Remembering India’s First Modern Sculptor, Ramkinkar Baij

He broke free from the stultifying conformism of colonial and pre-modern studio sculpturing to encompass in his work the lives and struggles of plain, unremarkable human beings.

My memories of Ramkinkar Baij, such as they are, are interlaced with two things that one rarely associates with an artist. The first, curiously, is kerosene. And the second, somewhat less oddly, is summer, or rather, a hot summer day.

One afternoon in the middle of April, in 1973, my friend and I were walking around Santiniketan’s quiet Ratan Pally on some errand, when my friend nudged me and pointed at someone who was coming from the opposite direction. He was a bare-bodied, bare-footed man in a short dhoti and a wide straw topi, and slung from his right arm by a piece of rope was a green bottle that smelt strongly of kerosene as he passed by us.

I gasped as my friend told me who he was, for only the previous day I had seen some of the Ramkinkar sculptures that dot the Santiniketan landscape. The only other time I saw him was in late May or early June of 1975, when another friend and I, on a rickshaw from the Bolpur station to Santiniketan, caught a glimpse of Ramkinkar on a bicycle, the bottle of what I thought was kerosene slung from the bike’s handlebar this time. It was a murderously hot day, but Ramkinkar seemed to me to be in perfect harmony with his surroundings, much as his sculptures had always appeared to do with theirs.

The truth, though, is that Santiniketan had always treated Ramkinkar as a bit of an oddball. Here was a true bohemian who set little store by convention, whether in his art or in his life, and genteel Santiniketan found it hard to come to terms with him. Indeed, it is a safe guess that, had Rabindranath Tagore not been alive when Ramkinkar first came to Santiniketan, he would have found the place far less welcoming. Great artist and peerless teacher that he was, Nandalal Bose was yet a traditionalist, and here was a student who not only had begun to work in oil since his early teens but also appeared to have evolved an idiom of his own already.

Extraordinarily talented people seldom fit smoothly into rigorously formal training systems, as Rabindranath had known from personal experience, and, but for the poet’s active encouragement, Ramkinkar would probably have found himself at a loose end early on.

‘Sujata’ (1935) – one of Ramkinkar’s earliest forays into alfresco sculpting. Photo: Biswarup Ganguly, CC BY 3.0/Wikimedia Commons

A callow 19-year-old from rural Bankura, Ramkinkar had arrived in Santiniketan in 1925, quite fortuitously. But since he had been recommended as a student of Santiniketan’s Kala Bhavan (the Art school) by Ramananda Chatterjee, the legendary editor of both The Modern Review and the Prabasi (‘The Expatriate’) magazines, Rabindranath himself kept an eye on the artistic development of this great idiosyncratic talent.

Also read: Cutting Through Mountains to Build a Statue

Ramkinkar pretty much sailed through Kala Bhavan’s academic programme and later joined the same school’s teaching faculty, becoming, in a few years’ time, the chair of the department of sculpture. He had grown up watching the local craftsmen and image-makers of Bankura at work, learning how to make small clay figures with the same felicity as drawing and painting with whatever resources that came his way. And now, with his intellectual horizons widened immeasurably and his artistic imagination allowed full play, he turned his attention to out-of-doors sculpture, something virtually unknown in India outside of religious and colonial-heritage installations dedicated to gods or rulers.

One of his early works was a representation of the Buddha, of course, but the themes he readily engaged with nearly always revolved around ordinary people living their quotidian lives in unremarkable circumstances, their daily struggles, joys and sorrows, disappointments and triumphs.

Indeed, his 1935 sculpture ‘Sujata’ was also conceived as only a portrait of a Kala Bhavan student, though the later addition, at Nandalal’s instance, of an above-the-head receptacle – presumably containing a devotional offering of payasam – transformed the portrait into one of the famous Buddha disciple’s. What is extraordinary about this early work, though, is that it was visualised not only as a work of art in and by itself: it was executed as verily a part of a eucalyptus grove inside the Santiniketan campus where the depicted human figure seemed to blend seamlessly with the slender tree-trunks crowding around it.

Rabindranath must have liked it greatly, because he is understood to have suggested to the young artist that he ‘fill the campus with sculptures’. If Ramkinkar needed any encouragement to press ahead with his alfresco projects, here it was.

In turning determinedly away from mythological or religious subjects, Ramkinkar inevitably focussed on the community of Santhals inhabiting the villages around Santiniketan. Here was a community which had managed to preserve the integrity of its pre-modern lifestyle, though it was increasingly getting exposed to an industrial – or, at any rate, an industrialising – society. Ramkinkar once spelt out his admiration for the community with characteristic candour:

(If) I feel an attraction towards them, the main reason behind this is their life, (its) vigour and rhythm. Their movement and words are rhythmic. The same rhythmic quality is reflected in their households, their day-to-day activities. Their lives are not as coarse and dirty as our lives.

It is this ‘vigour and rhythm’, this conflation of easy grace and strong simplicity, that many of Ramkinkar’s sculptures so majestically capture. Two monumental creations – Santhal Family (1938) and Mill Call (1956) – stand out.

(From the left) Santhal Family and Mill Call. Photo: Wikipedia

Santhal Family (detail) Photo: Wikipedia

These are studies of human beings in motion – moving house with their meagre belongings in one case, and rushing to answer the call of the factory siren in the other. Acute observation, compassion, humour and a touch of pathos shape these creations, but the overriding sense is one of verve and sparkle, of grace and strength.

The idiom is uniquely Ramkinkar’s: it effortlessly melds modern western and pre-classical Indian sculptural values in equal measure. Of course, he had scarcely any option other than to strike out on his own, because there had been no significant Indian sculptural tradition before him – except the popular ones of memorial/religious sculptures that he could have drawn upon with profit. And since he brought the first truly modern sensibility to Indian sculpture while still being firmly rooted in the soil he grew up on, he emerged as the first authentic exponent of modern Indian sculpture.

But while works like Santhal Family and Mill Call are invested with a strong lyrical content, Ramkinkar was equally adept in evoking a sense of wretchedness or stark hopelessness. The headless female nude in Thresher is captured in the act of harvesting corn – a potentially life-giving ritual whose purpose contrasts tellingly with the dreariness of the effort itself. The crippling human cost of the Bengal Famine of 1943 is adumbrated in this work. After all, hundreds of thousands of Bengal’s poor perished in that catastrophe – among them countless peasants who put food on privileged tables but starved to death themselves.

Also read: Man, Artist, Wound: Somnath Hore as I Knew Him

Few of Ramkinkar’s public sculptures were commissioned or sponsored work – except the Yaksha/Yakshi duo installed at the entrance to the Reserve Bank of India in New Delhi – and he had to make do with whatever resources he could mobilise locally through his personal efforts. This must have obliged him to use only inexpensive, locally available material, but his genius helped metamorphose this seeming handicap into an abiding strength.

Many of his  sculptures were crafted with cement concrete – rather than stone or bronze or plaster of Paris, all expensive ingredients – combined with laterite pebbles, abundant quantities of which were available in and around Santiniketan then. His chosen medium gives his alfresco sculptures their distinctive texture and flavour. They look as though they have risen out of the ground, much like termite mounds seen growing out of Santinketan’s red soil. They are rugged, earthy, zestful – never unexciting or flat.

Ramkinkar built each sculpture around metal armatures – or bamboo-and-stick contraptions perhaps held together by a piece of rope – and threw clumps of the cement-laterite paste over them, which he shaped and chiselled away at as he went along. It was an extraordinarily demanding effort, for cement, unlike clay or plaster or wax, hardens quickly and is difficult to handle. And yet he fashioned out of this material numerous busts and portraits, often at incredible speed.

The Poet (1937). Photo: NGMA Delhi

Ramkinkar’s sculptures – much like his paintings – defy pigeonholing into a particular category: modernist, expressionist, cubist or abstract. He absorbed multiple influences, often many at the same time, and assimilated them so completely as to be able to fuse different approaches and styles effortlessly, often in the same work. Expressionism remains a strong undercurrent in his work, but his portraits and busts also reflect an abstraction of form accentuated by somewhat distorted anatomies, highlighting the essential characteristics that define the person being depicted.

The 1937 image of Rabindranath Tagore (see above) is an outstanding example. The poet’s face is profoundly unlike its habitual image, and yet the narrow head with a significantly elongated nose, the penetrating eyes, the receding hair that curls inwards and a beard that pleats well beyond the chins together leave the viewer in no doubt about the subject or the power of his presence. This is perhaps one of the first post-cubist character portraits done by an Indian sculptor.

‘Famine’ (1943) Photo: National Gallery of Modern Art

The minimalist creation Famine, on the other hand, reproduces with a fine weave of expressionism and symbolism the horror of the Bengal Famine. Bulging eyes on a bloated head perched on top of an emaciated body and spindly fingers clasping at an empty begging bowl create an image that haunts the viewer well after she is done viewing.

I had begun by recalling my personal memories of Ramkinkar Baij. Let me end with two glimpses of what posterity, in India, has chosen to do to his legacy. In December 2015, on a day trip to Balaton from Budapest, I made what I then thought was a startling discovery but later realised was stale news. Balaton is central Europe’s largest freshwater lake and a splendid all-season tourist destination, but to me, an Indian, it recommended itself on another count – its association with Rabindranath Tagore. In a heart sanatorium in the charming lakeside town of Balatonfured, the poet had spent three weeks in October 1926, convalescing. He had been taken ill in course of a long and gruelling tour of Europe that covered Scandinavia to Italy to Hungary.

The rooms of the hospital the poet stayed in have been preserved as a memorial to Rabindranath, and there is a lovely ‘Tagore Promenade’ on the lake-front made up of two rows of linden trees, the first of those trees having been planted by the poet himself, as a tribute to Balaton, after he got back his health.

The Tagore bust that offended genteel sensibilities. Photo: National Gallery of Modern Art

I loved the place, but wondered why a very ordinary-looking Tagore bust had been placed in the middle of the promenade. Oddly, the bust sat on a pedestal that seemed to lean a little to the front. I forgot all about it, however, till I reached the sanatorium/museum when I found, sitting on a desk inside the room the poet had occupied, Ramkinkar’s magnificent 1940 study of Rabindranath.

It is a remarkable study, for it is the image of a pensive old man whose deeply-lined brow bears witness to tragedy and pain, not an image exuding Olympian equanimity. Why was this masterpiece lying cooped up in a room even as a perfect mediocrity stood outside in full public view, claiming to represent India’s greatest poet?

It turns out that it was, indeed, the Ramkinkar bust that had first adorned the promenade, and a slightly tilted pedestal had been chosen to accommodate its unusual bearing. However, sundry Indian VIPs (mainly politicians but also, sadly, some well-known Tagore aficionados) clamoured in later years for its banishment, averring that it was ugly, and by no means an ‘authentic’ image of the sage-like poet.

The controversy raged for many years before it finally smoothed the way, in 2005, for the non-descript academic sculpture to make its appearance, relegating a wonderful work of art to the obscurity of a closed room. I, an Indian, had to hang my head in shame in far-away Hungary that day.   

Cut to Ramkinkar’s own Santiniketan, where, in January 2017, my wife and I were visiting after many years. One afternoon we were walking around the Kala Bhavan complex, trying to figure out how much the whole place had changed since we had been there last. It was then that our eyes fell upon an extraordinary scene: a portrait of Ramkinkar in a rubbish dump. The bust looked suspiciously like the copy of a famous study by a reputed artist, but that was hardly the most striking thing here.

Ramkinkar bust in a rubbish dump in Santiniketan. Photo: Author provided

What really stood out was the supreme unconcern with which Santiniketan had come to treat the memory of arguably its greatest plastic artist, a titan who, in his time, had spurned fame and lucre so that he could go on living, and working, in peace in the place he had made his home.

No question that India was well on its way to becoming the Vishwa Guru.

Anjan Basu can be reached at basuanjan52@gmail.com

In Talk of Dismantling Ramkinkar Baij’s Gandhi Statue in Guwahati, an Unhappy Déjà Vu

In 1984, a Left Front minister in Bengal wanted Baij’s statue of Tagore in Hungary removed because it didn’t ‘look like him’. Today, his statue of Gandhi in Assam is facing the same criticism.

New Delhi: By Hungary’s Lake Balaton, many would know, there is a promenade named after Rabindranath Tagore. This is because the town of Balatonfüred felt a sense of pride that Tagore, a Nobel laureate, came visiting in 1926 to have himself treated at the famed State Hospital for Cardiology there.

In 1984, the then public works department minister in the West Bengal government, Jatin Chakraborty (of the Revolutionary Socialist Party), visited that promenade in the spa town to inaugurate a bust of Tagore. The bronze bust was crafted by none other than the father of modern Indian sculpture, Ramkinkar Baij – also an old associate of Tagore at Santiniketan.

Soon after removing the veil from the bust, Chakraborty remarked that it didn’t “look like” Tagore and should therefore be replaced. On returning home, he went about working towards this, triggering a huge uproar and much resistance by the state’s art fraternity.

The protesters, led by Satyajit Ray, finally forced the then state government not to go ahead with this plan and Chakraborty had to take back his statement on Baij’s work. The culture minister who decided against replacing the bust was the Communist Party of India (Marxist)’s Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee.

However, much after Ray’s death, sometime in the mid-2000s, Baij’s sculpture was replaced by a new one that looked “more like” Tagore. The West Bengal chief minister, ironically, was Bhattacharjee.

The bust created by Baij was thereafter placed in room number 220 at the State Hospital for Cardiology, where Tagore was treated.

For those aware of the 1984 incident, news that the Assam government has reportedly decided to replace a bronze statue of Mahatma Gandhi created by Baij simply because a group of administrators joined by a state politician think it doesn’t “look like” Gandhi, evoked unpleasant memories.

Begun in 1968 by Baij and later completed by his students, the statue was installed at the Gandhi Mandap in Guwahati’s Sarania Hills in October, 1970. Then chief minister Bishnu Ram Medhi inaugurated it on Gandhi Jayanti.

According to the Indian Express, the decision to replace the 47-year-old statue was taken in a meeting of Kamrup metropolitan district officials, attended by local MLA and former BJP state president Siddhartha Bhattacharjee. A new one which ‘looks like’ Gandhi is meant to replace it.

Without a doubt, this is Assam’s ‘Chakraborty moment’.

In keeping with the Left Bengal leader’s observation about the Tagore bust by Baij, the BJP politician was quoted in the report as saying, “Look at the statue. Look at the disproportionate hands and feet. They do not resemble those of the Mahatma in any manner. His face is distorted, as also the pair of glasses. That is why we have decided to dismantle it and place a new statue there.”

Though chief minister Sarbananda Sonowal has not responded to appeals on social media to stop his government’s plan for the Gandhi statue, a tweet from the Assam government’s official handle late on August 9 evening, insisted the statue was safe:

The official tweet said, “This is absolutely false news. The Government of Assam has decided to renovate the entire area of Gandhi Mandap. The Gandhi statue will remain as it is.”

The France-based K.S. Radhakrishnan, renowned sculptor and a student of Baij at Shanti Niketan, was one of those who felt that moment of déjà vu after reading the Indian Express‘s report.

“I woke up in Paris, a city of great public sculptures, to hear this atrocious news of a few administrators trying to destroy a monumental sculpture of Gandhi done by Baij. It came as a body blow. As an independent artist, as a student of Baij, as a person who believes in Gandhian values, and as an artist who has done several public sculptures, I condemn this move. It is anti-ethical as well as anti-aesthetic,” Radhakrishnan told The Wire.

According to art historian R. Sivakumar, two sculptors, Baij and Sarbari Roy Choudhury, “loomed large over [Radhakrishnan’s] mental horizon during his student days in Shantiniketan”.

Ramkinkar Baij. Credit: Twitter

Ramkinkar Baij. Credit: Twitter

Recalling the 1984 incident, Radhakrishnan pointed out, “What happened in Bengal in 1984, now in Assam and many such incidents about other art works actually show that when it comes to art and aesthetics, the policymakers, administrators and politicians just can’t make a decision on it among themselves. If they find artistic distortion as something to be done away with, I would say that they should consult experts in the field before doing anything with works of art. Because, these kind of activities can adversely affect our public discourse on art and aesthetics. I feel it is high time that politicians leave art and artists alone to do their work.”

Like Chakraborty three and a half decades earlier, Bhattacharjee betrayed his lack of understanding about the role an artist’s interpretations play in the portrayal of a personality. In fact Baij, considered one of the foremost sculptors of modern India, is recognised worldwide precisely for the non-conformist and earthy nature of his work.

It is also exactly because of this lack of refined consciousness about arts and aesthetics that a lot of statues across Indian cities are often seen getting a coat of paint, even though the material used by the artist may be stone or bronze. Baij’s Gandhi statue in Guwahati is one such victim of bureaucratic nonchalance. The brazen lack of interest from district administrators has led the statue to suffer, every year, at least three mandatory coats of paint during Gandhi Jayanti, Republic Day and Independence Day. Never mind that the statue is made of bronze.

A blog post on August 9 by Delhi-based art critic Johny M.L., quoting Sivakumar, gives more details about the statue. Sivakumar said, “This work was created by a group of assistants based on one of the miniature models created by Baij in his studio sometime in 1948.”

Radhakrishnan, who curated a retrospective on Baij in 2012 at the National Gallery of Modern Art, New Delhi, said the 1948 maquette of Baij’s Gandhi statue is still at Kalabhavan, Shanti Niketan.

Gandhi statue by Baij in Santiniketan. Credit: Vijay Mahajan/vijaymahajan.worpress.com

“Though the maquette shows Gandhi stepping on a skull, showing his presence in riot-ridden Noakhali, the statue in Guwahati doesn’t. One may say it was a work done by Baij’s students and therefore it is not his work, but you have to keep in mind that when a sculpture of a considerable size, particularly when it is made of bronze, stone, etc. the artist has to take help from others. Baij used to do it very often; students would work on a piece under his supervision. He never thought much about his works or their criticism. He was like that,” he told The Wire.

A Guwahati-based journalist who asked not to be identified said that although the Kamrup metropolitan district officials indeed passed a resolution to bring down the statue on August 7, the decision had been in the works for “about a year”.

“There was a meeting of district officials about a year ago where the issue came up and the officials agreed to replace it with a new one. About four-five months ago, a tender was released too, seeking bidders for the new bust. Some people have also applied for it,” he claimed.

In an interview to The Wire, the well-known Guwahati-based artist Noni Borpujari  corroborated this claim. “Yes, this has been going on for nearly a year. I am glad that [the news] has come out at the national level now. When I got to know about it then, I alerted the Guwahati Artist Guild, and said we must petition the government not to go ahead with this. After all, how many cities today can boast of public art done by Baij? It is a matter of pride for our city. If publicised well, it can also be a tourist attraction. However, nothing happened. Some time later, I heard that a member of the guild too had responded to the government’s tender process to replace the significant statue. I feel so disappointed that assignment of art works has been reduced to almost a contractor’s job, through tender, etc.” he said. Attempts by The Wire to confirm the tendering process for the replacement of the statue met with no response from the concerned officials.

Though Borpujari said he failed in his efforts to mobilise support for the Baij statue, his attempts to protect the historic police station in Gohpur town of Biswanath district, which was also to be dismantled, have been successful.

“It was the police station where the celebrated Assamese freedom fighter Kanaklata hoisted the Indian flag for which she was shot dead by the British. While visiting Gohpur in early January with my wife, I took her to the station and began clicking a few photos of the old building. A policeman stopped me. When I asked him whether he knew about the significance of the old building, he said no, but added that Rs 18 lakh had been sanctioned by the previous Tarun Gogoi government to dismantle the historic building. I was shocked to hear that a few bureaucrats took the decision, much like what happened in the Baij statue case, while the local people, who are so proud of it, had no idea about the government’s plan. So I petitioned the chief minister’s office, requesting the government to preserve that building which makes us Assamese feel proud. Sonowal responded quickly. He not only stopped the earlier order but also got a statue of Kanaklata holding the national flag installed there,” Borpujari told The Wire.

Ramachandran’s ‘Monumental Gandhi’ Is a Symbol of Peace in These Frenzied Times

The seven-foot plus bronze sculpture of Gandhi, which has a bullet hole and the words ‘Hey Ram’ engraved on its back, is on display at the National Gallery of Modern Art in Bengaluru.

The seven-foot plus bronze sculpture of Gandhi, which has a bullet hole and the words ‘Hey Ram’ engraved on its back, is on display at the National Gallery of Modern Art in Bengaluru.

A. Ramachandran. Credit: YouTube

A. Ramachandran. Credit: YouTube

At a time when every other Indian is experiencing an adrenaline rush in his dreams of forcefully crossing the Line of Control, even if vicariously, it is perhaps a good moment to contemplate on the representation of Mahatma Gandhi. The Indian landscape teems with realistic portraits of Gandhi. Every small town crossroads, every public office sports a clichéd likeness. So much so, the eye gets jaded with the lifeless portrayals and we effortlessly push Gandhi’s memory into oblivion.

An artist’s conceptual portrait of Gandhi is quite a different matter. An example of this is A. Ramachandran’s seven-feet plus bronze sculpture titled ‘Monumental Gandhi: Hey Ram, Second Version.’ The first version was completed in 2012 and was shown a couple of years later. Both versions are similar in execution, but the ‘Second Version’ has on its back a bullet hole and “Hey Ram”, the poignant cry uttered by Gandhi when his life came to an abrupt end by the assassin’s bullet. It went on display in a retrospective of Ramchandran’s work at the National Gallery of Modern Art (NGMA) in Bengaluru on Wednesday.

Monumental Gandhi: Hey Ram, Second Version. Credit: Ella Datta.

Monumental Gandhi: Hey Ram, Second Version. Courtesy: Ella Datta.

Ramachandran’s ‘Monumental Gandhi’ is a standing figure with the flowing drapes of his chadar gleaming softly over his body. His hands are folded in a namaskar, expressing humility and respect towards all sentient beings. In contrast to the smooth, burnished glow of the robe, Gandhi’s head is roughened like an eroded rock-face. The figure stands on nearly a three and a half feet square base.

On this platform is carved in heavy, bold lettering of varying sizes, Einstein’s famous quote on Gandhi, “Generations to come, it may well be, will scarce believe that such a man as this one ever in flesh and blood walked upon this Earth.” This blending of text and image endows the sculpture with a larger dimension.

Monumental Gandhi: Hey Ram, Second Version. Credit: Ella Datta

Monumental Gandhi: Hey Ram, Second Version. Courtesy: Ella Datta

Not only may this sculpture be seen as a symbol of peace and truth, but in its evocations of compassion, it is also reminiscent of the standing Buddhas of early India. Such a conflation of the ideas of Buddha and Gandhi in the artist’s mind goes back to 1969, when Ramachandran was commissioned to do a mural in Delhi for Gandhi’s centenary. He titled it ‘Gandhi and the 20th Century Cult of Violence’The occasion gave Ramachandran an opportunity to contemplate on the history of our times, not just of India, but also of the world.

The horrific narrative of violence replete with images of torture and bloodshed that are depicted in the mural is broken in the central section by the emergence of Gandhi’s bare leg, dhoti-clad till the thigh, from a veil of darkness and is topped with multiple images of seated Buddha. This is a positive assertion of human values to counter the negative, nightmarish vision of life that he expressed in the first two decades of his art practice.

From the mid-1980s, Ramachandran stopped painting manifest narratives of violence, torture, bloodshed and dehumanisation. In 1984, he witnessed from his home a Sikh shop owner from the neighbourhood being lynched and felt that no representation of violence that he had done so far could ever replicate the cataclysmic horror of reality. Bringing people face to face with the violence in society could not change their mindset. So he began painting and sculpting an idyllic vision of man in nature in the scenes from the lives of Bhil tribals living in the villages around Udaipur. Many contemporaries have critiqued Ramachandran’s representations of adivasi life and environment as an indulgence, but the artist has steadfastly engaged himself in representing an alternate vision of life.

This does not, however, mean that Ramachandran is not aware of the violence and turbulence seething below the surface that flare up from time to time. The Gandhi sculptures that he has made in the last four years indicate that he is responding to our troubled times in his own way. In a catalogue essay titled ‘The Multiple Worlds of A. Ramachandran’, art historian R. Siva Kumar wrote, “Our lives are shaped by our times, but we choose from the possibilities of our times on our own terms. This creates a variety of valid responses to the world at any given historical moment, …”.

When asked why he thought of sculpting Gandhi, Ramachandran said, “Gandhi is the solitary political image that haunts me even today.” As a young boy, Ramachandran remembers being drawn to Gandhi, especially because of a teacher who was a passionate Gandhian and who talked to the boys about the leader’s ideas.

Later, when Ramachandran went to study art at Kala Bhavana in Santiniketan, West Bengal, he encountered Nandalal Bose’s linocut portrait of the Mahatma titled ‘Dandi March’ with the legend Bapuji, 1930, inscribed on it. Sculptor Sankho Chaudhuri, who was also an alumnus of Kala Bhavan,a has written about Bose’s respect for Gandhi. He has stated, “His admiration for Gandhiji and the Swadeshi movement could be seen in his portrayal of Gandhiji in his famous linocut … symbolic of the spirit of the Mahatma.”

Ramachandran also absorbed the vigour and strength of the bas-relief sculpture, ‘Dandi March’ by his mentor Ramkinkar Baij, which was modelled on Bose’s linocut, but was enlarged. Ramachandran was very impressed by this transformation. He said, “Ramkinkar cut grooves and gashes into the wet cement. It was as if the sculpture was turned into a line drawing.” Beside the bas-relief, Baij made two sculptures in the round of Gandhi, one of which, bold and rugged, is in the collection of NGMA, New Delhi.

Bose’s linocut and Baij’s sculptures show Gandhi in a heroic stance. The two artists conceptualised Gandhi as a brave, determined leader, exuding a moral strength and guiding his people to resist the British Raj. Although belonging to the same gharana, as it were, Ramachandran’s Gandhi has a different appeal. In its simplicity of form and larger than life proportions, there appears to be a spiritual force instilled in the two versions of ‘Monumental Gandhi’. Whereas the Gandhis portrayed by his teachers have powerful movement inscribed into the figures, the very stillness of Ramachandran’s portrayal emanates a different kind of power.

The idea of the simplification of form came to him in a flash of childhood memory. The woman who supplied his family with the daily requirement of clay pots brought some clay one day and showed him how to make a simple figure by rolling out a cylinder of wet clay and then pinching it here and there to make a human form.

The artist followed almost the same principle to make the ‘Monumental Gandhi’. Only pinching was not enough to give the clay cylinder a lofty human form. He had to beat the roll of clay, flattening out the chest, narrowing the waist and so on. Here the artist had to engage in a heroic struggle to overcome the challenges of the material and give form to the elusive ideas that lurked in his mind.

Ramachandran’s monumental Gandhis stand as icons of peace guarding against the violence that threatens to tear apart the communities of the world. The brutality and murderousness that peaked in the 20th century seems to be gathering added momentum in our present time. The retrospective organised by NGMA, Bengaluru in collaboration with Vadehra Art Gallery, New Delhi will be on view for three weeks. It is worth a visit, if only as an antidote to these present, frenzied times.