Search results for: 'why i don't want kids'

The Madras Art Movement that emerged in the early 1960s was a late phenomenon of modernity in south India within the national context. It developed as a regional phenomenon that began to take shape from the mid-1950s onwards as a search for authenticity in modernism derived largely from the region’s cultural heritage. D. P. ROY CHOWDHURY A P SANTHANARAJ ACHUTHAN KUDALLUR AKKITHAM NARAYANAN ALPHONSO DOSS C DOUGLAS C J ANTHONY DOSS J. SULTAN ALI K C S PANIKER K M ADIMOOLAM K RAMANUJAM K SREENIVASULU K V HARIDASAN L MUNUSWAMY M SENATHIPATI M SURYAMOORTHY P GOPINATH P PERUMAL P S NANDHAN PANEER SELVAM R B BHASKARAN REDDEPPA NAIDU Rm. PALANIAPPAN S G VASUDEV S. DHANAPAL S. NANDAGOPAL V. VISWANADHAN VIDYASHANKAR STHAPATI

DAG invited leading historians of Delhi, Swapna Liddle and Rana Safvi, to explore our archives collection. The items they found there include numerous photographs of the three durbars, taken by prominent photographers of the day. They also include many other objects relating to the durbars, from portraits and medals, to maps and official guidebooks, and to tickets and programmes. Historians in the past have analysed the ideology of the Delhi durbars, but never before has such a collection of the material culture of these events been brought together for display.

Prabhakar Barwe (1936-95) could well have ended up a theoretician whose book 'Kora Canvas' (Blank Canvas) was a manifesto that established the multi-dimensional relationship between an artist, the object on which he paints, and his subjects. That he was not just an intellectual scholar but an artist whose work speaks for him, is evident through a range of works in which Barwe dissects our understanding of the world and how we view it. Taking commonplace objects and our perception of their existence in the space they occupy, he shifts the dialogue to a point of discomfiture that makes us question our understanding of them. Using scale, discordant juxtapositions, and displacements, he reimagines the everyday in a manner that is thought-provoking, even provocative, as alternate realities—whether perceived or imagined.

He was the colossus of the Indian art world whose reign over twentieth-century modern art remains unparalleled. M. F. Husain (1913-2011) was the face of Indian modernism and owned it completely. Having started out as a painter of billboards in Bombay, he became its unchallenged monarch as a member of the influential Progressive Artists’ Group in 1947. He claimed the first National Award instituted by the Lalit Kala Akademi in 1955, and went on to become India’s most celebrated artist. In a practice that spanned over seventy years, Husain was playful, experimental, provocative, controversial—but never mediocre.

The twentieth century was marked by two important decades—the 1910s, when the Bengal School saw the establishment of a revivalist practice that came to signify Indian modern art in general; and the 1950s, when a newly independent nation put its colonised past behind it and embraced a triumphant modernism. A. A. RAIBA ADI DAVIERWALLA AVINASH CHANDRA BABURAO SADWELKAR BADRI NARAYAN BIREN DE CHITTAPROSAD D. P. ROY CHOWDHURY DEVYANI KRISHNA DHANRAJ BHAGAT G. R. SANTOSH GANESH PYNE HAREN DAS Indra Dugar J. SULTAN ALI JYOTI BHATT K C S PANIKER K S Kulkarni K. G. SUBRAMANYAN K. K. HEBBAR KANWAL KRISHNA KISORY ROY KRISHEN KHANNA KRISHNA REDDY Laxman Pai M. F. HUSAIN MOHAN SAMANT NANDALAL BOSE NIKHIL BISWAS P. T. REDDY PARITOSH SEN S. H. RAZA S. K. BAKRE SAKTI BURMAN SHANTI DAVE SUNIL DAS SUNIL MADHAV SEN VISHWANATH NAGESHKAR

In a career spanning four decades, Amitava’s location as an artist has determined the authority that he brings to his practice. As an artist studying and working in the 1960s, Amitava Das experienced a decade of fragmented locii. The ’60s, the period of his education at the College of Art, was the decade of wars, fiscal difficulty and an uncertain polity in the wake of the death of Jawaharlal Nehru. Further, as a second generation pravasi (non-residing Indian) Bengali, the roiling political violence of West Bengal’s Naxal movement came to him through the filter of poetry, film and art—much as he would have received the existential writing of Camus, Genet and Rilke. Through the 1960s and ’70s, small groups of artists and filmmakers in different pockets in India had a heightened response: the state of the nation found an uncanny echo in the language of modernism, of the artist’s isolation and purity even within a state of uncertainty.