Bengaluru: Not privatisation, MoU will ensure a better-run gallery, says expert

Being a proponent for the Government of Karnataka’s (GoK) decision to ‘Adopt a Destination’ under CSR, one is saddened to see some artists put out misleading and wrong information to ensure that the Venkatappa Art Gallery (VAG) adoption MoU signed between the Government agencies and Tasveer Foundation is cancelled.

Terms like ‘brutal, undemocratic takeover’, ‘surreptitious MoU’, ‘usurp public resources’, ‘prime real estate capture’ are being bandied about giving the impression that some of us (who believe that VAG adoption is good for Bengaluru citizens) are descendants of Darth Vader!

How did artists let it deteriorate?
True on both counts. The artists do have an emotional attachment to VAG and the coming together to protest the adoption is a sign of that. Folks recall a few memorable events from the ‘80s, ‘90s.

But if the artists’ hearts bled for VAG, how did they allow the place to go to seed over the last decade and more. Do take a trip to VAG and see for yourself the state of the building and the exhibits – does it do justice to a place set up in the ‘70s under the donation terms of the Venkatappa family.

Ask yourself – what memorable art events in the last decade made you and your family head for VAG? The place has gone to seed and Government by suggesting adoption has indicated its road map to fix the place for the next decade.

Stakeholders of VAG
The protesting artists claim that they are the only stakeholders who matter in VAG. One begs to differ. There are 4 stakeholders – firstly citizens, then the artists, government and if the adoption goes through, the donor. Any resolution of the VAG adoption has to find common ground that is fair to all the stakeholders.

Artists say VAG is a space primarily for artists. Really? It’s a place that belongs to all Bengalureans. It’s a public resource. Check. It’s accessible to all. Check. It’s a democratic space. Check. One does not see how any of these laudable objectives is given up if VAG is adopted by Tasveer Foundation.

If anything the Government is ensuring sustainability of this moth balled building into a vibrant public space. One can understand that there can be a concern that VAG could become an elitist place.

Safeguards can be built to make it inclusive – for instance, a ‘free’ and ‘for a fee’ area can help address this. The way forward would be to build in the requisite checks and balances in the adoption program to ensure public interests are protected. But this implies that artists are willing to engage in a dialogue. And that’s not happening.

In a meeting with the Tourism Minister, a group of artists were adamant that nothing less than MoU cancellation would satisfy them. The Minister suggested that they could meet again after a week to discuss legitimate concerns and offered to make the acceptable changes to the MoU.

But this was spurned outright and one hopes they were not speaking for all artists when they ruled out any further discussions. They wanted the MoU cancelled, the State to provide funds for VAG and hand it over to the artists.

One wonders whether this too can be classified as an attempt at a ‘brutal, undemocratic takeover’ by the artists!

Tasveer Foundation’s plans
Abhishek Poddar of Tasveer Foundation has put out the plans for the premises. Do read it. What’s not to like about the adoption? As Stanley Pinto so eloquently puts it – “… why on earth are they fighting a plan to not just resuscitate but rejuvenate and transform this museum into an international quality space, that will protect and preserve its existing collections, give them every assistance they might need to exhibit their works regularly, create more spaces for a wider range of art formats - and forge links with the world's leading institutions like the Tate in London and the Museum of Modern Art in NY, something that's never been done before?.... Why on earth would the artists of Bangalore resent this wonderful enrichment and overhaul of a near-inanimate VAG?”. Indeed why?

There is a whisper campaign underway that Abhishek Poddar cannot be trusted and VAG will be converted into a private gallery for profit. This kind of maligning an individual who has come forward under a CSR adoption scheme of the Government is totally unwarranted, more so when there are operational conditions in the MoU and there will be a governance / administrative structure cleared by the Government.

Some say it is inconceivable that Abhishek would come forward to do such an adoption without vested interest. History is littered with so many folks (including ‘robber barons’) choosing to do public good, be it donations / endowments for universities, arts & culture, healthcare, education, poverty eradication, etc. Bengalureans need to be thankful that Abhishek has chosen to upgrade and run VAG as a public space.

Which finally brings us to the four options that may play out:

Going ahead with the adoption MoU signed by GoK incorporating any legitimate concerns of the artists and any other citizens
In my view, this is in the best interest of the city. We have a donor with great plans for VAG. If anything, we need to hasten implementation.

Heed the protesting artists’ demand of MoU cancellation, provide Government funds and hand over VAG to an amorphous group of artists.
It will take a very brave Government Minister / Official to take ownership for this decision and any consequences arising from this artists’ handover along with Sarkar money. Good luck!

Setting up a VAG trust that improves and runs VAG
Will need a well-honed, acceptable proposal (including trustees, significant non-government funding) to be tabled and finding Government folks willing to champion it internally with minimal Government involvement. Is anyone coming forward to take ownership to pilot this?

Status quo. VAG goes further south if that’s possible
Inevitable if the adoption proposal is jettisoned. The city will be the loser.

V. Ravichandar, the writer is Professor of Difficult causes, a Bengaluru-based civic evangelist