Thoughts on The Idol Thief
Sripuranthan Nataraja (courtesy: The Hindu) |
Colonialism and
imperialism, as the leftists would often argue, continues to manifest
itself in many ways, even as the colonies are long gone. A
fundamental manifestation in today's times are these galleries,
museums and private collections dotting the global art landscape.
Sujit
Sivasundaram in his book ‘Islanded’ had noted
how the Britishers tried very hard to occupy the place of the
Tri-Simhala Kandyan Kings of Sri Lanka by undertaking grand projects
of legitimacy. One aspect of that was the blatant cultural
appropriation by the British to show themselves as patrons of art
through two primary ways - commissioning art works for their own
glorification akin to the kings, and also to 'restore and protect'
heritage of the past of the occupied lands. Further, much damage was
undertaken in many colonies - the Taj
Mahal was also up for sale but for the pittance being received
for its 'inferior' marble. One standard way of the British and many
others was also to take away artifacts and items of great value to
reduce them to displays in their own countries – many of the
colonial officers themselves, during these postings, indulge in sales
of exotic oriental arts to supplement their incomes from the various
East India Companies or the parent governments. Even as part of the
history and archaeology bodies, the bosses, often the European, had
nothing but contempt for the heritage, or would take it away to their
parent country as some kind of trophy, a kind of jewel in the crown
that the colony represented. This was aptly represented by the
character of District Commissioner Richard in Bhisham
Sahni’s magnificent novel Tamas, where a curator excavating a
site nearby ‘gifts’ a Buddha head, adding to his already large
collection. ‘They cannot take care of it,’ ‘it is better in our
museums and collections’ - the attitude continues to fester even
today amongst the patrons and museum curators.
The impacts of this
new form of modern imperialism is felt across the antiquities market,
evidences of which can be seen time and again. The antiquities black
market is, as the investigative
journalist Jason Felch had stated few years back, the dirtiest
corner of the art world, and seems to find ways in washing its hands
off responsibilities altogether. While it is my personal opinion that
old objects being either to museums or their source locations, one
must admit that a sizeable market for such esoteric art does exist
globally. Therefore, the least that these institutions could do is to
ensure that there is responsible procurement, not just driven by
greed and arrogance. The biggest weakness of the market practices,
the process of provenance, is riddled with several weaknesses – the
manner in which the antiquity of the piece and the investigation into
its origins is shameful to say the least. Circular referencing, fake
letterheads and stamps, references to outdated or unreliable
databases, fictitious art validation by historians or quoting
imaginary conversations – the procedure is riddled with falsehoods
and deceit at every step. One of the biggest heists therefore
happened with the action in the United States of America and India
independently on the notorious antique smuggler Subhash Kapoor, who
had left no stone unturned in earning big bucks by looting temple
antiquities and artifacts from various sites in India like
Chandaketugarh (which has not yet been verified). It was only in 2011-12
that a grip on him was obtained in the case of the theft of the
Sripuranthan Nataraja and Uma Maheshwari bronzes. A highly detailed
account has been provided by S
Vijay Kumar in his memoir like book, The Idol Thief,
which traces the fall of Subhash Kapoor through a convergence of
independent actions and initiatives taking place across the world. It
is interesting to note how Vijay also points out the rot present in
the investigation agencies in India as well. The Madras High Court
had last year observed ruefully the horrendous
practices undertaken by the moles inside the Idol Wing of Tamil Nadu
Police and the thoroughly corrupt officials of the Hindu Religious
and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department of Tamil Nadu to
abet if not entirely aid the theft of idols. The professional network
of such smugglers within India like Sanjeevi Asokan and the Prakashs,
or the manner in which Singapore and Hong Kong have become excellent
conduits for smugglers with impunity has been highlighted thoroughly,
giving the reader a good introduction into the nefarious antiquities
world. Vijay Kumar’s own tryst
with the Chola Uma Maheshwari at display in a prominent Singapore
museum has also been discussed, and serves as a symbol of the
tentacles that this hydra called Subhash Kapoor had spread across the
world, looting not just our antiquities, but pushing a knife of greed
and contempt through our culture, heritage and traditions in a single
blow.
Courtesy: The Hindu |
The book, though an
important one, leaves the reader highly unsatisfied. Editing could
have been tighter, and the flow seems interrupted at several ends. On
reading the book, you wish that the author had written much more
lucidly about the entire Subhash Kapoor saga – the information
presented therein about the various cases is no more than that
already
floating in the public domain. However, it can be forgiven, since
the author is not a full time investigator or journalist, and has
taken considerable pains to get this account out. Also, the India
Pride Project, which morphed out of the efforts of the writer and
many others, would understandably prefer to keep several things under
wraps, and so can be forgiven, especially the identities of the
various anonymous tippers, investigators and contributors who sit in
the crosshairs of the antiquities market. Several pieces have
highlighted the role that antiquities smuggling has been paying in
financing terrorism, narcotics and many other crimes to generate
finances for operations, and this book is an important contribution
to the discussion on ways to curbing this ever increasing problem.
A philosophical
question arising from the whole exercise is the manner of
repatriation of antiquities. Morality demands that the countries go
ahead and use diplomatic channels for obtaining clearances. However,
people do not necessarily want to wait anymore. It is an open secret
today that rich elite of emerging economies are tapping into the same
burglar smuggler network now to ‘repatriate their honour’ in many
ways, with China leading the way. Is it correct though? Some in the
India Pride Project disagree
with the idea of theft on moral grounds; however, the frustrating
grind of bureaucratic machinery adds fuel to the fires of impatience
and anger seething amongst many. The role of the countries of origin
in these cases also leaves much to be desired, as shown with the
Indian government’s lethargy in taking back antiquities officially
returned, forget requesting new discoveries.
I would recommend
this book to all those who would like to know more, in an
interesting, easy to read manner, about this shady world’s
business. It behoves a more detailed examination though, but it is
not an attractive enough topic for several ‘intellectuals’ to
explore, and may not be there any time soon. Till then, read through
this and wonder where the Suthavalli Nataraja still hides.
Comments