Wind back to the seventies and the eighties. It was an age of penury, when artists — almost a pejorative term then — would practise the art of adda, that form of prevarication which passed as intellectual debate. They would pool in their precious pennies to buy half-cups of tea. Painting over, or on both sides of a canvas, was the norm. Those who did not have private incomes designed book jackets, did artworks for advertising agencies and illustrations for magazines. Often, their spouses were the main bread earners.
The nineties changed all that. Art became collectible and friendships fizzled away in the face of avarice. Serious money followed, and suddenly the success story of Indian artists was everywhere. Though still some way away from the giant bucks that Western art commands, Indian art has begun to chip away. And not just Indian art, but art from China, Vietnam, Korea, Japan and Iran, thanks to instant access via the Internet, has begun to boom. Collectors are no longer satisfied with the works of any one artist, or genre, or country. International collectors —and art funds — have stoked interest, and prices across Asia have risen. And now Asian, even Indian, collectors want to acquire works from other continents. For the first time, selected works by Damien Hirst from a Sotheby’s sale in London will be shown in New Delhi next week — doubtless to attract India’s billionaire collectors. Stories of price stagnation, of “inevitable correction”, rumoured every other month, have come to nothing as art prices have continued to ride strongly, with quality becoming the key factor in determining prices. Younger contemporary artists are better known in the West than in their own country, their prices now at par with what the moderns command.
In times such as these, people might wonder why an idea like the India Art Summit was so late in the coming. India’s first art outing became a celebration as artists and gallery owners and collectors and connoisseurs and art admirers rubbed shoulders without any of the tetchiness that marked the last decade. Held in New Delhi, which has emerged as the art capital of the country (though the cognoscenti argue that Mumbai understands art better), the Summit has attracted the attention of those interested in art not just within the country but, as was evident even at the launch event, also from those around the world.
An art platform can also help ancillary industries around it mature. One of the key factors requiring urgent attention is insurance. Then, there is the issue of archaic rules, particularly when it comes to antiques and deemed national treasures. Today, many more Indians have the wherewithal to buy back the country’s treasures from auctions or private sales in Europe or America, but are reluctant to bring them back to India from where these antiquities can neither be re-exported, nor easily re-sold. Another issue, and far more sensitive, is the fear of repercussion as lumpen elements take upon themselves the task of sterilising artistic content.
At Rs 1,500 crore (or more likely Rs 2,500 crore, taking into consideration the grey market), the size of the Indian art market is still tiny. The day is not far when — provided the government loosens up its regulations — a single work could fetch Rs 1,500 crore. Fantasy? You’ll eat that word yet.