There is historical precedence to observe, for instance, the colonial experience generated several outcomes in Europe. One was observing non-European cultures as the rulers were required to know the subjects. This initiated a process of observing and interpreting the Indian cultures which sooner became an elaborate process. From administrators to scholars, Europe found India was a gold mine of cultural studies, and Indology became a prominent area in European universities. This also created a simultaneous expansion of folk studies within India.  In the colonial stage, the cultural superiority and most theoretical constructs of Europe remained as overbearing in Indian studies. Folklife was seen as the continuing evidence of savage culture, everything in it is to be seen on a lower grade. Observing folk traditions in a hierarchical measure is also pre-existing habit in India. For instance, Brahminical discourses ignored any serious observations on the lower rank societies that were untouchable. Thus, there is no tradition differentiating folk history in any form. The folk study has several reservations within European scholarships as well. They restricted folkloristics and oral traditions as the main domain. It became similar in India which overshadowed the meaning and context of visual forms within folk cultures, for example, the song and pictures of Patachitra, wall paintings and other artistic objects.

          The folk study generally includes traditional customs, superstitions, stories, dances, songs, medicines, riddles, jokes, proverbs, games, charms, omens, spells, and rituals, all of which are not reliant on written words. Songs and legends structure the major part of the studies among those of preliterate societies. The narratives are handed on by word of mouth, from one generation to the next, from one place to another. They are often heightened with exaggerated events of life in heavenly phenomena; for instance, when Deva and Asura fought there would be a thunderstorm, lightning, and darkness. In mythic imagination, the events of heaven and earth merge, and characters interchange roles. Myth is an essential part of Katha to establish moral ideas. Folk culture is not only entertainment, but they also bridge the past with the present, creating identity.  

          Again, the correlation and link between the village and the ancient Janapad-Mahajanapad were never lost, and the tradition of Patachitra found occasional mention in many Jain-Buddhist scriptures. Sanskrit literature largely romanticized the life of forest-river-hills where Rakshasas raid Rishi’s Ashrams or Rajas to retire for Vanaprastha. Even though India is a data-rich country to study folk, the subject took shape in Europe, within Victorian scholarship. Scholars structured varied views mixed with romanticism and nationalism. European scholarship argued all such elements in folk legends as unreal. Max Muller interpreted mythologies as rationalisations of natural phenomena, a primitive beginning that might denominate “protoscience” from cultural evolution and, ultimately, linguistic corruptions. The fundamental frame in nineteenth-century Europe was to explain tales and legends in folk as an expression of savage societies. Jakob Grimm saw them as corrupted cosmic allegories; the German school considered them forces of nature personified. Edward Tylor and Andrew Lang held similar assumptions about the survivals from a savage society; Marx saw exotic myths as a class struggle, while Freud and the psychoanalytical school found them fraught with sexual symbolism. As it seems, there was arbitrariness in defining savagery, barbarism, or civilization. Moreover, they did not discuss the process of myths or poetic motifs until much later. Increasing constructs pervaded folk studies, nevertheless, the rising curiosity extended to understanding the history of mankind.

          However, change came, and rejecting all such views of the Victorian era, the twentieth-century writers of Europe and America entered into a more rational frame. They concentrated on cataloguing information and creating systematic data. However, certain contributions from the Victorian era became a base for further observations. For instance, the twelve volumes of The Golden Bough by Sir James Frazer were the magnum opus of folklore scholarship. In later publications, Thompson’s six volumes of Motif-Index Folk-Literature were valuable as they methodised the basic elements of folk traditions. The books appeared in assorted topics: the Encyclopaedia of Superstitions, the Collector’s Handbook, the National Folklore Atlas, the International Folklore Bibliography, and so on. All of these undoubtedly expanded modern folklore scholarships.

          Similar to Victorian Europe, Indian Shastras could not overcome the priorities of Caste society and ignored the traditions of larger life, the village. The ancient Shilpa Shastra discussed art in the temples and palaces, and the entertainments of the nobles, keeping aside the vernacular art as non-iconographic. Nevertheless, the bardic art, Patachitra, with endless variations, has inner freedom and grew in a wider landscape. We can observe, that excellence in Indian art has happened in both formats, with classical rules and bardic freedom. Nevertheless, classical art did not survive time, and at present, it has degenerated into regional crafts. On the other hand, bardic art evolving constantly through the periods, also facing the new challenge of time now. 

          Within the institutional activities, folk became a new interest in nineteen-century India. However, writings carried many of the Victorian biases as well as European theories. The folk study in India is also linked to finding an Indian identity, re-discovering India and aligning nationalism. However, as the European format remained, folklore became data and analysis. The historical, anthropological and cultural studies also grew, and art forms in folk clustered as material objects, crafts, minor art, etc. So, observing objects of art in folk or their context in folk culture became a lesser consideration. This left a huge gap in the construct of folk studies in India as anomalies are evident when viewing and interpreting the trends of Patachitra as exist all over Indian regions.  

         On the other hand, the history of the itinerant bards, the Potuas who creates song and picture, is long, and it stretches through the pre-writing stage. Katha, the bardic trend, could be the earliest form of oral literature, even before the epics, the Ramayana-Mahabharata took shape in written form. It is found that many of the episodes in these epics, were isolated stories and pre-existing, like Bhim-Kahini and Kangsho-Badh, which were popular in various regions, for instance, in the ancient Gandhara, as mentioned in Jain-Buddhist scriptures. With time, even though the bardic tradition gathered many variations in the Indian sub-continent, as known, there are no chronological or historical accounts. A mention is found in Chanakya’s Arthashastra, but it informs a specific role of the Chitrakar, which was information gathering from the remote areas of the empire.  The bardic tradition was prevalent all-over Central Asia and stories travelled and merged when cultures had no borders. Certain elements of bardic myth seemed to have shaped epic literature. The correlation between bardic myth and epics is undoubtedly close. It can also be seen with Homer.  As a result, similarities exist between the narrative process of the Indian epics and the Odyssey and the Iliad. Homer was a bardic poet and like a bard, he too assembled the earlier stories, transforming myths. However, the bardic tradition in India has inclusiveness, with both songs and pictures, unlike similar traditions in Central Asia or other cultures. The similarities of bardic tradition also bring intriguing points on how stories travel and assume new forms in different localities. The story of Jom Pat or Hell torture after death is a very ancient theme in Patachitra and continues until now in Santhal Pata. Simultaneously, Hell-torture is also a known theme in Central Asia, found in the pre-Christian religious themes, in many Biblical illuminations, and in eighteenth-century European paintings as well.

          It is not clear how the bardic tradition took shape in the region of Bengal. The only reference is to Chanakya’s mention, it could be assumed that Chitrakaras were known in the eastern part during the Mauryan period. It took further shape with the Jain-Buddhist and later Hindu Bhakti waves in Bengal. The vernacular literature found a new thrust during the Islamic period, and the epics found endless transformation in Katha, Puran stories, and the Mangalkabyas in Bengal. All of these became part of Patachitra, in songs and pictures. While Patachitra flourished with various themes and cultural overlapping such as Central Asian stories, and Christian themes, the Kalighat Pat generated a new urban version of folk trends during the Company period. But history is vague and undocumented, yet it is evident that Patachitra connects us continuously with social change, gathering new themes, and acquiring stylistic variations while remaining folk in character. However, twentieth-century Indian habit, of viewing art, remained limited by various constraints. Indian writers saw low morality in Kalighat Pat, concluding the corruption of village tradition in the Babu-Bibi theme, and for using non-traditional materials. So, art was lost in the moral version until Kalighat Pat found a home in European museums. In a recent comment, an art writer also mentioned that the songs in Santhal Pat, created by Bangla Potuas, should not be ‘glorified’ as those are lies and misinformation.  While European scholars overcame nineteenth-century bias, extending to various rational frames and ideas, India hardly left the Victorian-Brahminical frame of understanding art in folk.

          There is a vital issue in exploring folk art: visual literacy is at variant layers in Indian scholarship, as most writers are not viewers of art. Evaluating creativity in folk forms and identifying its aesthetic elements is a process that requires critical culture with art, assessing the aesthetic achievement in the form. All such things are avoided in folk studies. Art, as such, is left to a specialized group, a group that does not exist in India. A similar problem was also in Europe, the focus on African and Oceanic art forms was created by artists and various creative minds. Later, a method of writing on art developed with the awareness of visual literacy where art merged with all genres. It elevated the social discourse with art, crossing the barrier between classical and folk art. It is yet to happen in India.

          The images below provide some idea of the undocumented history and trends of Patachitra which is fast vanishing.

About the Author

Born in Calcutta, in 1941, Amitabh graduated in Painting from Calcutta, in 1963. Later he received a French Government Scholarship to study Painting and Graphics in Paris, between 1966 and 1969.

After spending six years in Chennai and Delhi, Amitabh went to Paris, once again in 1976. Later he did Ed.M. from the State University of New York at Buffalo.

He spent eleven years in Nigeria as the Head of Visual Arts at the University of Port-Harcourt in Nigeria. His paintings are shown in Nigeria, the USA, Europe and the Far East.             

He has published four books in UK and India. He lives and works in Alipurduar in West Bengal.