Abstract

During the first half of the twentieth century colonial India saw the rise of print culture, that produced an entire institutional network of printing presses, publishing houses, newspapers, periodicals and literary societies outside the purview of the state. The arrival of the printing technology and the processes of mechanical reproduction, brought forth a fresh interest in art, and writings on art and aesthetics among the reading public. The nationalist emotion, that had been turning into a major element in India’s socio-political scenario, in tandem with the orientalist points of view that helped in the formulation of national consciousness, contributed to the formation of different positions of art criticism in journals like Prabasi, The Modern Review, and the journals specifically dedicated to art like Rupam, published by the Indian Society of Oriental Art. The question of which narrative of India’s past should steer the development of a modern Indian national consciousness became the predominant issue to ponder upon in the writings on art published in the two journals. Is modern India supposed to trace its roots back through Hinduism to its ancient origins? Evidently, there was the ongoing question of how to respond to the influence of the West, thereby forming positions vis-à-vis the idea of modernity. It is during this period of history that the first issue of The Visva-Bharati Quarterly (further referred to as VBQ) came out in the year 1923. VBQ turned out to be an academic space to acquaint the world about the alternative practice of art at Santiniketan. Selecting some of the writings on art and aesthetics published between 1923 to 1941, this paper seeks to inquire about how different narratives of art criticism were promulgated through the journal with a perennial stress on the syncretic Art culture that Santiniketan stood for.