The art market is perhaps one of the most perceptive and sensitive to changes in trends and tastes, in comparison to other consumer markets. Its main strength lies in the fact that it does not reflect manipulations and fads too easily and is driven by long-term trends that survive momentary ups and downs of taste.
The patronage of galleries and collectors drawn from different walks of life is generally a far better arbiter of taste than that of those nominated to government bodies on a grace and favour basis. This is precisely why state collections, while they do have some of the better works of well-known artists (which they get as bequests or buy late in an artist?s life), are generally more than overstocked with deadwood acquired on a grace and favour basis.
This is the reason why even a senior artist like Anjolie Ela Menon supported the call by the then Minister of Culture, Maneka Gandhi, to clear the National Gallery of Modern Art of its deadwood. Quite apart from the fact that one person?s deadwood may be another?s avant-garde, even badly collected hoards are a good basis for research into the best and worst available at any time in history.
 |
| Scribe (2001): Mixed media on paper by Atul Dodiya |
Still, the question of space is there. All state collections have the problem of storage space after a while. So provincial museums could be encouraged to find a space to house and exhibit a part of the ?deadwood? from their state. In fact, it is perfectly possible for what is judged to be ?deadwood? at the national level, may in fact be an artist relevant to the art history of the particular state he or she comes from. In fact, it is even possible that a particular artist a national committee decides is ?deadwood? may not even be well-represented in his or her home state. So the works would at least get an airing.
A system of exchanges and lending could be worked out. I am against the selling of such ?deadwood? as it is bound to lead to corruption, with important works of the lesser-known artists finding their way into the market at throwaway prices. This is not as surprising as it sounds. Public collections are notorious for works lost, mislaid and even copies replacing the originals. In my view, the best way to control corruption is not to give occasion for it. Also, the shifting of works of modern art to the state museums from the NGMA will help evolve a better understanding of contemporary art, something that has been successfully launched on a global scale, even in the remotest parts of our country.
This is a far better way of encouraging artists than merely handing out awards. I am generally not in favour of awards, for I believe that committees appointed to do the job are, more often than not, ill equipped to make the judgments required. Instead, a certain number of scholarships and residencies for senior artists could be awarded. They would help to raise the standard of our art production. Until a less patronising approach is evolved by the government, auctions and sales will be the best judge of the worth of a work of art. And indeed, it is interesting to see how our artists fare in these.
The most recent auction is the Saffornart online auction in Mumbai. It is interesting to compare the prices of some of the younger artists who sold in this auction with what their works sold for in the December 2002 online auction. Atul Dodiya, whose landscape was listed at between Rs 65,000 and Rs 1.25 lakh actually sold for Rs 2.52 lakh (lot 99). A year, back, a mixed media work of his, listed to sell at between Rs 2.50-3.50 lakh (lot 165) was bid up to Rs 1.65 lakh only. So it is evident that Dodiya has gained ground since then.
TV Santhosh, again, like Dodiya, had one lot up for sale (107) but it went above the highest price expected of it, Rs 24,000, by selling at no less than Rs 94,500. Last year, a similar work of his that was expected to fetch Rs 35,000 to Rs 45,000 (lot 182) sold for only Rs 37,500.
Similarly, Shibu Natesan, had three works up for sale in 2002. Lot 178, which was expected to sell at between Rs 2.50-Rs 3.50 lakh but was bid for upto Rs 1,62,500; lot 179 that was expected to go up to Rs 50,000, but was bid for up to Rs 31,250 only; and lot 180 that was expected to fetch Rs 35,000 at most but actually fetched Rs 18,750, did better this year. Two works of his were up for sale, one of which (lot 105) fetched Rs 28,125 against a high of Rs 35,000 it was expected to fetch. But he scored with lot 106 which went at Rs 76,500 when the highest price expected was Rs 70,000.
So it is obvious that younger artists are being bought and at higher prices than last year. This is evident from the sales of artists like Paresh Maity, Apoorva Desai, Dharmendra Rathore, and Debabrata De as well. But younger artists ought to work for better quality all the time as Atul Dodiya does and not be satisfied with the odd good sale. Good work always pays better than good public relations. And good public relations are most effective when they promote good work.