Why the Christie’s South Asian Auction in London is significant for Indian art beyond the sales figures

Why the provenance matters

While Christie’s hasn’t officially named the owner of the collection, it has reportedly been attributed to the Kolkata-based tea producing company Goodricke Group, a subsidiary of the British conglomerate Camellia. Through the years, the artworks in the collection have reportedly been displayed across Camellia’s UK-based properties as well as the offices and residences of Goodricke’s senior authorities in India.

The significance of this sale lies in the understanding that this was not an Indian entity liquidating Indian assets but a premier Western institution perceiving Indian art as a high-profit-yielding asset, solidifying the dependability of Indian art in an otherwise slowing global art market. This was evident in the over seven minute of “spirited” and “animated” bidding by “collectors worldwide”.

The risk of regional trap

It is natural to be tempted to keep Indian heritage within Indian boundaries but frequent repatriation bids can cause the global value of Indian art to plateau. The most recent headline-grabbing sales were those of Raja Ravi Varma’s ‘Yashoda and Krishna’ and MF Husain’s ‘Gram Yatra’ bought by Cyrus Poonawallah and Kiran Nadar respectively, both Indians HNWIs.

That they are driven to scoop up these defining pieces of Indian art by a sense of cultural pride and an aim to build a legacy, is conspicuous. It, however, also creates a locked ecosystem within which these works move. From the vantage point of an international collector, Indian Modernists (as in the case of the Christie’s sale) then becomes a hyper-regional group instead of a universally attractive asset genre like the French impressionists or the Renaissance masters.

As prestigious as it is for an artist to be declared an official national treasure — like Raja Ravi Varma, Amrita Sher-Gil, Abanindranath Tagore, Rabindranath Tagore, Sailoz Mookherjea among others — under the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972, their works are prohibited from leaving the Indian soil once they are brought back. This runs the risk of restricting their capital mobility for international buyers and being gradually eliminated from the top art markets, including the US, the UK and Hong Kong.

The Christie’s sale, in this light, keeps the loop open, allowing for these particular works and subsequently, works by these artists to further appreciate in the time to come.

Market expansion for Indian artists

The Christie’s sale assumes particular importance also because of the artists it platformed, all of whom were secondary market pioneers. Indian buyers’ have historically concentrated their attention on blue-chip modernists such as MF Husain, SH Raza and VS Gaitonde, which tends to further inflate their already high values, leaving other names outside the scope of consideration.

Sublime Shadows has flattened the pyramid a bit, resulting in the broadening of the global attention on artists such as Pyne and the Tagores among others. It has also made these names more attractive for mid-level collectors worldwide, thereby solidifying Indian art’s global footprint. It marks the beginning of a changing narrative for Indian art among international buyers — that it is an investment with high returns, and not just for India’s billionaires.

The Christie’s sale is proof that while it is important for Indians to bid high on their own history, it is equally important for that history to transcend national borders, and when allowed to do so, it is capable of commanding the world stage on its own merits.