Abraham Kimball and Professor Robert Marshall, Visual Arts
Proposal and Rationale
During the time of colonization in India there was a lull in the production of Indian style artwork. During this time when illustrations were made they were European. When local artist were actually hired they were required to work in the prevailing European styles rather than indigenous Indian Styles (The Tamarind Papers, 11). Nevertheless, since the time of Independence Indian artists have slowly made there way back to their roots. But, with today’s onslaught of globalization I have wondered how art currently contributes to India’s social solidarity. Anciently, India’s Rajas (rulers-religious leaders) commissioned art; it functioned as a form of education and, for the creators, it symbolized certain social status (e.g. the mughal ruler, Akbar 1556-1605). Thus, I proposed to study the attitudes of contemporary artists and to create some of my own artwork in participant-observation oriented research.
Field Experience
Winter semester year 2000, as a part of an International Field Study and Internship (IFSI) program, I performed preliminary interviews and observations with artists and religionists in India. Much of my study was spent with Indian professor, Ramesh Chandra, and German artist Johan Benthin, at the Bangalore, Chitrakala Parishath Institute of Advanced Studies. In addition, I devoted an hour or more each, to interview people of the Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Buddhist, Jane, and Christian religions. With so many factions in every conceivable field in India, I simply valued the advice of artists and religionists in hopes that any change in their historical artisticreligious traditions might reveal changes in their broader society. Ultimately, I was asking myself what contemporary attitudes in art reflect as the major cultural themes and concerns of Indian society? I conducted informal interviews with English speaking people who were always more than willing to talk.
Follow-up and reactions
From September 2 – October 13, 2000 at College of Eastern Utah’s Gallery East, and from December 1- 15, 2000 at Brigham Young University’s Gallery 303, my artwork was included with two other artist’s work in an art show entitled ALTAR [ed] BEAUTY. We had all worked in a similar this theme, but in separate counties. There was a great turnout with both positive and negative responses – for which I’m grateful. In both cases I believe that responses were based on patterns of belief that are separate from those of the art’s cultural innuendoes, although judgements on basic aesthetics were helpful. One artist in India critiqued my show before it was ever finished saying, “some old ladies will just look at it and say, ‘Oh that young man went there and did all this stuff, isn’t that nice.’” Another artist put it this way,
“Actually if an Indian artist will do the same thing it will have a different meaning: different roots. So when you are trying to do such things it becomes superficial unless you know the history and culture. Visually you are influenced [but] if you are interested in these kinds of things it’s good if you know a little bit about what really is there – what they really mean….”
This is certainly a difficult task, an issue that anthropologist constantly battle. With these arguments in mind I have attempted to relearn and analyze my experience through writing ethnographically. Probably my biggest difficulties have come from trying to keep all of my informants happy, all of the time. Overall I feel like my study has been merely a stepping stone to more research. It didn’t reveal major paradigms in Indian thinking but mainly serves as a record to help clear up another abstract area of a post-colonial & globalized India.