Hema Upadhyay did not leave a will regarding her wealth or
works. At the age of forty three how many artists, I do not know, think of
writing a will. They might be thinking of changing spouses or changing the past
altogether. Instead of doing either of this most of them go for a complete body
checkup and come out with flying colors, with tick marks in all the columns
that suggest life style diseases. They may hit a gym or a yoga mat; there will
be sudden changes in the diet chart and the quantity of alcohol intake. Turning
spiritual and sprinkling the conversations with philosophical maxims make them officially
forty-fied. Unfortunately, Hema couldn’t turn too spiritual yet she was
cautious. I did not know whether she was philosophical during the last few
years for none of the writers who have tried to deal with her sudden demise
seem to have touched this aspect. Legal battles might have given her due
wisdom. There is not a single human being in the world who has not changed his/her
perspective of life when pain embraced them tightly. If Death is the leveler,
pain is the machine of soul cleansing.
A report in the Economic Times daily (published online on 24th
December 2015) has attempted to raise a few questions about the works that Hema
has left behind without ‘willing’ them to anybody or any agency. Even the two
galleries, Chemould in Mumbai and Vadehra in Delhi are not sure about the
future of her works. Logically, they believe that the works should go back to
her family. One of her works which is currently shown in a project called
Sensorium in Goa, sourced through the Vadehra Gallery, is titled ‘Conversation’
and another work which is with the Chemould Gallery is tilted ‘Evening (Home
Coming)’ and is to be presented in the India Art Fair in Delhi slated to be in
the last week of January 2016. Vadehra has already withdrawn the work from the ‘market’
and it would be a signal to the Chemould gallery that it should also keep the
work out of the market even if it is exhibited in the forthcoming India Art
Fair.
(an installation by Hema Upadhyay)
An artist who has lived long enough would naturally be
bequeathing his works and properties to the heirs or definitely be ‘willing’
them to Estates, Trusts or Foundations. This takes place along the way as the
artists as human beings feel the need to do so in order to avoid further
confusions. Bitter feuds for properties have been a common feature in the history
of art; modern masters like Picasso and Dali were drawn into property feuds
even posthumously though most of them were contained by the negotiations within
the respective estates. The latest feud that we heard was between Charles
Saatchi and his estranged wife Nigella Lawson. They were not artists but the
feud was on the artistic wealth. Closer to home we have the ongoing dispute
between so many parties regarding the works of Manjit Bawa.
Absence of a will paves the way for forgery. The concern of
the galleries that hold the works of Hema now doubles up when the concern of
the collectors and dealers who have invested heavily in the works of Hema added to it.
Though it is not the right occasion to say the following, as I feel that it
should be said by someone at some point, I take the responsibility of saying it
now: Death of an artist ensures enhanced prices of his/her works in the market.
The reason is, the existing oeuvre of the artist will be pristine and there
will not be any addition to it. The solid set of works currently in the market
would behave like rare gems that cannot be replicated. History built around
these works also becomes a supporting factor for the added value. Though I do
not know how a superstitious market or rather a market with superstitious
people would respond to an artist’s works whose life has been cut short by
unnatural means. As of now, it looks like Hema’s death has given her a martyr’s
halo and the works look very poignant with the given history of the artist.
Each work of the artist would be now read back with the tool of the known
history of her painful death and the very backdrop would make us believe that
those works were prophetic in many ways. It becomes very evident when we
understand that Hema’s last works were titled ‘Conversation’ (with a male and
female profile done in rice grains but kept apart) and ‘Evening (Home Coming)’
(which sound so ominous).
(Hema installing her Triennale award winning work)
The biggest fraud that could follow is the introduction of
works done by ‘Hema’ but not done by her. So many dead artists, who have not
left a clear documentation and will regarding their works, have become the
targets of fake makers. In the case of Hema, I do not think her works leave a
possibility of being forged but my humble submission is that the people who are
dealing with her works should be really cautious about the introduction of her
forged works in the market.
Hema has never been a prolific sort of artist. In fact most
of the artists of her generation are not prolific in nature. They work either
according to the demands or as per the schedule of their exhibitions. This is a
situation created by the art boom that appeared and disappeared in the last
decade. Once upon a time artists worked whenever they sat in their studios without thinking much about them getting exhibited or sold (today also there
are artists like that but the present generation does not seem to be like
that). Hema’s generation of artists
started off like ‘artists’ who did art because they did not know anything else
to do. Economic boom showed them a different scenario. They became busier than
ever. The demands on their works were too huge to shoulder alone. The meaning
of an artist’s studio changed considerably as it became primarily the office of
an artist who ‘managed’ his/her works from there. To meet the demands they had
to employ many assistants who painted or sculpted for them. Money and
opportunities made them ambitious and their works too grew into ambitious
scales. Outsourcing became a norm in the art scene. Strategizing became the job
of the artist and most of the Indian contemporary artists in the last decade
proved themselves to be the best managers, administrators and businessmen
alike. In fact, I would say proudly that in this aspect, Indian artists have
become really the ‘Renaissance artists of our contemporary times.’ Besides,
they had to do a lot of travelling and most of the artists managed works through
phone calls and their primary occupation during these travels became
photographing places, people and things with a deliberate intention to use them
(not only as experience but also as raw materials) in their works.
(Hema with her installation in France)
I would say, this kind of busy schedule turned the artists
less prolific than the previous generations of the artists. Sitting in the
studio and working on canvas, going out for sketching, handling clay on
armature, designing things for oneself etc became rare things. Spontaneity
comes to have taken the back seat in the process. In my experience, I have not seen many artists of my generation
working spontaneously (a few of them do). Everything is planned and executed.
Hema was not different from this. During the initial years in Mumbai she might
have worked quite a lot spontaneously. However, later on she too delved herself
into the making of ambitious works. Hence, my assumption is that there cannot
be an enormous amount of works left in her studio. There will be some unsold
works and there will some works half done. There will be some sketches and
plans. If I am not wrong, rest of the works will be either with her galleries
or already in the hands of the collectors. In this scenario, I want to suggest
a few things in order to save the works of Hema from getting forged and also in
order to give Hema a dignified place in our history of art:
1.
Both the galleries, Chemould and Vadehra should
come out with the number of works that they have sold and the number of
works they currently hold.
2.
In the absence of a will, this need not be done
in public. Instead, these two galleries could take a few collectors and Hema’s
family members into confidence and constitute a body to which the number and
details of her works should be presented. If possible, they could include a
cultural theorist as an observer.
3.
There should be a request given to Hema’s family
to start a Trust or Estate in her name and both Chemould and Vadehra could be
two of the executive members.
4.
If her works are floating in the secondary
market, there should be an effort to withdraw all of them for the time being,
till the Trust takes over the affairs of Hema’s works.
5.
All the major collectors of Hema’s works should
come together and make a plan to become ‘Donors’ of her works to the National Gallery
of Modern Art (all three establishments) so that there could be the display of
her works permanently in these national establishments.
6.
All the efforts to monetize her works at least
in the coming five years should be discouraged.
7.
There should be check points created by the art
scene to avoid the possible forgery of her works.
8.
There should be a publication of all her works
and that should be used as a manual to control her works in the market.
Though it is not time to think about the following points, I
would suggest:
1.
There should be an effort to do a Hema
Retrospective in one of the National Institutions.
2.
There should be a bursary in Hema’s name to help
some bright female students to do a course in one of the foreign universities.
3.
There should be an online counseling platform
for all the artist couples going through divorce or property feuds.
4.
There should be an annual seminar on Hema’s
name.
No comments:
Post a Comment