered ‘We are on the Same Boat Brother’, a work through which the artist digs deeper to present the Jewish synagogues in Kolkata as symbols of the accumulative heterogeneous culture of the Indic subcontinent[5].

  

‘Islam the Caretaker of the Bethel Synagogue’ depicted the family of Khalil[6] (a poor Muslim family of Orissa) who have been looking after the Bethel Synagogue for many years now, and with the dwindling Jew population of the city, two of his sons[7] (along with a have also begun looking after another nearly synagogue[9].   The assemblage itself (re) presents this vision of utopia, through layers of forgetting and nostalgia. Texts, objects and sculptures engage in multiple oxymoronic relationships, as if consciously highlighting the tension between the dominant dystopias and hidden utopias.  The sewing machine (like the distorted pink background of the ‘Bene Israel Family’) evokes a history of the Jewish History Museum  (Berlin), even as the video projection lingers on the contemporary history of the Jewish community of Kolkata, the two synagogues and their caretakers. We see the facade of the ‘Jewish School’, with a steady stream of young Muslim girls (students) gushing out, and an interaction with the owner of the city’s oldest Jewish bakery[10].   Gupta’s assemblages have a definite scenographic quality, and the ambiance created is unmistakably rooted in the ethos of old ‘Calcutta’ interiors, the figure of (goddess) Saraswati, the typewriter perched on a table, a large fishbone standing on an anchor, found photography and text, come together in both a critique of fashion and a proposal for alterity.

---

---

[1] http://clarionjournal.typepad.com/clarion_journal_of_spirit/2007/07/the-jews-of-ind.html

[2] Currently in the collection of Saatchi and Saatchi

[3] The Bene Israel Jews speak Hindi and Marathi, the languages of the Maharashtra state. Once thriving and populous, the Bene Israel group now accounts for about 3500 to 4000 people. Most of them live in Mumbai, and only a few families live in Calcutta and Delhi. The majority of the Bene Israel, which is ten times their population in India, moved to Israel.

[4] Which has been acquired by a collector from Morocco

[5] The Jews of Calcutta came from Iraq and Syria and were known as the Baghdadi Jews. They were a prosperous lot. Then two events — the Independence of India and the creation of the promised land, Israel — changed the fate of the community here.

[6] Whose father Moharram Khan began working in the synagogue.

[7] Anwar Khan and Imraan Khan. Anwar, who are in their late 30’s.

[8] Magen David or the Shield of David stands on Biplabi Rashbehari Bose Road (previously Canning Street). It’s a five-minute walk from Bethel. Magen David has a tall spire that rises above the structure like a beacon, painted a bright red. But the entrance to this grand building is entirely hidden by stalls selling hairclips and other trinkets. The synagogue was built in 1884 by Ezra’s son Elias David Joseph Ezra, in the memory of his father. The synagogue is built in the Italian Renaissance style and has a red brick finish. It looked beautiful against the blazing summer sun. The interiors are as pretty as Bethel, prettier even. Ornate floral pillars shipped from Paris enhance its Continental look.

[9] http://www.telegraphindia.com/1081225/jsp/opinion/story_10296397.jsp

Curatorial Text - Broardening the Canvas| celebrating blemishes

Contemporary Visual Culture of Alternate Sexuality.

There is an entire generation that has grown up and are practicing adulthood through  the decade of the late nineties and and the 2000s’. at least in the urban cosmopolitan pockets of india (the pockets in which ‘contemporary indian art’ largely thrives)  ‘coming out of the closet’ has largely begun to signify freedom, rather than the fear of social stigma.  The Delhi High court Judgement  de legitimising Section 377 IPC, has undoubtedly opened up new horizons.  However (along with the gay and lesbian movements) one cannot ignore the impact of feminism in opening up our understanding of gender and body, and challenging the patriarchal hetro sexual framework.

Now there is a young generation of artists working with a  new freedom for expressing body, sexuality and gender, and this is what ‘boarding the canvas| celebrating blemishes’ focuses upon.  The attack on Balbir Krishan’s last solo at Rabindra Bhavan Delhi (one of the last remaining significant ‘public’ spaces for art in India), showed that in this world of false morality, not too many people like the rainbow yet. The acceptance of alternate sexuality is not simply a change of taste, but marks an important stress line in our battle against heteronormative patriarchy. It is under such circumstances we feel the historical need and opportunity to do an annual art exhibition of the contemporary visual culture of alternate sexuality. Organised as a part of Kolkata Rainbow Pride Festival, this show seeks to be a platform for expression and dialogue, and also a zone that makes contestation possible.


About the exhibition:

The exhibition is designed in three sections as walk from : entrance 1 -2


Section 1- posters/pamphlets/stickers of NGOs working with sexuality rights, and covers of iconic magazines of the community.
These section is designed to give the viewer a glimpse into the mainstream visual language of the communities of alternate sexuality

Section 2- Art video corner...6 videos in loop: Suchismita Ukil. Manmeet Devgun, Deepak Tandon, Paribartan Mohanty:

Section 3- Paintings, Art Photographs, Digital Prints, Installations, Drawings

Balbir Krishan, Anuradha Upadhaya, Deepak Tandon, Jayna Mistry, Mandakini Devi, Manmeet Devgun, Moumita Shaw,  Prakash Kishore, Rudra Kishore Mandal, Syed Taufik Riaz, Tapati Choudhury, Jose Abadh and Vidisha Saini.

The exhibition extends itself into a limited edition catalogue, Sunil Gupta’s interview helps us understand how alternative sexuality is slowly coming out of the closet in contemporary visual culture...both the histories of struggles and celebrations. Prof. Shivaji Paniker’s essay brings out the fissures within art history and curation in terms of practice, and forms a critical text in resisting a heteronormative takeover of Bhupen Khakkar.

The show will be installed as an exhibition hanging workshop with volunteers from KRPF and Performance independent (Pi), and there shall be performance interventions by Pi through out the duration of the show.


Rahul Bhattacharya
Co-founder - Regional Arts Performance and Events
Jt. Secretary - Performers independent

A ‘take’ on Art and Rudeness.. ?

When I got a the mail from Johny requesting a "take on Art and Rudeness", must admit that there was a feeling of being stumped. There was been a strong post-modern critic of the 20th century Avant-garde as being culturally violent and brash, the image of a artistic genius has been cast in the mould of arrogance, but art/artist as rude?  True the practice of 'sniggle' exists…but it is seen more as a politically subversive breaching experiment…not exactly fitting the definition of rudeness (i.e. the most commonplace definition of rudeness as uncouth, ill mannered). Rudeness is not a quality claimed from within, it is more of a quality pushed from the top. The culturally dominant is never rude…its acts will be labeled as Subversive, Anarchic, Absurdist…all labels claiming a positive ethical space in the ream of social history. On the other hand rudeness has always been 'out there in the margins'.    

So I begin to think …"is 'rudeness' as a category definable by its failure to become acceptable in the mainstream definition of manners…" suddenly it felt that I was looking at a 'concave' and a 'convex'…art and rudeness.  This realization surprised me…as I had begun my 'take' assuming that parallels would surface. 'Art' sometimes plays the role of   legitimization of rudeness, and when legitimized an act ceases to be termed as rude.

Am I creating too much of a uni-planer version of rudeness? Throughout  the history of art under capitalism or its variants, certain artists have reveled in being 'rude'. The alleged inability of the mainstream to digest rudeness has been the lure to explore rudeness as a site of subversion. Is it that there are two 'takes' on rudeness that we constantly experience? Celebrating it and de-meaning it all at the same time, what does Art do to our experience of rudeness…

But it also a one sided view of Art that I am taking. There have been objects and actions which have been celebrated in the realm of high culture, but have been found extremely 'rude' in pockets of the 'popular'. So what is art and what is rudeness is sometimes determined by where-how strong the hegemony of certain avant-garde practices or affiliations to them lie.

When an act of 'rudeness' is declared to be 'valid' and pedestialized inside institutions…a certain set of narratives are generated around it, casting the semantics of the object/action into a completely different sphere. Viewed through these new prisms of meanings the actions/objects begin to represent acts of (often poetic) subversions…some are even viewed as important monuments in rebellions against hegemonic powers.  Supported by elitist intellectual discourses, a set of actions/objects goes on to become desirably rude.  Actions/objects (falling under the purview of rudeness), which fail to get accreditation by any dominant, or emergent discourses, tend to just fade away…momentarily mockingly dismissed.

The dialogues between Art and rudeness have been played out on the site of aesthetics. Rudeness has been celebrated as a strategy to shock the bourgeois from its capitalist complacence and reveal glimpses of a greater reality…or rather the realities that were taking shape with the avant-garde mocking on Kantian Truth or Beauty.  The rudeness was allegedly justified by 'intentionality'  (or whatever that means). So 'intentionality'   has gone on to become the yardstick of aesthetics…or rather its ph scale. Is it just the presence or absence of 'intentionality' that determines which side of the fence the action/object is? Over the years 'intentionality' is being increasingly pre-defined…and it tends to find legitimacy only within certain set of politics. To be 'desirable', 'legitimate', 'aesthetic' and hence Art, rudeness has to cooperate or participate within these 'certain sets of politics' (or at least intend to participate).

Then there are other things to consider. The capitalist system thrives not on repressive conformity (as one have learnt to imagine) but rather on individualism and a quest for counter-cultural distinction…this is how the imagined 'logic of late capitalism operates'. Like everything else that aesthetics has touched, 'rudeness' also has the potential to accumulate cultural capital. As such it should not be so much of a problem, but one still needs to point out that 'original' intentions are usually anti-hegemonic. 

What does one do, it is these conditions that have lead certain minds to call our times 'Schizophrenic'. A Schizophrenia to be celebrated …or to be lamented…. A, certain angst is often needed to be the licensed to indulge in rudeness… but this is also the times when it is idealism is not 'cool'. The logic of our times has ensured that traditional bourgeois ethics that nearly defined Art  (production, consumption and distribution) have been eroded. Sometimes rudeness is a subversive leap into forgotten imaginations…and no matter what the fate of the act is, it has to be judged in the moment of its action.

So what about the day-to-day actions which we dismiss as 'unacceptable rudeness'? Their neglect of the mainstream arrogance reflect a conscious or subconscious rejection of mainstream 'manners'…perhaps not 'aestheticised' by our ramblings…it is in these kinds of 'forgetting' that 'innocence' allegedly lies. But it a completely different 'take' involving Art and 'innocence'….some other time.

Publised in mattersofart in the summer of 2006