Visual manifestation of colonial India and Ambedkar

This blog is an attempt to interrogate certain visual manifestations as a per-

ceptual means of understanding and to approach caste and life narratives 

from the conceptual framework of “protected ignorance.” Caste life narratives are typically regarded as literary works, but they have also become subjects of visual language, wherein experiences of caste life become a means to create 

visual metaphors as potential critiques of the hegemonic and the normative.

In dominant Indian society. Colonial India saw the production of four dominant modes of discourse in understanding Indian history and culture:

1) an imperial discourse in which 

race and Western superiority were assumed;

2) a Brahmanical discourse main-

ly rooted in the idea of divinity, an outright trust in textual traditions,and a politics opposed to imperial interpretations; 

3) a Marxist/socialist discourse 

mainly associated with economic interpretations; and

4) a non-Brahmanical discourse displacing the abovethree.Many of the Indiandiscursiveprocesses under the colonial conditions were distinctly marked by Brahmanicaldomi-nance located in a political context of nation and nationalism. Brahmanical 

hegemony producedmetanarratives of a nationalist imagination rooted inani intellectualpolitics of homogenized precolonial, colonial,and postcolonial 

Indian traditions. 

“Protected ignorance” is a day-to-day phenomenon that is seen in ev-

ery sphere, including in the creative realms of visuality. Perceptual under-

standings of visual signifiers, being socially and politically located, are gaugesof “protected ignorance.” Expressive urges are manifestedthrough language, 

where language need not mean only an accepted notion of language, but may encompass all possible expressive means and capacities. In this context, “sub-altern” as it is understood and applied as a categoryin India becomes prob-

lematic, particularly when it is read against Ambedkar’s understandings of caste. Ambedkar defines caste as not only a division of labor but also of labor-ers. The experience of division of laborers cannot be understood by the no-menclature of “subaltern.” “Subaltern,” being a generic rubricand more class oriented, does not empower us to understand castedifferences and conflicts. 

Caste entails graded hierarchy, whereby levels of discrimination and exclusion are different in each case.

Caste life narratives and their representation in visual art have emerged as antithetical to such a homogenized Brahmanical understanding of Indian art. Cultural difference displaces the discursive process of homogeneity of tra-dition. Attempts to reconstruct the past as well as its cultural residues from a non-colonial as well as a non-Brahmanical perspective can become inter-vening tools of investigation and understanding, and directly challenge the political project of homogeneity of tradition. 

Mahatma Jyotiba Phule (1827–1890) and B. R. Ambedkar (1891–

1956) were instrumental in enacting aparadigmatic shift from amere acknowledgment of the dogmatisms of tradition to the ineffectiveness of ritual practices as legitimized in religious texts. For Ambedkar, the political proj-

ect of fighting untouchability meant not only to question the exclusive nature of caste practices and traditions, but also to underline their self-centered proc-lamations and political designs that religious texts sanctioned. Additionally, he brought out the ways in which cultural behaviors were reflected through a series of behaviors dictated by caste. 

Ambedkar further drew attention to the power of religion and how Indian caste society was consciously following caste rules as religious duties. Caste life narratives, as literaryproducts and pictorial representations, produce a cri-tique of the power of religion.

The discursive process of interpretation/understanding was narrativized in the projection of Gandhi as the Father of the Nation. There is no differ-ence and no oppositional logic between the modernist and the postcolonial-

ist; both of their desires have often been to eulogize Gandhi. Because images of Gandhi appear as a part of the nationalist metanarrative of struggling for freedom, all images of Gandhi in the public domain can position him as a figure of struggles for freedom. Even today, quite a number of artists have 

painted Gandhi in a celebratory mode.

Figure 1. Top: Ramkinker Baiz, Gandhi after Pune Karar, cement, 1953–55, size with pedestal approximately 13.6 feet. Bottom: detail. Photo by Professor Snjoy Mallik, Kalabhavan, Shantiniketan.

However, caste narratives empower readers to rethink the whole idea of human value and question the 

ethicality of caste-Hindus. 

Ramkinker Baiz and Dalit artists, 

through their own lived experiences and caste life narratives, have challenged dominant representations of Gandhi. Baiz, a sculptor from Bengal, showed courage to be different and did not al-

low his consciousness to accept the 

normative understanding of Gandhi. Between 1953 and 1955, he created a huge sculpture of Gandhi in the prem-ises of Shantiniketan University

 (Fig. 

1). He created a number of key models as a precursor to this sculpture. Baiz’s large rendering of Gandhi—which lit-erally depicts Gandhi on a pedestal and 

with a human skull under his foot—

remains the sole example from a mod-ernist who refuses to accept Gandhi’s persona as that of an extraordinary per-son. According to Baiz, “Gandhi be-came Mahatma by crushing people.” Baiz made this statement when Ritwik Ghatak made a documentary showing 

Baiz before the colossal image of Gan-dhi, explaining the importance of the human skull.5 Baiz decodes Gandhian achievements by placing the skull un-

der the feet of a tall, towering Gandhi.

The sculptor’s deliberate intervention 

is rooted in pragmatic understandings and not in romanticizing this icon of 

the freedom struggle. Baiz therefore 

harshly critiques the idea of Gandhi as a figure of “nonviolence.” Baiz’s image of Gandhi is conceptualized through a formalistic engagement and offers a different reading of Gandhi that chal-lenges Brahmanical representations.

Caste life narratives, however, reveal structures of power as well as sub-jugations, and also empower us to interrogate the “rules” and “principles” as Ambedkar proposed. Ambedkar’s followers began to think differently and at-tacked the very canons of language in art communities. For example, caste life narratives emerged as a powerful medium of expression in the Marathi lit-erary circle that shook the consciousness of readers. 

Figure 2. J. Nandakumar, Gandhi 

after Pune Karar, acrylic on can-

vas, 54 inches x 66 inches, 2010. © 

Copyright and reproduced courtesy 

of the artist.

J. Nandakumar’s works exemplify how the personal experience of op-

pression can become a fundamental tool in working against “protected igno-rance.”

 Despite his poor conditions, he pursued his education and interest in art and confronts the dominant caste groups throughout his education. Because of the discrimination he endured, Nan-dakumar rethought his painting practices and ended up connecting with Sawarkar, who emerged as an important figure in Indian contemporary art.

Figure 3. Savi Sawarkar, Untouchables under the Black Sun, oil on canvas, 11 feet x 5 feet 6 inches, 

1990. © Copyright and reproduced courtesy of the artist.

and aesthetic norms, especially given that his personal intervention had its genesis in how he portrayed his community. By the time Sawarkar started painting, Dalit life narratives had emerged as a powerful means to explore the world of caste realities.The black sun is a sym-bolic representation of the darkness in daylight that forbids “untouchables” any freedom, though the sun is usually a general symbol of hope because its emanation of light and energy is crucial to everyone’s survival. But in the life of the “untouchable,” no such luxury exists. Though it operates at an imagi-

nary level, the image equally aims to remind caste-Hindus of a glaring physi-cal and material fact of life of an untouchable, where freedom is completely absent from their life.

Figure 4. Savi Sawarkar, Dalit Pissing on Manu, oil on canvas, 10 feet x 6 feet, 1991. © Copyright and 

reproduced courtesy of the artist.

Many elements contributed to Sawarkar’s evolution as an artistFor him, Ambedkar becomes a cardinal figure of in-spiration who critiqued Manu in the strongest possible manner. There is a desire to create an imagery that will not betranscendental but more physical 

and real. Symbolism, in this case, denotes the caste-Hindu who is absent in the pictorial space but is part and parcel of the violence that is imposed, codi-fied, and practiced as a societal norm.

Sawarkar painted Foundation of India  a work that represents the residues of the past and the transformational, structural 

change that he desires for society. The four-fold division of the varna system 

is represented through conventional symbols. The image of the male is con-ceptualized, as has been advocated in the purushsutta of the Rigveda. The top head signifies a Brahman, the arms as weapons denote the Kshatriyas, where- asthe potbelly represents wealthy trading. The feet represent the Shudras. Sawarkar does not stop here. He shows bells hooked to the garland tied at the bottom, denoting “untouchables.”

Figure 5. Jaya Daronde, Relationship, oil on canvas, 18 inches x 18 inches, 2009. © Copyright and 

reproduced courtesy of the artist.

patriarchal world. Daronde’s figures are simple and have no sexual overtones. There is a deliberate attempt on her part to go away from the usual sensual representations of the Dalit female body. In her work, caste life tensions are observed as part of social realities. Textures in the pictorial surface of Da-ronde’s paintings are decorative in nature and reflect everyday existence. Some 

of her work shows groups of women involved in themselves in a manner that declares their independent existence away from the collective caste-Hindus. Intervention on issues of caste is not just confined to one section of the community. When others venture into such a thematic expression, viewers are offered another side of caste practices. 

paintings after his engagement with an Ambedkarite NGO. When Khodke 

was exposed to the writings of Phule and Ambedkar, he found his own Brahmanical tradition extremely problematic and draconian in nature. His paint-ing on Trivikrama is an apt example of the brutality with which the imagery of Trivikrama is guarded by the Brahmin household (Figs. 6 and 7).8 This work of art exhibits how the Brahmin family reveres the myth of Trivikrama 

and how, despite understanding its violent nature, they are taught not to cri-tique it because of the supposed sacredness of Brahmanical traditions. 

Pavan’s engagement with caste narrative took a long time to evolve. As a part of graphic design practices, he preferred to draw decorative figures with certain caste affiliations. A priest’s head upon legs and a broom is a graphic representation of the caste divide in Haryana society . In another work, a cow with a priest’s head is shown as a political critique of the Hindu.

Figure 8 Prajapati, Installation, mixed media, 80 inches x 33 inches x 28 inches, 2012. © Copyright
and reproduced courtesy of the artist

incident from Ambedkar’s life when he was working in Baroda Maharaja Say-ajirao Gaikwad’s office. Ambedkar was given a separate earthen pot to drinkwater from in the office. Evoking caste life narrative becomes a necessarymeans to express the realities of Indian psychoticperversions like this episode
from Ambedkar’s life

.Prajapatii Is another artist who referred to his own life narrative when he
critiqued caste-Hindu cultural practices, this time of cremations at the banksof the river Ganga at Varanasi (Fig. 9). He used the motif of the cremationbed with a currency note painted on it to refer to the practice that goes in the
making of the bhataji-shethaji (priest and trading community) nexus. Praj-apati, being from a “backward caste” community and sensitized to Ambed-karite consciousness, dared to present a pictorial critique of the caste-Hindubelief system. He depicts generic objects used at the time of cremation forcovering dead bodies such as four flame lamps attached with sticks and thebier (bamboo bed to carry the dead body).

Figure 10.Malvika, Dr. Ambedkar, monochrome, 30 inches x 40 inches, 2016. © Copyright and re-
produced courtesy of the artist.

 Malvika’s Ambed-
karite consciousness helped her critique the draconian caste-Hindu systemand she paints Ambedkar’s experiences of humiliations to underscore how in-
humane the caste system is. Ambedkar’s caste life narrative inspired Malvikato use her narrative skills to paint what her consciousness recognized was im-portant, enabling her to dissect the traditional behavior of India’s caste-Hindu
population.


The more pertinent questions here are who are the subalterns and how dowe understand and categorize both the subaltern as such and subaltern expe-riences? In the Indian context, the term has gained considerable currency inthe fields of literature, drama, and visual arts. The subaltern is understood asbeing located in opposition to hegemony. However, “whose hegemony?” is a
critical question of analysis. Other serious questions draw our attention to theconceptual category of the subaltern. Subaltern consciousness often does notquestion graded hierarchy. By applying Ambedkar’s definition of caste we can
see that the very rubric of subalternity bypasses the existential realm of a directexperience of division of laborers. Caste life narratives, driven by an Ambed-
karite consciousness, signify a power of articulation, where the physical realmof existence is categorical in realizing aspirations of equality and liberty. Thisessay has shown that caste life narratives, as expressed through certain works
of art, challenge the social metanarrative of Indian society, interrogate “pro-tected ignorance,” implicitly question the ambiguouscategory of “subaltern,”
interrogate the “postcolonial,” and critique Brahmanical hegemony.


Thank you 😊

Click here to visit my another paper presentation on the same topic.

Reference.
Achar, Deeptha, and Shivaji Pannikar. Articulating Resistance: Art and Activism. Tulika Books, 2012.

Alone, Y. S. “Dr. Ambedkar’s Historicism: Confrontations and Inquiries.” Ambedkar in Ret- rospect: Essays on Economics, Politics and Society, edited by Sukhadeo Thorat Aryama, Rawat, 2007, pp. 261–91


“Can the Subaltern Speak?” Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, edited by Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg, U of Illinois P, 1988, pp. 271–313. Sutar, Sudhanshu. Personal interview. 2016.

Kumar, Vivek. “Babasaheb Ambedkar: Conceptualization and Operationalization of Social Justice.” Globalization and Social Justice: Perspectives, Challenges and Praxis, edited by P. G. Jogdand, Prashant P. Bansode, and N. G. Meshram, Ravat Publication, 2008, pp. 103–55. ———.