|
|
|
| March 23, 2007 | Friday | Rabi-ul-Awwal 3, 1428 |
Visual artists see a lot in change of name: National Art Gallery
ISLAMABAD, March 22: Just days before its opening, the National Art Gallery has been renamed as the National Centre of Creative Arts to the shock of the visual arts community in the country.
Top visual artists expressed the fear that this action of the Ministry of Culture was an attempt to undermine the very concept for which the gallery was founded.
They suspected that the motive behind the renaming was to expand the national art gallery project to include “all forms of performing arts”.
It was meant to be one of the country’s largest and most significant art projects in six decades - a home to some of the rarest works by the nation’s greatest masters like Sadequain, Chughtai and Shakir Ali to name a few.
It was still under construction when preparations started for a premature inauguration, now scheduled for March 26.
“This (National Centre for Creative Arts) is now the official name of the project,” Ministry of Culture Secretary Salim Gul Sheikh, confirmed to Dawn.
When asked for the reason for changing the name, Mr Sheikh retorted: “It should not be a big issue. It’s a government project and the government has decided to rename it.”
As criticism mounts, painters, art critics and historians, sculptors, calligraphists, printmakers and even performing artists have termed the move a “gross encroachment and a great loss for the art community.”
Judging from the widespread and harsh criticism, it would be an understatement to say the visual art community is perturbed at dumping the name National Art Gallery which it lovingly - and now forlornly - called NAG.
“We are hurt and feel marginalized,” was how the community’s concern was conveyed to the director general of the Pakistan National Council of Arts (PNCA), Naeem Tahir and the Ministry of Culture.
Art critic Nilofur Farrukh said, “there are many performing art theatres in Islamabad but no proper galleries exclusively for visual arts. We want the gallery to be devoted only to visual art activities and be run only by professionals from the field. That’s how it is world over.”
The NAG was officially earmarked for the visual arts community in its documents from the very inception and all the funding was provided in its name, she said.
“The president who likes promoting the soft image of Pakistan will be inaugurating the gallery. But for the three-hour inaugural programme, only 15 minutes will be devoted to a hurried tour of the exhibitions on which leading artists and curators of the country have been working for over a year. This is being done in total negation of the aspirations of the country’s art community,” Ms Farrukh said.
The visual art community wants the NAG to retain the original name on which the project was initiated, and executed, and not be hijacked by the performing arts, said a former principal the National College for Arts (NCA), Saleema Hashmi.
Ms Hashmi, who is also a curator at the NAG, said the auditorium, built for seminars and debates, had been designed to meet requirements of theatrical performances and was handed over to the performing arts.
Ms Hashmi, herself a performing artist, said, “we have struggled (for) 16 years to make this dream come true and just when the National Art Gallery is near completion, by renaming, the whole complex the objectives of having a NAG have changed.”
Member Board of Governors, NAG, Ijazul Hassan termed the move “totally irregular and unconstitutional”. It was clearly decided at the Board of Governors meeting, attended by Minister for Culture Dr G.G. Jamal and noted in the minutes, that the gallery’s name would remain National Art Gallery, said Mr Hassan, who is also chairman of the Art Association.
“We are so used to violating laws and constitutions. This is yet another example and encroachment of Pakistan’s heritage. This was an opportunity, at last, to show our great heritage,” he said.
Mr Ijaz said he would not attend the inauguration if the name was changed, adding “the move leaves a bad taste in the mouth. It deprives the nation of their heritage. It’s condemnable.”
|
|
|
|
