The Third Estate

DO communities need visual scribes? The line suggested that the idea was to create a voice for the eunuch community and hence, the photograp...

DO communities need visual scribes? The line suggested that the idea was to create a voice for the eunuch community and hence, the photography show, supported by a plethora of German agencies, up on display at Max Mueller Bhavan’s Delhi centre. The show took me back almost instantly to Dayanita Singh’s work on the same theme that resulted in the book, Myself Mona Ahmed.

What is the difference between these two bodies of work, apart from the colour and stylistic differences? And what is the synergy? At first glance, Dayanita’s work is without a self-conscious mission, a partnership over several months that explored the possibility of the subject and where image intertwined with text.

The other show is laden with a rights-based agenda where images serve to goad the viewer to recognise the subject. The starkest difference between these two perspectives on eunuchs is that Dayanita has ensured that her lens works in partnership with her subject.

Story continues below this ad

The NGO show, on the other hand, put up images that demanded enfranchisement by assent and did not base themselves upon the Mona Ahmed kind of partnership. The difference is important. It tells us about the perils of artists working with communities, and about how it determines representation.

In a recent similar interaction, a young Delhi-based artist interacted with some teenaged boys from the same background to make a video film. The reality of the boys’ lives—shot in colour, in daylight—merges with the artist’s fantasy, which was shot at night and acted out in accordance with his directions. This is apparent only by speaking to the artist. Otherwise, the bizarre acts he convinces the boys to perform (like breaking tubelights such that they could be injured) or the sharp comments he asks them to make appears to portray the secret adventures of the two boys and makes them mere stereotypes of their drug-addicted lives.

The boys then become a confused cocktail of subjects of a documentary film and actors—reality bytes meets sting operation. For an unlikely moment, imagine the awkward position the boys would be in if that film is seen by anyone involved with their work.

So, how can communities and artists move towards working with each other in equitable ways? How can there be greater participation in the work that will reflect them? This will largely depend upon the artist. It isn’t about being ‘conscious’ alone.

Story continues below this ad

It’s also about how artists view communities and the individuals they partner with, and how they structure their work to create a partnership, risks intact. This stands in contrast to the usual director-actor relationship.

Community-based art is embedded in responsibility. But practising it is challenging, given how the artist’s own perspective may be obfuscated or derailed, forcing such initiatives to turn more exploratory and adventurous than may be feasible. But, a slower pace and dialogue could be the first step. Without that, surely, it’s resource extraction.