Features
Bawa Art Industry: Lunuganga, and Chandrajeewa Atelier: Wennappuwa
By Dr. Laleen Jayamanne
Art history annedotally
The pioneering Viennese Art Historian Alois Riegl wrote a book that was not very popular among traditional Anglo-American art historians but some of us film theorists poured over it, the prose a bit dry in translation, but with some powerful ideas. The book is The Late Roman Art Industry, an examination of the industrialisation of production in late antiquity (during the last stages of the Roman Empire), of previously handmade craft-work. Because film is an industrial artifact, this book provided some lateral ideas to us to think of the deep history of industrialisation of goods as commodities, including film and idea of legal contracts. But more urgently, it helped us to begin to understand the industrialisation of thinking in the Neo-Liberal globalised University. In Australia, we were ordered to produce more and more, faster and faster. No one spoke about quality. Hardly anyone had time to read each other’s work anymore and most tragically, students just speed-read bits and pieces without reading arguments carefully and thoughtfully. The globalised art industry of Biennales and Triennials, and mushrooming film festivals, are also products of this same dynamic of Neo-liberal capitalism where the market rules, after the dissolution of the Soviet Republics in 1991.
Within this savage market economy, talented artists become hyper competitive and are in danger of developing a repetitive formula. And curators may unwittingly encourage narcissistic mirror games, conforming to their perception of what matters. This creates weak art over time, deskilling artists and also cliques who operate through exclusionary tactics, where artists who do not fit in are shut out of the art and film history narratives and collections. In the fractious small art world of Sri Lanka this situation needs to be discussed openly, calmly and with rational rigour. This is my aim here as a Lankan who lives in Australia but who is engaged to some extent with the contemporary Lankan film culture, as a scholar of the Lankan cinema for over 50 years.
Riegl, was a founding figure of the discipline of art history, working in Vienna at the peak of its intellectual, artistic and political power in Europe just before the demise of the Austro-Hungarian Empire with World War One. He was also the curator of Islamic Art at the Museum of Decorative Arts in Vienna and the famous exhibition of Islamic fabric and carpets he curated just before his untimely death in 1905, was also visited by Henri Matisse. So an ancient Islamic civilizational crafted material and European high Modernism came into a generative contact in an imperial Art Museum. (Art history was invented by Winkleman at the Vatican museum, after he converted to Roman Catholicism. He studied Greek art there without ever going to Greece!). Riegel also lectured at the University of Vienna. There, Klimt’s famous allegorical murals caused a controversy and rejected, therefore an art historian defended them by giving a lecture titled, ‘What is Ugly?’, considering it seriously as an aesthetic category of Viennese modernism and of avant-garde art. And his far ranging books, on the Historical Grammar of the Visual Arts, and on ornament in particular, still provide vital ideas on ornament as a mode of thinking, a power of connectivity, rather than just prettified, picturesque, vegetal motifs. He starts with Egypt and arabesques his way through epochs of great cross-cultural exchange in trade and ideas and also wars.
Lankan Scholar/Artists
I am writing about this stuff now hoping that Lankan art historians and curators might just be tempted to consider seriously the work of two Lankan artists working in different art forms but both of whom are also scholars in their own right and are University Professors. Doing so would, I expect, considerably strengthen the intellectual discourses on art, connecting them to wider political and cultural ideas across social class, caste, ethnicity, languages and genre boundaries in Sri Lankan cultural production.
According to my brief non-specialist research, (being a film scholar and critic), Sarath Chandrajeewa is considered, by some, to be Sri Lanka’s preeminent contemporary sculptor working in Bronze and Terra Cotta (rathu mati), for well over 30 years. He was the star pupil of Tissa Ranasingha, with whom he studied bronze casting on a government scholarship, at the Royal College of Art, London. Ranasingha is considered the pioneering Lankan sculptor (monumental, portrait, and other), of the modern era after independence. Chandrajeewa also paints, and has produced large clay figurative relief murals of ‘the people’, and abstract tiled murals in a pedestrian tunnel, and has had a scholarly publishing project of significance for Lankan art history, and cultural theory more broadly, in my non-specialist opinion. But, I have been schooled by working in a Department of Art History and Film at the University of Sydney for a few decades, because ours was an interdisciplinary department. Chandrajeewa also founded with his patron, Harold Peiris, the Contemporary Art and Crafts Association of Sri Lanka (CACA) in 1990, to organise exhibitions and it still functions as a research institution. Like Riegl, he has published work off the beaten track of the art history protocol of specialising on one period, digging the same strata in delicious detail and not treading on jealously guarded intellectual ‘private’ territory. This approach of art historians, I think made rigid by the American academy, was a source of amazement to us film scholars because our discipline was organised differently, a bit unruly, with a much shorter history than art has and was inter-disciplinary in its very formation as film is a popular technological commodity, made for entertainment and making profit, first and foremost, with aspirations to become Art.
***
Professor Sumathy Sivamohan is the only independent woman filmmaker who has produced a significant body of films, exploring the muti-ethnic polity of Sri Lanka from the point of view of minority communities. While her body of work is still growing, she has a clear project of examining Lankan Nationalisms from the point of view of minority communities. Her Sons and Fathers is in Sinhala exploring the multi-ethnic formation of the Lankan film industry from its very inception. The civil war and its aftermath is the background to her research. As a professor of English, she is also a literary theorist who also teaches film and producers scholarly work. I am hoping that the few observations I make here may arouse a curiosity at the very least, to create opportunities to engage with her work seriously. Interdisciplinary dialogue has been essential for a long while now in any serious progressive public sphere of culture and without deep scholarship, what you often get is mere ‘art-speak’ one hears on Youtube, sometimes lively and generous and fun but often lacking the intellectual bite of complex ideas that one can take up and wrestle with and further explore by reading widely and debating, discussing and then use to further our understanding by writing. Sivamohan’s and Chandrajeewa’s work also happily converged in the book of poetry called Frames edited by the latter, forthcoming in late 2022, if there is no paper shortage! The name derives from the large stacks of door and window frames which have lost their functional utility after bomb blasts in Jaffna during the civil war.
The images of these blasted buildings, and their intact solid door and window frames share a space with the poetry and movingly enframe them. The book is an attempt to speak to that void across the linguistic barriers. Among the poems there is one by Sivamohan and also by her sister Dr. Rajani Thiranagama, her sister, who taught Anatomy at the Jaffna University and was assassinated by a LTTE gunman as she was riding home after teaching, within ear-shot of her home. Her photo is the only human face in the book. And I believe Sarath and Sumathy have not met each other as yet, except for a chance brief encounter at a meeting of artists, with the then President Maithripala Sirisena. Sumathy was the only artist there who spoke in Tamil, with a translator. And what better place to launch Frames than at MMCA that uses all three languages with a very long term record of engagement with promoting art making in the time of the civil war, especially in Jaffna and unusually have poetry readings there, too.
***
I gather the field of Sinhala film culture is highly evolved, robust, with heated debates, cult groups, brilliant theorists, a quarterly film journal, Chitrapata Magazine and numerous blogs and newspapers and so on. In the more polite middle class art world the surface is smooth and inviting, tri-lingual now in important institutions, though there is an undercurrent of violence and hostility camouflaged in specific instants, I am discovering, as I do my research. These appear to be of a professional nature. I am all too familiar with this mode of behavior, having taught in several Australian Universities for over 30 odd years and having fought tooth and nail, successfully, an effort to sack me on false charges about my teaching or lack thereof, in a provincial University. Professional rivalries and cruelty are quite well developed in Universities and the tactics and strategy familiar but what’s unique to Sri Lanka is the direct connections academics and some artists have to political power that appear limitless. It is shocking to hear an academic/artist boast of his direct access to people in power and even to the president of the country to deal with one’s conflicts.
Both Tissa Ranasingha and Sarath Chandrajeewa were also academics, the latter a VC of the University of Visual and Performing Art, as well, who tried to fundamentally transform a moribund feudal fine arts curriculum and ethos into a modern one that would educate the students according the best standards of fine arts education practice in the world and to become informed, responsible global citizens. They were both forced to resign due to actions authorised at highest levels of government. This story is public knowledge and I learnt of it only recently from information mostly available on the internet and some passing comments in an art book published in Australia edited by the Human Rights curator and architect of the Asia Pacific Triennale, of the Queensland Art Gallery, Caroline Turner.
***
The Geoffrey Bawa Lunuganga Trust, established after the celebrated architect’s death, has become a visionary educational institution, under the Lunuganga Trust. And the new Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, directed by Senior curator Sharmini Pereira, aims to make it an inclusive centre of art education in this country and build its collection accordingly. And it is to these institutions that I address a call for an experimental move, of opening an exchange with these two senior scholar/artists. Might the launch of Frames at one of these institutions be the occasion to start this belated encounter? (The concluding part of this article will appear in the Midweek Review of 06 April)
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
