The full hall at the Sharan Apparao-moderated workshop on ‘Writing about Arts’ had an unexpected mix of participants: literature students, artists, travel-buffs, techies, businessmen and the “just curious”. But if you were serious about reading or writing on art you just had to be there. The panellists were absolutely the best you could hope to see together in one space.
Understand what we have, do your research before writing, said Na. Muthukumaraswamy of Indianfolklore.org. There is no such thing as “authentic” folk-form, so don’t denounce something different. Folk art accommodates changes, and responds creatively to environment. Keep prejudices out when you write, stay away from terms like “under-developed” and “savage”. Question your own background. Self-reflect, and, during the process of writing, transform yourself into being inclusive. Think about the subjects’ aesthetics, not, “What do people see in it?”
Geeta Doctor fast-forwarded the discussion to art criticism in the virtual world. Using a series of slides, she argued that Internet-run social media had made the art critic obsolete. We package and sell our work, we are our own critics. Curators and gallerists have been marginalised. In this hyper-reality, art is broadcast/blogged about constantly, and the origins are blurred. Who said, “Je suis Charlie” first? Art is now in a virtual supermarket, can be bought with virtual currency. With selfies, the artist now becomes his art, democratising art in the process.
It is shoddy thinking to valorise one form by putting down another, said journalist Renuka Narayanan. You are a just a bridge. Tell stories; communicate; let readers make their choice. Don’t write as an intellectual; keep it simple; write in the active voice. Choose an area of specialisation, you can’t do it all. Be humble and kill attitude. Keep your distance from the painter/artist. Check what value you are bringing to 32-lakh pairs of eyes. “And please take care of spelling and grammar!”
Question the purpose of your writing, said art historian Pradeep Chakravarthy. His study of bronzes/stone carvings and textiles has convinced him that ancient Indian art is inextricably rooted in sanatana dharma. So discuss what positive changes art brings in thought and behaviour in you and your readers. Creators of our art felt that way. See art in the overall scheme of its economic/social/political environment. Explore the technique, and humour. Ask what/why and the “how” will fall in place.
Dance suffers from lack of audiences for both the performances and write-ups, rued Anita Ratnam. Unhappy with the quality of writing, she began to write a back-story, explaining what she was doing, where she was at that point in time. Get out of the body part-syndrome she urged young writers. Shed trite imagery, do your homework and watch rare videos on YouTube. She opened narthaki.com to disseminate her work and invited writers to watch rehearsals. Without a patina of negativity, a dancer cannot grow, but couch it in elegant language. Dance intersects culture/poetry/music. There is visual interaction between the dancer and the singer. So talk about why it moves you. “We desperately need good critics,” she said.
We have a long tradition of commentary of earlier works, done over centuries, said art critic Sadanand Menon. Our zombie consumerism discourages critical thinking, and reviews are presented in boxed segments. And where are the 8-page/12-page art pull-outs? Where is the talk of decline of arts institutions, national culture policy, and the visual arts? With re-calibration of art as entertainment, its seriousness has gone out. Schools must start art appreciation courses, why are journalism students clueless about art vocabulary? Online social media “a new kind of vandalism”, makes critical discourse imperative, there is no healthy art without healthy criticism.
