A Letter to the Editor
To
The
Editor, The ‘TRIVENI’
Sir,
Calcutta,
19th November 1944.
I
am grateful to Mr. K. B. Iyer for paying me a left-handed compliment, by
referring to my very incomplete work on South Indian Bronzes published
in 1915, and since summarized in a profusely illustrated pamphlet, Southern
Iudian Bronzes (1932).
Nobody
is more conscious of my sins of omissions and commissions, and of the many
imperfections in the works than myself. And I have been planning for a long
time to atone for my sins by publishing an exhaustive survey of Southern Indian
Bronzes, accompanied by adequate Photogravure reproductions of the
Masterpieces, such as given in my Masterpieces of Rajput Painting and Rupam.
No amount of literary text, iconographic or rhapsodic, can convey the
beauty of Indian Art–without adequate process of reproduction to convey the
subtlety and mystery of Indian masterpieces. And Mr. Iyer’s two pages of
dithyrambics are not borne out by the miserable half tone blocks with which he
vainly attempts to convey the beauty of the original–which is far better
rendered in the plate in my very incomplete work, which still fills me with
shame and remorse for my inability to do justice to that great school of Indian
Sculpture.
To
publish an adequate work on the subject with worthy and adequate illustrations,
I have vainly canvassed the support of many illustrious and wealthy friends of
the South–who rarely show any appreciation or interest in
the great contribution which ancient Tamil Masters have contributed to the
World of Art–and which is yet very little known in India or abroad.
Art,
in any form or kind, is still an avoided and despised subject in our Schools,
Colleges and Universities, and the cultured public as well as Ministers
and M. L. A’s, and our leaders of men love to ignore the subject, which occupy
the serious attention of all classes of society in all civilized countries.
Under
the circumstances, there is very little chance of the great school of Southern
Indian Bronzes receiving its worthy tribute in the shape of an exhaustive
monograph unless distinguished M. L. A’s, like you, Sir, undertake an agitation
to enlist the support of the well-to-do people to finance the project.
War
has brought into existence numerous War Profiteers who have made enough money
to spare some to vindicate the cause of National Art–which would be far better
spent than in investing in fleets of motor cars, diamond
ear-rings, and other items of ostentatious luxury.
I remain, Sir,
Yours truly,
O. C. Gangoly.
Mr.
K. B. Iyer, to whom a copy of the above letter was sent, writes:
Allahabad,
8-12-44.
To
The Editor, The ‘TRIVENI’
Sir,
I
fail to see how my reference to Mr. Gangoly’s South Indian Bronzes as
incomplete in view of several fresh finds could be regarded, on any showings as
a “left-handed compliment.” Mr. Gangoly has in a penitential mood and with
generous rhetoric catalogued in his letter the many imperfections of his work.
That is all very much worse than I ever suggested or dreamt of.
If
he believes in what he says, then why all this bother? Since his cheap flings
at me hang by that extremely slender thread–the fancied left-handed
compliment–I do not propose to be disturbed into a reply on that Score.
Yours sincerely,
K. B. Iyer.
(We
are publishing above a communication from Mr. O. C. Gangoly, the distinguished
art–critic–and a letter from K. B. Iyer. We and our publishers are more to
blame than our valued contributor, Mr. K. B. Iyer, for the ‘wretched’
reproduction of ‘Gouri’. We admit that the art-reproduction is not as good as
it might be; but we preferred to give some illustration to reinforce the
statements of Mr. K. B. Iyer in his admirable critique–which we would not
rather characterise as ‘dithyrambics.’ We heartily endorse the appeal of Mr.
O. C. Gangoly that those who can spare the money should help art-critics like
him to popularise Indian art.–K.S.G.)