Art Appreciation, Narendra Modi Style

The prime minister’s ringing endorsement of the angry Hanuman image suggests that the Sangh parivar is fully conscious of the power of ‘art’ and has a firm idea of what such art should be.

Credit: Amazon.com

Sidharth Bhatia

POLITICS

THE ARTS

08/MAY/2018

In between mocking the Congress party for its various acts of omission and 

commission – never mind if he got his facts mixed up – and invoking the

 patriotism of dogs, Prime Minister Narendra Modi found time during

 his campaigning in Karnataka to single out a young artist to

 congratulate him.

Karan Acharya has created the popular image of the ‘angry Hanuman’

 and Modi hailed him for his “magnificent art”. The prime minister 

criticised the Congress for “painting it (the image) with a communal angle”. 

“Unable to digest its success, the Congress tried miring it in a controversy.

 There is not an iota of democracy in the Congress members.” 

A few days later, he praised an ‘extremely talented artist’ Kshitij Bajpai, 

a little known cartoonist whose works are replete with frightening misogyny

 and brazen anti-Muslim messaging.

Art appreciation is subjective and it is possible that such images and

 cartoons appeal to Modi. But in his political career, Modi has not so 

far shown any interest in or propensity towards art. Not so his fellow

 Sanghis, whose idea of art criticism is to get violent towards the artist.

 Ironically, one work that really got them angry was a painting of Hanuman

rescuing Sita by M.F. Husain. The celebrated artist had to face the wrath

 of Hindutva elements and had to finally leave India, the land of his birth,

 and become a citizen of another country in his 90s.

Then, in the year 2000, an exhibition at the National Gallery of Modern 

Art was abruptly shut down because the then NDA government did no

 like the work titled ‘An actor rehearsing the interior monologue of Icarus’,

 by Surendran Nair that showed the Ashoka pillar. The same year, 

Indian diplomats in Canada objected to an exhibition of contemporary

 Indian art in Toronto.

The BJP and the larger Sangh parivar are, therefore, not known to 

be art aficionados. So it does come as a surprise when no less than the 

prime minister praises a work as “magnificent art”.

The image in question, done in dark saffron and black, shows Hanuman

 with a furrowed brow, glowering eyes and a scowl. The monkey god has 

very different qualities in Hindu lore but the work projects ultra

 machismo that fits in well with the self-image of the Hindutva oriented male.

 Acharya says his Hanuman has “attitude not aggression”, is “powerful,

not oppressive”. Those who are displaying it with pride may not

 necessarily think so.

Traditional images of Hanuman have shown him either at the feet of Ram

 and Sita, or tearing his chest to show their images within. In many 

paintings, he is shown flying, carrying a small hillock with the life

 saving sanjeevani booti, which, in mythology, was said to be a miracle cure. 

(No one has actually found this particular medicine and a massive, multi-crore

 project of the Uttarakhand government to locate it has so far failed.)

 Hanuman is a warrior in his own right, leading an army of his fellow

 simians, but rarely has he been displayed as anything but a perfect

 devotee of his Lord, Ram. Acharya’s rendition gives him an entirely 

different spin.

Modi has quickly understood the power of this drawing and the potential 

to utilise its propaganda value – for one thing it will fit in well with the 

campaign for the temple in Ayodhya. It is the kind of image that can be

 used and amplified across multiple platforms and could transmit just

 the message that the BJP today wants to, that it is not a party anyone 

should mess with. The Hindu is effete no more; he is angry and 

ready to take on anyone, violently if necessary.

As it is, the Hindutva organisations have traditionally distorted the 

image of Hanuman to further their own political agenda.

 In one recent instance, activists of the Bajrang Dal celebrating Hanuman 

Jayanti came out on the streets waving swords and shouting slogans such

 as ‘Jai Hanuman’ and ‘Hindustan humara hai’, a neat conflation of religion

 and nationalism. Whatever the artist may say, the image has been 

appropriated – not in a benign but an aggressive way.

But despite its obvious religio-political symbolism, Modi has chosen not

 to focus on that –  he has called it ‘art’. He is not connecting it with 

Ram or indeed Hindutva, but with artistic and creative freedom, 

criticising the Congress for its lack of ‘democracy’, presumably implying

 freedom of expression. With this, he has given his imprimatur on its

 artistic value.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Credit: PIB

Does this mark a first step of the BJP towards hallmarking art? Will the

 party and its ideological mentors now take it upon themselves to brand

 what is ‘good’ art and what is not? And will it promote its favourite

 artists and try to undermine renegades who challenge established notions 

of Indianness?

At one level this sounds like a moot question – contemporary Indian 

artists have not shown any propensity towards questioning the burning 

issues of the day. There has hardly been a significant expression, leave 

alone protest, about rising intolerance. The artist community did not 

participate in the award wapsi campaign, and nor has there been any

 major exhibition that comments on the important questions of the day,

 such as communalism or attacks on minorities. It is as if Indian

 contemporary art is operating in a vacuum, cut off from social reality, 

happy to display in galleries abroad. If and when a prominent artist 

overtly makes an artistic statement on an issue such as rising, ugly 

majoritarianism, we will see how the militant elements of the

 parivar react.

The prime minister’s ringing endorsement suggests that the parivar is 

fully conscious of the power of ‘art’ and it has a firm idea of what such

 art should be. The angry Hanuman ticks off all the key boxes from the

 Sanghi point of view – not only is it hyper masculine and forceful in 

its representation, it is also modern. This is clearly graphic art, possibly

 done on the computer, in a stylistic way that would appeal to a younger

 demographic. They may not be attracted to the soft-focussed, kitschy,

 calendar representations of yore that can be seen in homes and shops 

all over India. No self-respecting young Hindutva warrior will want to 

stick a work of Raja Ravi Verma on his SUV; this looks technologically 

advanced enough to use with pride and arrogance.

The use of art for ideological reasons is hardly new. The Soviets 

were big on socialist realism that served and glorified the communist cause. 

The Nazis, and Adolf Hitler personally, celebrated the racial ideal, 

appropriating classical Greek and Roman forms. They romanticised 

not just the pastoral but also the heroic. The idea was to invoke 

a golden German age of the past, which fitted in well with Nazi ideology.

This also meant that modernists were seen as subversives – Hitler was

 personally against any form of modern art and it was banished from 

the authorised canon. In 1937, the Nazis held an exhibition called ‘

Entartete Kunst’ (Degenerate Art) showcasing 650 pieces of modern art 

which were beyond the Nazi pale. This was to show what art was

 unacceptable and would be purged. Similarly, the Nazis eventually 

shut down the Bauhaus school that was developing a new design 

vocabulary which was simple and streamlined, moving away from 

the romanticised styling of the past, including in typefaces.

So far, the Hindutva elements have not spent any time on art, preferring

 to concentrate on history and mass media such as cinema; they have

 appointed their own favoured officials in key positions who can exercise

 control over what gets shown and what doesn’t. Art, maybe, is considered

 too esoteric and elitist. At the same time, Indian artists have given no 

one any reason to get worked up.

But that could soon change. With a pat on the back from the highest in 

the land to a young artist for his take on a religious figure, we can see 

the beginnings of what the establishment will like and what it may not. 

The disapproval may reveal itself one day. Soon we could have

 officially-approved art and our artists, safe in their cocoons, 

will have to make difficult choices.

https://thewire.in/politics/narendra-modi-angry-hanuman-art-sangh-parivar