As a Sher-Gil sells for Rs 62 cr, an expert weighs in: what determines the value of an artwork?

Saffronart CEO Dinesh Vazirani spoke to Vandana Kalra about The Story Teller, Sher-Gil, and the value of artworks.

What is the significance of The Story Teller?

Executed in 1937, The Story Teller was painted during an important formative period in Sher-Gil’s oeuvre that saw her European and Indian influences merge into a unique artistic language. The dominant subjects are women — who feature in many of her works — depicted as close-knit figures, crafting an inherent intimacy within the canvas.

Sher-Gil’s fondness for this work is evidenced in its numerous mentions in her letters. It was also exhibited at her successful solo exhibition at Faletti’s Hotel, Lahore, in November 1937, which was inaugurated by Manohar Lal, then Finance Minister in the Punjab government, and Charles Fabri, a Hungarian archaeologist and curator of the Lahore Museum, who reviewed it for the Civil and Military Gazette.

In the same year, an exhibition of Sher-Gil’s works was arranged by R C Tandan, then secretary of the Hindustani Academy in Allahabad and later director of the Allahabad Museum, at the Roerich Centre of Art and Culture. A portfolio of her works was planned, which was eventually published posthumously with an introduction written by art critic and collector Karl Khandalavala.

The Story Teller was among the twelve works selected by Sher-Gil herself, and she called them her most important works.

What determines the value of an artwork — by Sher-Gil or any other artist?

The estimated price is negotiated between the seller and the auction house. Several factors are considered — these include the subject, the medium, the condition of the work, its historical pricing over a period of time, its provenance, and where it has been published or exhibited.

The importance of the work in the oeuvre of the artist also plays a significant role. So, an M F Husain [who was very prolific] from the 1950s and 1960s compared to a later Husain will have a completely different (higher) value, and it will be the same for an S H Raza from the 1980s, a V S Gaitonde from the 1970s and 1980s, and a Tyeb Mehta from the 1990s [which were the periods during which each of these masters produced their most critically acclaimed works].

The best works of the modernists are already with serious collectors, and it is extremely rare to find an Amrita Sher-Gil, especially, on the market. She is known to have produced fewer than 200 paintings, a significant number from which are with the National Gallery of Modern Art, and some are with her estate. Fewer than 30-40 of her works would be with private collectors.

An Amrita Sher-Gil is so rare on the market that there is bound to be excitement when an opportunity arises to own one.

What does this high-value sale mean for Indian art?

With this sale, India has become one of the few countries where a woman artist is leading the market. This has previously never happened in India. I have been asked on several occasions why a woman artist is not in the same price range as her male counterparts.

This is also a testament to the art market’s continued strength, and the sustained growth that we have observed in recent years. Several records are being broken, and we are finally witnessing an escalation in the prices of artists who we have always considered undervalued.

Besides the Amrita work, the evening’s sale also saw personal records being achieved for several artists, including A Ramachandran (whose 2000 canvas ‘Autobiography of an Insect in the Lotus Pond’ sold for Rs 4.44 crore, nearly four times its higher estimate), and K K Hebbar (whose 1959 untitled work sold for Rs 2.64 crore, more than seven times its higher estimate).

Numerous factors are contributing to the strength of the art market, including the rising number of new and serious collectors who are entering the market. They are discerning, and have the economic means and intent to build a good collection. But they also realise that the works of the modernists are scarce, and one needs to hunt to fulfill the desire to own one.

So is this a good time to enter the art market?

Art is a good investment, and it is always a good time to enter the market. India has a lot of talent and artwork at different price points, and people should look at art that appeals to them, that they would like to grow old with.

Compared to the global art market as a whole, Indian art is largely undervalued, and value creation is therefore, inevitable. While the supply is limited, there is constant growth in demand, especially with regard to the modernists.

We are seeing very little speculation and prices are bound to reach new highs as more serious collectors enter the market, and with the rising number of private museums that are building formidable collections.

There is also a rising interest in contemporary art, as people can relate to the themes, and there are also works on a much bigger scale, which many collectors want in their homes.

What makes Amrita Sher-Gil such a special artist — the pioneering modernist who has been declared one of the nine National Treasures of Indian Art, whose work cannot go out of the country?

The questions of identity that perhaps arose from Amrita’s Indo-European parenting inspired her artistic quests. Born in 1913 in Budapest to Umrao Singh Sher-Gil, who hailed from an aristocratic family in Punjab and was a scholar of Sanskrit and Persian with an interest in philosophy, and Marie Antoinette, a Hungarian opera singer. From the tender age of five, Amrita immersed herself in painting with water colours, and her early works were vibrant illustrations of Hungarian fairy tales.

In 1921, the Sher-Gil family moved to India and settled in Shimla and it was here that Amrita honed her keen observational skills. Her uncle Ervin Baktay encouraged her to sketch from live models, focusing on facial expressions and body forms, which shaped her fascination with the human figure.

She moved to Paris at age 16, and the Bohemian lifestyle of the city resonated with her and left a lasting impression on her vivacious personality that remains widely celebrated. As a student at the École des Beaux-Arts, she learnt human anatomy and explored the potential of line, form, and colour, sketching many male and female nudes, predominantly academic in style, from 1930 to 1932.

An intense longing to return to her roots prompted Amrita to return to India in 1934. In September 1934, she wrote, “It seems paradoxical but I know for certain that had we not come away to Europe, I should perhaps never have realised that a fresco from Ajanta or a small piece of sculpture in the Musée Guimet is worth more than a whole Renaissance.”

In November 1936, she embarked on an extensive journey of South India, beginning from Bombay, to Ajanta, Ellora, Hyderabad, Trivandrum, Cochin, Cape Comorin, and Madurai. In Bombay, she met the scholar and art collector Karl Khandalavala, who introduced her to a collection of miniature paintings, and she was captivated by the Basohli school. The murals at Ajanta, Padmanabhapuram, and Mattancherry also caught her attention.

In the late 1930s, she produced masterpieces such as ‘In the Ladies’ Enclosure’ and ‘Boys with Lemons’, which adopted a compositional style with close-knit figures, drawing inspiration from the Indian mural traditions.

In 1938, Amrita went back to Hungary for a year and painted in European themes and treatment. On returning to India, she continued painting with an increased Indian sensibility and influence from miniatures.

She passed away in December 1941 in Lahore after a brief illness. She was only 28. Although her mature career spanned only a decade, her work left an indelible mark on the art world.