Paper short abstract:

This paper focuses on the re-evaluation of Pithora paintings, from a divinity with the power to cure, to a form of 'Tribal art' with representative and symbolic function. It interrogates the ethical and political consequences of this shift for Adivasis' struggles for equality and recognition.

Paper long abstract:

Baba Pithora is an important God among some of the Rathava, Nayak and other Adivasi communities of western India. Through a wall painting and a ceremony Pithora is called to bring protection and prosperity upon a household in the occasion of sickness, scarcity or misfortune. Pithora Paintings are not representations of the sacred, they are themselves sacred entities - Pithora is the God. Today Pithoras are also produced as paintings on canvass and circulate within transnational art markets, museums and networks of indigenous people. They can therefore be seen as commodities, art pieces or symbols of cultural/indigenous identities.

Looking at aspects of production and circulation this paper considers the re-evaluation of Pithora as 'Tribal Art', with a focus on the 'symbolic' shifts that this implies. The paper starts by discussing Pithora in villages in relation to theoretical discussions about aesthetics and the agency of art objects. It then considers the emergence of the categories of 'art' (kala) and 'artist' (kalakar) and its implications, in terms of style, canons of beauty and value, and relations of patronage. Most importantly, the paper examines how the re-evaluation of Pithora as art involves a shift from agency (Pithora as a God) to meaning (Pithora as a symbol of indigeneity), and assesses its ethical and political implications. It considers how, while the painting is to an extent emptied of its efficacy, the question of agency also resurfaces in relation to how art objects can act as agents in attempt to grant equality to indigenous people.