when i learnt from an email that Kavita Singh of JNU arts and aesthetics was talking in the city, it felt like an institution coming to my door step and i was absolutely thrilled and eager to jump in. i was however doubtful if the talk was open to public, the venue being stella maris college. i was glad i could sneak myself into the Francis hall jus as the lecture had begun. i had missed the introduction and the title slides.
Kavita was there to deliver the Edith tomory lec, a name, i was obviously hearing for the first and had to google to find out that she had been a faculty and a head here and was popular for her book on ' history of art'
when i joined the lec, Kavita was in the middle of explaining a visual on a painting depicting the execution of a khan jahan Lodhi
, she was exploring the expression on the man's face, what would otherwise have been a minuscule part of a painting, and interpreting the politics and history of that expression, i was already blown away.
Mughal paintings differed from the parent(?) persian safawid paintings in venturing to record the 'here and now'. the conflicts that raised between the ulemas and emperors and how akbar resolved them made for an interesting story.
The fact that Akbar was unlettered and had learning difficulties, together with his dropping into a state of trance as recorded in a couple of paintings (infact,once in the middle of an hunting expedition!!) is being interpreted to say that Akbar was dyslexic!
Akbar's love for books and his obvious inability to read combined to explain the numerous illustrations that literary works produced under Akbar would carry.
It was interesting to learn how The Mughals sent painters as a part of foreign missions to get portraits of their adversaries done and put some physiognomy to use to assess them and arrive at some important decisions. this could sometimes prove wrong as well as in Jehangir's decision to take on the minuscule looking Shah of Iran and sufferring defeat at his hands.
other tid bits of information i found fascinating were:
1. a second edition of Akbar nama had been brougt out in 1603 by abul fazl.
2. the second ed has some paintings depicting Akbar in a more humane and vulnerable manner( particularly his exploits with an elephant gone amuck, famously depicted in Jodha akbar), whereas the first was all about glorifying him, may be a result of maturing of the emperor..
3. Jehangir could not get his bio compiled together, though it is available in parts here n there..
a painting depicting Jehangir visiting a Hindu ascetic, Jadrup gosain appeared to be a very touching one.
4. Zafar- victory (zafar nama), Jaroka - window ( as in Jaroka portrait)..
5. many paintings far from depicting the reality could be compared to modern day photoshopping techniques done to achieve political ends. The cases of
a. mirza hussains's capture showing Dara's father in law,
b. Jehangir's Jaroka darshan later painted with a jaroka of AKbar in hand.
c. Mughal ladies njoying fireworks and the painting of Radhekrishna njoying fireworks ..
were illustrative of extent and motives of 'photoshopping'.
6. Rao ram Singh of Kota depicted horsing on a roof is illustrative of the fantasy of indian art.
7. the painting depicting the duel between Qilich Khan ( the founder of Hyderabad) and Bhim Singh , giving the moral upper ground to the latter even though it was the former who was the victor, was instructive of the many under currents that a painting comes hidden with.
8. That a whole narrative could be cooked up, was evident in the nain sukh's painting of Balwant Singh.
9. The fact that most of these paintings were at museums across the world was painful and at the same time a relief that they were better kept there. ( the case Amaravathi sculptures on dispaly at Chennai Musuem may be borne in mind) . It was a pleasure that through the slides the author had given us an oppurtunity to walk through museums across the world. it als struck me that the paintings made more sense when sewn into the narrative of this lecture, leaving me wondering, how much would one viewing an isolated piece at some corner of a world take away from it over and above that it was just another Mughal Piece.
The speaker who was proposing the vote of thanks, struck me with a thoughtful remark that the speech had come a full circle from death to life to death!, very true.
Kavita was there to deliver the Edith tomory lec, a name, i was obviously hearing for the first and had to google to find out that she had been a faculty and a head here and was popular for her book on ' history of art'
when i joined the lec, Kavita was in the middle of explaining a visual on a painting depicting the execution of a khan jahan Lodhi
Mughal paintings differed from the parent(?) persian safawid paintings in venturing to record the 'here and now'. the conflicts that raised between the ulemas and emperors and how akbar resolved them made for an interesting story.
The fact that Akbar was unlettered and had learning difficulties, together with his dropping into a state of trance as recorded in a couple of paintings (infact,once in the middle of an hunting expedition!!) is being interpreted to say that Akbar was dyslexic!
Akbar's love for books and his obvious inability to read combined to explain the numerous illustrations that literary works produced under Akbar would carry.
It was interesting to learn how The Mughals sent painters as a part of foreign missions to get portraits of their adversaries done and put some physiognomy to use to assess them and arrive at some important decisions. this could sometimes prove wrong as well as in Jehangir's decision to take on the minuscule looking Shah of Iran and sufferring defeat at his hands.
other tid bits of information i found fascinating were:
1. a second edition of Akbar nama had been brougt out in 1603 by abul fazl.
2. the second ed has some paintings depicting Akbar in a more humane and vulnerable manner( particularly his exploits with an elephant gone amuck, famously depicted in Jodha akbar), whereas the first was all about glorifying him, may be a result of maturing of the emperor..
3. Jehangir could not get his bio compiled together, though it is available in parts here n there..
a painting depicting Jehangir visiting a Hindu ascetic, Jadrup gosain appeared to be a very touching one.
4. Zafar- victory (zafar nama), Jaroka - window ( as in Jaroka portrait)..
5. many paintings far from depicting the reality could be compared to modern day photoshopping techniques done to achieve political ends. The cases of
a. mirza hussains's capture showing Dara's father in law,
b. Jehangir's Jaroka darshan later painted with a jaroka of AKbar in hand.
c. Mughal ladies njoying fireworks and the painting of Radhekrishna njoying fireworks ..
were illustrative of extent and motives of 'photoshopping'.
6. Rao ram Singh of Kota depicted horsing on a roof is illustrative of the fantasy of indian art.
7. the painting depicting the duel between Qilich Khan ( the founder of Hyderabad) and Bhim Singh , giving the moral upper ground to the latter even though it was the former who was the victor, was instructive of the many under currents that a painting comes hidden with.
8. That a whole narrative could be cooked up, was evident in the nain sukh's painting of Balwant Singh.
9. The fact that most of these paintings were at museums across the world was painful and at the same time a relief that they were better kept there. ( the case Amaravathi sculptures on dispaly at Chennai Musuem may be borne in mind) . It was a pleasure that through the slides the author had given us an oppurtunity to walk through museums across the world. it als struck me that the paintings made more sense when sewn into the narrative of this lecture, leaving me wondering, how much would one viewing an isolated piece at some corner of a world take away from it over and above that it was just another Mughal Piece.
The speaker who was proposing the vote of thanks, struck me with a thoughtful remark that the speech had come a full circle from death to life to death!, very true.
No comments:
Post a Comment