Wed 17 Oct 2007
The following was sent to us anonymously. After verifying some of the information posted here and considering complete blackout of this news in the print media, we are publishing this. This has a few interesting points that needs to be debated. The background of the story was covered here. The opinion is of the author only.
Unholy Alliance?
-Proshno Uttor
The past few weeks have seen tempers run high in some part of the artistic and heritage community over the supposed ‘theft’ of our artifacts by a foreign government, their ‘threatened destruction’ and the ‘anti-state’ activity constituted by their exhibition abroad. Quieter voices within both communities have talked about the importance of culture being part of a universal heritage, which cannot be confined within geographical borders and boundaries but must be shared across communities and countries. But our press has done little to give space to these voices, reporting only the shrill and frankly ignorant (’the Mona Lisa has not been shown outside France’ says one eminent former DG Archaeology – now involved in litigation to stop the artefacts being taken abroad).
All this is about the exhibition on ‘Masterpieces of Bangladesh Art’ to be shown at the Musee Guimet in Paris from October 2007 to March 2008. Or rather the exhibition that should have been shown. Right now it is again a moot point whether the artefacts will ever reach Paris at all, let alone be displayed.
The first time the exhibition was delayed due to a so called ‘public interest litigation’ raising questions about whether the agreements entered into between the Government of France and the Government of Bangladesh and various Bangladeshi national museums had been in accordance with law. This petition included documents from files of the National Security Intelligence. It would be interesting to know how those involved in the case obtained these documents. As it happened, these documents concerned inquiries pending against a government official who it was claimed was involved in accompanying the artifacts to France. In documents presented by the Government before the Supreme Court (and given to the petitioners) it was clear that this claim had no basis at all. The person named is not accompanying the exhibits, nor was he doing so. When the petitioners were asked by the Supreme Court to explain what evidence they had on this point, their lawyer was unable to respond.
The second attempt was a case filed before the District Court, again by ‘art lovers’ including former DGs of Archaeology etc. Interestingly, the case was filed (according to newspaper report) against the French Ambassador and others. The Court issued a show cause order, but did not stop the artefacts from going.
At this point, with no more puppets to join the dance, the DGFI’s (Military Intelligence) fist finally came out from beneath the glove. It directly intervened at the airport to stop the artifacts from going on the ground that an ‘inquiry’ is to be held. An inquiry into what? An inquiry which effectively amounts to non-compliance with an order of the apex Court?
The artists and other genuine arts lovers who raised questions regarding this exhibition surely did so from the cleanest of motives. They were not informed by the Government of many details of the exhibition and being active members of civil society rightly felt that there should have been greater public information and consultation on the issue. Since Bangladesh has never had a major international exhibition of ancient art, it was understandable also that few people were familiar with the procedures and protocols, and were anxious about the risks involved. Perhaps more information and clarification would have resolved their doubts. But for the true believers, perhaps even that would not have helped.
But what deserves attention now is whether these artists know that they are dancing to someone else’s tune? Perhaps alarm bells should have rung when a security consultant, the petitioner in the High Court case, claimed publicly that sending ‘our artifacts abroad is an anti-State activity’? And when NSI documents appeared in the Writ Petition? Or when at least two of the people involved with the writ allegedly held frequent meetings with top DGFI Officers?
You would think that those who are most disturbed by the current situation, anxious to see a ‘return to the rule of law and democracy’ where the ‘powers that be’ do not determine all results and outcomes, would find this particular outcome chilling. But do they? Or have some of them at least helped to bring this about?
For now the DGFI action has interfered with the Supreme Court’s order, preventing the artifacts from going to France and the exhibition from opening. Why are our intelligence so opposed to this exhibition and why are they greater guardians of our cultural heritage than even the apex Court? More importantly, why does this exhibition bother them so? Is it because it will show a face of Bangladesh which is different from that they wish to project?
October 17th, 2007 at 9:49 am
Well I pushed on the wrong button and my comment went ! Here it is again: just cancel the previous one.
Who ever you are, you must be right in the last part of your comment: most items selected refer to the pre-islamisation of the region, and this selection reflects the history of the region when there were no Bangladesh,no “India”,no “State of West Bengal”. The radical historical and cultural changes which the country went through from the 13th c. and onwards explains the absence of “images” at that late period but one should not forget that those who produced these images were Bengalis, that they had other cultural values but still that their culture, which is still part of the Bengali culture, deserves respect and understanding. Would it not be a sign of cultural reconciliation with its own past to integrate it rather than repressing it ?
October 17th, 2007 at 10:41 am
I agree with Bhudevi (#1) this sounds like “Muslim”(for want of a better word) prickliness about these “graven images” from the pre-Islamic art. However, I could be convinced otherwise with better data. The DGFI sometimes has weird and(weirder still)innocuous reasons for doing what it does.
October 17th, 2007 at 11:31 am
I have not been following the case closely enough to be able to judge its merits, but I know artist/professor Shishir Bhattacharya was one of the people who verbally opposed the rushed sending of the artwork to Musee Guimet (for issues such as the inadequate insurance, etc). I don’t think Shishir would oppose it because he wants to suppress the pre-Islamist heritage.
Having said that, I really don’t know what’s wrong or right in this case.
October 17th, 2007 at 11:35 am
Some well known people like shishir bhattacharya opposed this move to send these artifacts abroad. As the writer said, they may have unknowningly played a part in it and danced to someone else’s tune. It would be interesting to note what is their reaction now after the latest development on this.
October 17th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
[...] Unheard Voices on a rather murky matter of an exhibition of Bangladeshi artifacts that were to be shown in Paris. Share This [...]
October 17th, 2007 at 7:21 pm
The uproar provoked by this exhibition has most probably different sources, but I fear that on the whole, people were badly informed as to what such an international project means. As mentioned in an earlier comment, objects from Bangladesh (i.e. East Pakistan) were once sent to Germany for an exhibition in 1962. Nothing wrong happened, nothing was damaged, nothing was lost but some objects did not return from (West) Pakistan to the then eastern part of the country after the exhibition was over. That objects could go lost, damaged, stolen, etc. while being shown in Paris was mere fear. The main danger lies in a potential accident during the transport and this was also evoked in some comments – beside the fact that the amount for which the objects were insured is very low, considering the extremely high quality of the images.
However, a few points would deserve more attention: how did the organisers approach their Bangladeshi colleagues? Who, among the Bangladeshi curators has such an experience that he/she can manage an exhibition abroad? Who is fully aware of the law and of the existence of boards who should decide whether an object might leave or not the country? And who among the French team has a long time experience with Bangladeshi institutions or has made field work in the country? One thing is sure: neither on the French side nor on the Bangladeshi side, have the scholars involved in this exhibition a permanent and long-time experience with the material selected: the archaeologists involved at Mahasthan do not exclusively work on Bangladesh but excavate in various sites located in Mediterranean or in the Middle East, and the curator in charge of the exhibition is responsible of the textile section (all Asia) in Musée Guimet. What is required for putting on an exhibition is not only money, but also the human experience, i.e. also knowledge of the political and cultural background.
Moreover, in both countries (France and Bangladesh), scholars who have been involved either in Bengali art historical or archaeological research for decades or who have been in active service in Bangladeshi museums have been carefully kept aside by the organisers. Would they have been consulted, the choice of the objects would have been different; many remain indeed sceptical concerning the evident fact of bringing out of the country its jewels. Bangladeshi museums are rich, their reserve collections, in particular in Rajshahi and Dhaka, are tremendous and there is there enough material to be exhibited without pulling out of the main exhibitions the masterpieces. Let us be frank: who among the French public will know that what they see are masterpieces? You define a masterpiece through comparison with other images and the study of Bengali art history is in no French school program. It would have been possible to make a great exhibition with objects partly drawn from the exhibition rooms, partly from the go-downs.
Such an exhibition would have been acclaimed in Bangladesh and even more if Bangladeshi scholars would have been asked to participate actively to this project – in selecting the objects, in writing the catalogue. A stronger Bangladeshi participation in the making of the exhibition and of the catalogue would have more probably constituted a stronger resistance in front of all those hindrances which have arisen one after the other since the objects have been packed and ready for being sent. But even for writing the chapter on the art of Bangladesh in the pre-Islamic period, a German scholar who has never written anything on the topic was asked to contribute whereas a Bangladeshi colleague who has worked all his academic life writing on the subject and is still one of the most active scholars in the field was simply ignored.
This had to be essentially an exhibition of prestige on the French side and this would be indeed a prestigious exhibition but I wonder whether the place for such an exhibition should not be first Dhaka. Let us hope for a quick solution: some objects are particularly fragile and to keep them for weeks, even months packed as they are for the moment will definitely not do anything good to them.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:18 pm
There’s a lot being spoken here about expertise. Everyone’s an expert but wouldnt it be nice if ‘Bangladesh Archaeology’ had a decent public website where we could visit all these relics and understand them.
In situ relics could be linked to google earth so we could see how ‘well’ we treat them.
^^ very elitist use though possibly essential.
The artefacts, in this discussion at least, seem to have become very potent symbols of national chastity.
Somebody somewhere needs to get a sense of proportion. The archealogical sciences need every break they can get. It seems a prime example of the civil service block stroke, useless against any penetrating delivery that requires institutional craftmanship to fend off but nontheless offered to a juicy slow long hop.
October 19th, 2007 at 3:42 am
[...] you may have read earlier about the French Exhibition saga on UV. This little detail caught my eye: But what deserves attention now is whether these artists [...]
October 19th, 2007 at 4:59 am
#2 ‘… this sounds like “Muslim”(for want of a better word) prickliness about these “graven images” from the pre-Islamic art.’
Bhudevi and Shahed, this is ridiculous. The Daily Star reported yesterday that reputed educationists and artists such as Prof Khan Sarwar Murshid, Prof Kabir Chowdhury, Prof Ajay Roy and Rafiqunnabi signed a statement objecting to the sending of the artefacts to Paris. These guys are die-hard secularists. The Islamists (or ‘fundamentalists’ as some of us like to call them) are not in the picture at all. They have not raised any objections to the sending of artefacts to France.
Why is it that when something happens that we dislike, we always find a way to relate it to ‘Muslim prcikliness’ and balme the Islamists?
October 19th, 2007 at 8:23 am
How you telling it unholly I don’t understand. We have seen in past, many of such things went out of country and didnot come back. Our predecesor couldnot proved them that responsible and patriotic to take care of our histroy and haritage. We don’t know who has did it, but they did the right thing. I don’t know how 188 pices of such valuable things they were sending in one flight. They have not processed insurance for both the place, because on flight insurance will not enough for getting these back home. We don’t find that much expertise personals involved in this process. So why will not have fear of loosing all these. You may not know there are some unique pices which is not available anywhere in the world. Thus I think it should be carefully plan and specially ensure its return first.
October 19th, 2007 at 9:47 am
Karim (message 8): I feel sorry if I hurt your feelings, which had definitely never been my aim. Rather, I was trying to understand the last part of the message let by “Proshno Ottor”: the image which this exhibition will give of Bangladesh. Only a handful of transportable items included in the exhibition relate to the post-12th century, i.e. Islamic, period. Here again, and sorry if it hurts you, but the term “Bangladesh” within the context of this selection is hence only but partly correct: the term Bengal would be more appropriate because one cannot separate the history of the Delta within the Bangladeshi borders of today from the history of the whole region at a period where such borders did not exist and where the cultural and religious background was completely different. And to be true, it is impossible, at a historical and scientific level, to deal with the art North Bangladesh for instance without taking into consideration the Northern districts of the State of West Bengal.
I do not know how “Bangladesh” is presented in the catalogue and the exhibition, but true it is that before the 12th c. the region had a major position in the economic, cultural and religioux exchanges in the Bay of Bengal, that, for instance, the region of Mainamati was a fundamental centre which influenced Java and the South Seas from the 8th century and onwards, that relationships developped from an early period between this region (Mainamati-Chittagong) and Arakan, and later on between the region and Pagan (Myanmar)and that these relationships basically rooted in the travels of Buddhist monks. True it is also that Brahmin priests from Bengal were famous all through Southeast Asia, were employed at the courts of the Burmese (Pagan) and Khmer (Ankgor) kingdoms. Such examples could be multiplied, showing that Bengal was an international platform before the 12th c. And to come back to my earlier comment, I was wondering whether, as a matter of fact, this image of a Bengal, “pre-Bangladesh”, might not be felt/feared by some as a kind of demand of cultural identification, of calling into question the contemporary situation.
October 19th, 2007 at 7:26 pm
I very much doubt any cultural or religious rivalry or taboo in exhibiting ancient heritage of Bangladesh, even by current situation standards.
It is an incredible pride for the nation that civilization here went back so far, and we are so fortunate to still witness that past, with the existence of ancient lifestyle.
The concern that is preventing transport of our priceless history, is more likely to be a clandestine connection (corruption) with those willing to depart with these relics, for personal benefit.
Bangladesh authorities have most likely found a scent of corruption, not in France, but in BD itself, which requires that the relics remain at home. In previous governments, before 2007, politicians and officials would most likely get a percentage figure from the illicit trnasfer of such goods from corrupt agents, and would not care who takes what, as long as money was there.
But in this current CTG (caretaker government) where such transactions are apparently more accountable, it is preventing the wholesale sacrifice of such relics for the benefit of corruption.
This is only my suspicion, based on previous experience and records of corruption in Dhaka.
October 20th, 2007 at 8:23 am
KGazi: I guess that you must be right. But not being a Bangladeshi does not give me right to make such statements as you do (and with which I agree)and I admire the country for tackling very seriously the corruption matter. One does need much imagination to think that such a project could not go through the years, indeed and sadly, without being, even faintly, touched by this phenomenon. However, this exhibition cannot be assimilated to an “illicit transfer of such goods” (which had taken place “en masse” in the last years with a very large number of 7th-8th c.. terracotta images from the region of Mahasthan landing on the Western art market till a major Bangladeshi dealer was arrested nearly a year ago). Do you mean that the project is being aborted because officials were corrupted during the preparation of the exhibition (and hence the right, correct or legal way was not followed)or do you mean that the “right” persons were not enough corrupted ?
October 20th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
The debate continues and the artifacts are sealed up in the airport I presume. The question that comes to my mind is if the exhibition is cancelled (we haven’t heard anything on that from Guimet) what will be the fate of the artifact in case there is a court case (litigation etc.) When will all these artifacts be returned to their orginal display rack or space? Another interesting aspect of this debate is the so-called liberals have become divided on this issue and are accusing each other of being……. and that is sad.
October 20th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Bhudevi - my suspicion is ‘that the project is being aborted because officials were [maybe] corrupted during the preparation of the exhibition’, or there are some ‘major Bangladeshi dealer’ involved who is questionable.
I imagine that this CTG has aborted numerous other ‘projects’ which were half-completed by previous governments, due to questionable transactions, and this exhibition may have fallen into that net also.
akku #14, the point of corruption is extremely serious in our region, and it will be even sadder if we bring ‘liberal’ politics into that business. We need to cut the corrupt trade of our heritage before we open all doors so that someone doesnt feel embarrassment of corruption.
Your concern for outcome of those relics while in limbo of decision, Guimet cancelled or not, is a valid one. Corruption is so serious, that we need to keep track of their whereabouts, before something more serious happens to them!
October 22nd, 2007 at 12:18 am
Can anyone share pictures of the items?
Some pictures here:
http://ahmedehussain.blogspot.com/2007/04/shonar-bangla-in-paris.html
October 23rd, 2007 at 12:55 am
TV show Abiram Bangladesh
http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=8423
November 12th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Can any one inform the update of the issue.Thanks for nice discussion. see more at
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/vajra
November 13th, 2007 at 8:30 am
To Sikder: Go to the following link, a committee has been built-up to reconsider the whole matter.
http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=9010
Go to the website, English page, of the Guimet: no dates are given anymore but the information is now “upcoming exhibition (dates to be confirmed)”: http://www.guimet.fr
November 13th, 2007 at 8:44 am
And I forgot: the catalogue of the “exhibition” is on sale ! See
http://www.guimet.fr/Les-catalogues-d-exposition
November 15th, 2007 at 1:04 am
Thanks Bhudevi. But I do not understand what will the benefit of Bangladesh from this exhibition? What is the diplomatic interest? what type of Cultural cooperation is going between Bangladesh and France? How many Bangladeshi student getting scholarship from French Govt? Why we need to promote our culture and heritage to paris? How it will promote Bangladesh because there is huge negligences to the Source community. unfortunately its true that Guimet showed negligence to the Stakeholder. Its not interesting. I think they did not even think that poor Bangladeshi! people are aware of their Culture and heritage that why they did not involve the prominent Bangladeshi Scholar. even its seems a kind of fraud when the count 50coins as one object and value estimated at 5000 euro. About the copy right its really funny that one person visited our museum and took photograph of the museum objects and the copy right goes to them. U can buy a catalog but there is no interest of Bangladesh side. best wish. Peace, force and joy.
November 15th, 2007 at 8:36 am
Dear Sikder,
Thank you for your reply. I fully agree with your comments and I may tell you that not only Bangladeshis are of this opinion. But there was a strong will on the side of the organisers to make it alone - whatever the reasons. This means also that they refused (and I underline it, out of personal experience) any proposal of help or of discussion coming from scholars in Bangladesh and abroad who have been actually working in the field in the last thirty years. The result is that unfortunately also the catalogue is not free from mistakes (not at all).
November 22nd, 2007 at 8:27 pm
From todays papers:
————————
“”Call for authorities to unpack artefacts to be sent to Paris
Staff Correspondent - New Age Nov 23, 2007
Academics, archaeologists, artists and poets on Thursday called on the authorities to unpack about 200 artefacts that are stored at the National Museum to be sent to Paris to foil any move to lose the pieces.
They put out the call at a news briefing at the Gallery Chitrak in Dhaka.
Professor Serajul Islam Choudhury said, ‘The move for sending our masterpieces to Paris is an outcome of an ill motive. It should be stopped immediately and public awareness is a must to protect our archaeological resources.’
Artist Nisar Hossain said, ‘The process is trafficking in our artefacts and the French authority will never return them.’
Nisar also detailed some points made by the French officials in Dhaka at the Sunday evening meeting on exchanging ideas over sending Bangladeshi artefacts to Paris for an exhibition at the Guimet Museum despite having diverse irregularities in the whole process.
‘In response to the realisation for correction of irregularities found by the government fact-finding committee, headed by Professor Abdul Momin Chowdhury, and the need for a new contract on sending any artefacts from Bangladesh to Paris, the French officials blamed the officials concerned of Bangladesh for the mistakes in the process,’ Nisar said.
Nisar also urged the Anti Corruption Commission to look into the unfair move of sending the artefacts in violation of laws and international practices.
Former secretary AKM Zakaria, also an archaeologist, said, ‘In 1958, then Pakistan government sent a bronze relic casket to Paris for restoration and it had never come back.’
Artist Rafiqunnabi said, ‘If we send the artifacts to the Guimet Museum, our archeological education and researches will be seriously hampered. Even though we get them back, they will be duplicates.’
He also urged the government to make a statement over the report of 10 artefacts that went missing from the National Museum.
Former National Museum director general Shamsuizzaman Khan said, ‘The Guimet Museum has a bad image of collecting artefacts from other countries.’
Archeologist Shamsul Wares said, ‘Joachim K Bautze, a European Indologist, in a letter to the French ambassador to Bangladesh on October 12, 2007, said the move to send the artefacts to Paris is “like a financial fraud”.’
Architect and poet Rabiul Husain said, ‘The Guimet Museum is still in such a legal cover that it can buy stolen artefacts in violation of the UNESCO Convention 1995.
The Guimet Museum has not yet signed the convention although the UNESCO headquarters are located in Paris.’
Professor Sanjida Khatun, Professor Hasna Begum and artists Shishir Bhattacharya and Moniruzzaman also attended the briefing.”"
http://www.newagebd.com/met.html#2
November 23rd, 2007 at 4:59 am
Frankly, this is not the kind of issue I really care about. I really don’t care if this exhibition ever takes place or not. Neither would be a great blessing/disaster for BD.
But there is a bone in my body that really doesn’t like utterly ridiculous and inaccurate statements:
Firstly, STATES not musuems sign international conventions. Secondly, as this link shows, the convention has been signed - but not ratified - by France. What this means (to my less than perfect understanding) is that while the French executive has signed the treaty, the French Parliament has not yet passed it into law. So in a sense the poet is right.
Secondly, notice any name missing? I’ll give you a hint, it starts with “B” and ends with “Desh”. Until we sign it, I doubt we have legal cover either to recover our artifacts from other countries! Yet, I’m not hearing too many people urging us to sign this treaty as a means to stop theft away from Bangladesh.
Can we get a few international lawyers on this instead of poets and - apparently - spies?
November 29th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Shahidul Alam on this controversy and his visit to the Guimet.
December 1st, 2007 at 7:13 pm
[...] about unholy alliance in Drishtipat: The past few weeks have seen tempers run high in some part of the artistic and [...]
December 25th, 2007 at 12:20 am
[...] Voices later reported of an unholy alliance that stopped the archeological artifacts from sending: “…a (second) case was filed before the [...]
December 25th, 2007 at 3:05 am
[...] Voices later reported of an unholy alliance: … a (second) case was filed before the District Court, again by ‘art lovers’ [...]