Raja Ravi Varma (1848-1906) is to a hundred years of Indian visual language what Shakespeare is to four hundred years of English. If, as claimed, forty per cent of an English speaker’s common usage is derived from the Bard, Ravi Varma provides approximately the same quotational base for the popular Indian visual lexicon.
Even in 21st century India, it is difficult not to encounter on a daily basis the iconometrics of the two-dimensional pictorial code that Ravi Varma drilled into the subconscious of a people waking up to the idea of a self-image as part of their claims to cultural uniqueness and identity in the face of colonial/ imperial subjugation. It was accompanied by, as art historian Ratan Parimoo has pointed out, “a newly awakened taste for the luscious”.
Calendars, posters, greeting cards, book covers, oleographs (oil prints), cinema hoardings, match and fire-cracker labels, multi-colour prints of gods, goddesses and other dramatis personae from mythology—commonly found in restaurants, offices, trucks, buses and household pooja rooms—have so naturalised these otherwise Western approaches to the pictorial narrative that these have become the signature stereotype of ‘the Indian look’.
Even though mass-produced printed images had been in circulation since the 1870s, like the Kali and Chinnamasta oleographs from Chore Bagan Art Studio, Calcutta, it was only after 1894, when Ravi Varma, along with his brother Raja Varma, set up the Ravi Varma Fine Arts Lithographic Press in Bombay (shifting it later to Lonavla), that deities like Lakshmi, Saraswati, Krishna and Rama received their unique identities and a hybrid pan-Indian costuming, which was to freeze into a cultural trope fairly swiftly and get eternalised as the ‘authorised look’. It’s this ossified look that created such inexplicable troubles for more recent painters like M.F. Husain who sought to deal playfully with a hardly 100-year-old convention.
It is only in the past decade that the Ravi Varma imagery has been shown up to be a cross-cultural pastiche with a neat coexistence in his canvas of Indian facial types, Western landscapes, northern costumes, southern jewellery and an intuitive naturalism that was attracted to a kind of provincial European academicism. There is very little of any nationalist aspiration evident in an artist who was so active during the early decades of the national movement.
So the inevitable question is, had Ravi Varma only painted his prolific 2,000-odd canvases in a career spanning over three decades and not set up his famous printing press, would the history of India’s contemporary visual landscape have been different? It is interesting that there have not been too many attempts at pursuing such an inquiry. It is even more curious that for an artist who was severely critiqued in the first decades of the 20th century by the likes of Ananda Coomaraswamy, Sister Nivedita and Sri Aurobindo and in the last decade by artists like Husain, Akbar Padamsee, Tyeb Mehta and J. Swaminathan, so little existed in the form of any in-depth biography or critical study. This is the lacuna that Rupika Chawla’s book has now so comprehensively filled.
Chawla is known in art circles primarily as a restorer of damaged paintings. In 1993, she co-curated (with artist A. Ramachandran) an exhibition at the NGMA, Delhi, of restored Ravi Varma canvases, returning the peripatetic painter from Kerala to the centre of a raging controversy regarding his worth as a serious artist and as an early Indian modernist.
She has also demonstrated the need for current critical practice to equip itself with basic knowledge of the behaviour of synthetic paints—industrial colours packaged and sold since late 19th century in extruded tin tubes—and the polymerisation process that occurs as the linseed oil dries over time, creating a new translucency to the surface. This pentimento, or the ‘ghost images’ emerging in Ravi Varma’s various canvases that she has referred to, is likely to lead to an all too new interest in his work.
The minor disappointment is with the lack of a comprehensive bibliography to the book and to the smooth bypassing of the debate around Ravi Varma’s status as a modernist. But the author has effectively resurrected the painter-king from Kilimanur.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT