Hysterical (Hi)stories of Art

Abstract

(1867-1938), who produced, on the one hand, biting satires of Bengali hybrid society, and, on the other, a poetic version of Cubism. In general, however, Abanindranath's followers continued the sterile formula of 'Indian art', never resolving the hiatus between the modern and the traditional painter. Even though these artists proclaimed their antipathy to material success, they nonetheless dominated art institutions all over India. In the 1920s, Santiniketan replaced Calcutta as the centre of nationalist art with Nandalal Bose, the most influential of Abanindranath's pupils, creating his own style of art that was no longer tied to archaeologising the past, thereby inspiring later painters like K. G. Subramanyan. The Making of a New 'Indian' Art reaches the following conclusion: despite its claims, the Bengal School did not enjoy a monopoly over the definition of indigenism, though it turned into an establishment art. Actual modern artists emerged outside its parameters, following the exhibition of Bauhaus artists in Calcutta in 1922. Furthermore, the art school in Calcutta never lost its importance as a focus of artistic activity, while elite academic painters continued to enter the lucrative market of cheap prints for the masses. Academic artists like Hemen Majumdar created their alternative images of women that challenged the success of oriental art. By the end of the 1920s, Nandalal Bose and Jamini Roy supplanted Abanindranath in Bengali esteem, as the new leaders of modern national art. Tapati Guha-Thakurta is among the best of the younger generation of Indian art historians. Her monograph is well-argued and painstakingly researched. I recommend it warmly.