Midweek Review

Does Sri Lanka contribute to global intellectual expansion of Social Sciences and Humanities?

Published

2 months ago

2025/10/29

Let me begin with a confession. Even though I have been conventionally located within social sciences in terms of training and university location, I have never been a discipline or subject puritan throughout my career. As a result, I have transgressed broad disciplinary borders and specific subject domains in search of what interested me. This has taken me from sociology to history, philosophy and bodies of theory across disciplines and more recently to creative writing including poetry and translation of literature. Much of this is beyond my formal training in social anthropology, but one can – and I believe one actually should – venture beyond the ramparts of one’s training.

This preface is to offer a simple explanation as a point of departure for the ideas I want to present here. From this eclectic – and what has been an adventurous academic background, I want to raise very briefly two broad, but fundamental questions today on the intellectual personality of both social sciences and humanities as they manifest in our country. These are questions I have raised both in Sri Lanka and elsewhere in South Asia for well over two decades:

A) Does the research we produced locally in these disciplines make an impact on the corresponding global or regional discourses? For example, does Sri Lankan sociology, political science, literature, cultural studies and so on make a difference in the ways in which these disciplines work and think elsewhere in the world?

B) To what extent has theory and philosophy produced by our social sciences and humanities, which ideally should be so fundamental to these disciplines, impacted global discourses? Again, to simplify, have Sri Lankan social sciences and humanities taken a lead at any time in the intellectual histories of the world in theorising these disciplines more broadly as have bodies of knowledge that range from Marxism to Structuralism to Poststructuralism, all of which emanated from the West at different historical times which we have embraced without much reflection?

While the responses ought to be clear, I am not going to answer these questions. Instead, I will place several related issues in context and let you think and make up your own minds – but hopefully founded on concrete bases, as the social science tradition I come from insists.

Does the Research Produced Locally Have a Global or Regional Discursive Impact?

Until about the early to mid-1970s, at least where the University of Peradeniya-based social sciences were concerned, the work of scholars such as Ralph Pieris, Gananath Obeyesekere, Leslie Guanwardena among a few others, did write for us as well as for the world. Their work had an impact on the ways in which historical sociology was to be conducted; how Theravada Buddhism might be studied as a distinct category through its practice rather than simply via precepts; and the ways in which ethnicity and similar ethno-cultural markers could be seen – or might be absent – in ancient historical sources and in latter day historiography, and how these would impact identity formation in the present.

All this was local research produced by social science scholars working in our country at the time. And their work was read across the world in their own disciplines and beyond. More importantly, not only were they read, but they contributed to scholarly discourses beyond our shores.

Fast forward to the present.

Does this happen now? Today, we certainly have many more scholars in these disciplines in universities, practitioners beyond universities and almost limitless forums for publishing locally. Universities, faculties and even departments run journals. But do we speak to the world convincingly through our research? Do we even speak sense to ourselves based on what we do? Why is it that we still often talk about the theoretical contributions of ‘dead white men’ in these journals – and that too, centuries after their demise and newer ideas have emerged and overtaken theirs – in the most simplistic terms without reference to any new sources or ideas that might allow their thinking to be reinterpreted?

This situation comes about as the result of three inherent problems. One, the lapses in the academic networks in which we have become a part. These networks decide where we present our ideas abroad and who we invite to our deliberations here. What if these networks are spurious and mediocre? How would these interactions impact knowledge production? Two, there is no intellectually serious encouragement from universities or other entities within the country to produce core research in social sciences and humanities. The questionable and school-like award schemes adopted by many universities and conferences to offer recognition to so-called best papers’ will not pave the way for this. It is precisely this lack that led to the brain drain of the 1960s and 1970s which significantly impacted social sciences and humanities, a situation from which we have not yet fully recovered. Three, this also results from very insular and often non-reflexive and non-critical writing appearing locally without offering core research outcomes through which comparable social systems or analytical domains can be read elsewhere in the world. This is also directly linked to the space that becomes available to take our writing to the world outside – basically where and how we publish and how that knowledge circulates. Will this kind of situation allow us to be leaders in global knowledge production?

Does Sri Lankan Theory and Philosophy in Social Sciences and Humanities have a Global Impact?

I am personally not aware of theoretical or philosophical contributions from Sri Lankan social sciences and humanities in recent times that have or could contribute to theory-building, methodological fine-tuning or conceptualization in these disciplines at a regional or global scale. The reason is that we have become mere followers and imitators of borrowed bodies of theory and other forms of abstract thinking rather than being inventors of core bodies of knowledge ourselves, based on our histories, experiences, research and thinking. We continue to be blinded by the false colonial legacy of the alleged ‘universality’ of theory and philosophy. In our country and elsewhere in South Asia, it almost seems that the abstract thinking we profess today have to be imported from the west for our disciplines to survive and thrive.

It is in this context, but with reference to India that Prathama Banerjee, Aditya Nigam and Rakesh Pandey have observed in their important essay, ‘The Work of Theory Thinking across Traditions’ (2016), “theory appears as a ready-made body of philosophical thought, produced in the West …” while “the more theory-inclined among us simply pick the latest theory off-the-shelf and ‘apply’ it to our context, notwithstanding its provincial European origin, for we believe that ‘theory’ is by deﬁnition universal.”

Though on a different intellectual trajectory, this is also what Dipesh Chakrabarty attempted to argue in his 2008 book, Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. He hoped to show his readers the limitations of western social science when they attempt to explain the historical experiences of political modernity in South Asia. However, it was not his intention to reject western thought completely. Instead, he wanted to renew western and particularly European thought ‘from and for the margins.’ It was a matter of bringing in diverse histories from marginalized regions when it came to global knowledge production. That is, to count knowledges and historical and political experiences of South Asia, Africa, Latin America and other such marginalised regions in the production of knowledge for the world.

Is it not this same blindness to the limitations of theory and absence of innovation in constructing knowledge in general, and theoretical knowledge in particular, that also prevails in social science and humanities classrooms in our universities and in related discourses beyond? That is, we are trained to be intellectually subservient and inferior, and be mere followers, not innovators and inventors. So, how can any disciplinary domain thrive and produce serious knowledge for the world in such conditions? My young friend Prof. Renny Thomas from the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences at the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research – Bhopal, and I have attempted to address this issue in our forthcoming book to be published in December this year, Decolonial Keywords: South Asian Thoughts and Attitudes.

In it, we have provided space for thirty South Asian scholars from across disciplines in social sciences and humanities to “discusse[s] words and ideas from a variety of regional languages, ranging from Sinhala to Hebrew Malayalam” encapsulating “the region’s languages and its vast cultural landscape, crossing national borders.” Each encyclopedic-entry-like chapter “reiterates specific attitudes, ways of seeing and methods of doing that are embedded in the historical and contemporary experiences of the region” keeping in mind “the contexts of their production and how their meanings might have changed at different historical moments.

Crucially, the volume explores “if these words and concepts can infuse a certain intellectual rigour into reinventing social sciences and humanities in the region and beyond.” In short, we are initiating a fairly comprehensive and culturally, linguistically and politically inclusive effort at theory-building and conceptual fine-tuning based on South Asian experiences that might be able to speak to the world in the same way schools of thought in politically dominant regions of the world have done so far to us. This is a matter of decolonising our disciplines.

When Sri Lankan social sciences and humanities thoughtlessly embrace knowledges imported in conditions of inequal power relations, it can never produce a forum or discourse from which we can speak to the world with authority. Renny Thomas and I have made an initial and self-conscious effort to literally and metaphorically turn the tables on theory-building and conceptualisation in social sciences and humanities in South Asia in our favor.

Nevertheless, our aim is to do this without succumbing to crude and parochial forms of nativism that are also politically powerful in the region including in Sri Lanka. I flagged this example to show both what is possible and what is necessary if we are truly keen to infuse power into the discourses we author.

As I said at the outset, I did not answer the two questions I posed. But when I pose these questions, I do not wish to abrogate my share of the responsibility. I am sure at another time in our country’s intellectual history, I may have been part of the problem too. But I continued to reflect. I continued to look for ways to act and search for similarly inclined people to create a critical mass who might be able to make changes. The book I referred to earlier is one clear outcome of these explorations. Another is the PhD theory course I co-designed and co-taught with my colleague Ravi Kumar at South Asian University titled, ‘.’ Its sole purpose, while teaching theory, was to look at regional knowledge sources across history to build a body of theory and analytical categories to read our social systems.

I hope the related issues I placed in context would lead readers to think through these issues on their own. One can also disregard my thinking in preference to one’s own comfort zones. Interestingly, whenever I talk about these issues, the polemical title of Kishore Mahbubani’s 1998 book, Can Asians Think? often comes to my mind. In this context, I want to ask from colleagues, friends and former students in Sri Lankan social sciences and humanities, why we are so reluctant to think? Why are we so lackluster and backward in creating knowledge not just for ourselves but for the world as well? My fear is, if we continue along this path, we will always remain in the margins in the worlds of knowledge.

(This essay is adapted from the keynote address titled, ‘Social Sciences and Humanities: Does Sri Lanka Contribute to the Global Intellectual Expansion of Disciplines?’ delivered at the inauguration session of the ‘Annual Research Symposium 2025’ of the University of Colombo on 28th October 2025)

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

Year ends with the NPP govt. on the back foot

Published

5 days ago

2025/12/24

Sahan Weerasooriya

President Dissanayake addresses Parliament as PM Dr. Harini Amarasuriya looks on. Dissanayake is the leader of both the JVP and NPP

The failure on the part of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)-led National People’s Power (NPP) government to fulfil a plethora of promises given in the run up to the last presidential election, in September, 2024, and a series of incidents, including cases of corruption, and embarrassing failure to act on a specific weather alert, ahead of Cyclone Ditwah, had undermined the administration beyond measure.

Ditwah dealt a knockout blow to the arrogant and cocky NPP. If the ruling party consented to the Opposition proposal for a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) to probe the events leading to the November 27 cyclone, the disclosure would be catastrophic, even for the all-powerful Executive President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, as responsible government bodies, like the Disaster Management Centre that horribly failed in its duty, and the Met Department that alerted about the developing storm, but the government did not heed its timely warnings, directly come under his purview.

The NPP is on the back foot and struggling to cope up with the rapidly developing situation. In spite of having both executive presidency and an overwhelming 2/3 majority in Parliament, the government seems to be weak and in total disarray.

The regular appearance of President Dissanayake in Parliament, who usually respond deftly to criticism, thereby defending his parliamentary group, obviously failed to make an impression. Overall, the top NPP leadership appeared to have caused irreparable damage to the NPP and taken the shine out of two glorious electoral victories at the last presidential and parliamentary polls held in September and November 2024 respectively.

The NPP has deteriorated, both in and out of Parliament. The performance of the 159-member NPP parliamentary group, led by Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya, doesn’t reflect the actual situation on the ground or the developing political environment.

Having repeatedly boasted of its commitment to bring about good governance and accountability, the current dispensation proved in style that it is definitely not different from the previous lots or even worse. (The recent arrest of a policeman who claimed of being assaulted by a gang, led by an NPP MP, emphasised that so-called system change is nothing but a farce) In the run-up to the November, 2024, parliamentary polls, President Dissanayake, who is the leader of both the JVP and NPP, declared that the House should be filled with only NPPers as other political parties were corrupt. Dissanayake cited the Parliament defeating the no-confidence motions filed against Ravi Karunanayake (2016/over Treasury Bond scams) and Keheliya Rambukwella (2023/against health sector corruption) to promote his argument. However, recently the ongoing controversy over patient deaths, allegedly blamed on the administration of Ondansetron injections, exposed the government.

Mounting concerns over drug safety and regulatory oversight triggered strong calls from medical professionals, and trade unions, for the resignation of senior officials at the National Medicines Regulatory Authority (NMRA) and the State Pharmaceutical Corporation (SPC).

Medical and civil rights groups declared that the incident exposed deep systemic failures in Sri Lanka’s drug regulatory framework, with critics warning that the collapse of quality assurance mechanisms is placing patients’ lives at grave risk.

The Medical and Civil Rights Professional Association of Doctors (MCRPA), and allied trade unions, accused health authorities of gross negligence and demanded the immediate resignation of senior NMRA and SPC officials.

MCRPA President Dr. Chamal Sanjeewa is on record as having said that the Health Ministry, NMRA and SPC had collectively failed to ensure patient safety, citing, what he described as, a failed drug regulatory system.

The controversy has taken an unexpected turn with some alleging that the NPP government, on behalf of Sri Lanka and India, in April this year, entered into an agreement whereby the former agreed to lower quality/standards of medicine imports.

Trouble begins with Ranwala’s resignation

The NPP suffered a humiliating setback when its National List MP Asoka Ranwala had to resign from the post of Speaker on 13 December, 2024, following intense controversy over his educational qualification. The petroleum sector trade union leader served as the Speaker for a period of three weeks and his resignation shook the party. Ranwala, first time entrant to Parliament was one of the 18 NPP National List appointees out of a total of 29. The Parliament consists of 196 elected and 29 appointed members. Since the introduction of the National List, in 1989, there had never been an occasion where one party secured 18 slots.

The JVP/NPP made an initial bid to defend Ranwala but quickly gave it up and got him to resign amidst media furor. Ranwala dominated the social media as political rivals exploited the controversy over his claimed doctorate from the Waseda University of Japan, which he has failed to prove to this day. But, the JVP/NPP had to suffer a second time as a result of Ranwala’s antics when he caused injuries to three persons, including a child, on 11 December, in the Sapugaskanda police area.

The NPP made a pathetic, UNP and SLFP style effort to save the parliamentarian by blaming the Sapugaskanda police for not promptly subjecting him for a drunk driving test. The declaration made by the Government Analyst Department that the parliamentarian hadn’t been drunk at the time of the accident, several days after the accident, does not make any difference. Having experienced the wrongdoing of successive previous governments, the public, regardless of what various interested parties propagated on social media, realise that the government is making a disgraceful bid to cover-up.

No less a person than President Dissanayake is on record as having said that their members do not consume liquor. Let us wait for the outcome of the internal investigation into the lapses on the part of the Sapugaskanda police with regard to the accident that happened near Denimulla Junction, in Sapugaskanda.

JVP/NPP bigwigs obviously hadn’t learnt from the Weligama W 15 hotel attack in December, 2023, that ruined President Ranil Wickremeinghe’s administration. That incident exposed the direct nexus between the government and the police in carrying out Mafia-style operations. Although the two incidents cannot be compared as the circumstances differ, there is a similarity. Initially, police headquarters represented the interests of the wrongdoers, while President Wickremesinghe bent over backwards to retain the man who dispatched the CCD (Colombo Crime Division) team to Weligama, as the IGP. The UNP leader went to the extent of speaking to Chief Justice Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, and Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to push his agenda. There is no dispute the then Public Security Minister Tiran Alles wanted Deshabandu Tennakoon as IGP, regardless of a spate of accusations against him, in addition to him being faulted by the Supreme Court in a high-profile fundamental rights application.

The JVP/NPP must have realised that though the Opposition remained disorganised and ineffective, thanks to the media, particularly social media, a case of transgression, if not addressed swiftly and properly, can develop into a crisis. Action taken by the government to protect Ranwala is a case in point. Government leaders must have heaved a sigh of relief as Ranwala is no longer the Speaker when he drove a jeep recklessly and collided with a motorcycle and a car.

Major cases, key developments

Instead of addressing public concerns, the government sought to suppress the truth by manipulating and exploiting developments

* The release of 323 containers from the Colombo Port, in January 2025, is a case in point. The issue at hand is whether the powers that be took advantage of the port congestion to clear ‘red-flagged’ containers.

Although the Customs repeatedly declared that they did nothing wrong and such releases were resorted even during Ranil Wickremesinghe’s presidency (July 2022 to September 2024), the public won’t buy that. Container issue remains a mystery. That controversy eroded public confidence in the NPP that vowed 100 percent transparency in all its dealings. But the way the current dispensation handled the Port congestion proved that transparency must be the last thing in the minds of the JVPers/NPPers holding office.

* The JVP/NPP’s much touted all-out anti-corruption stand suffered a debilitating blow over their failure to finalise the appointment of a new Auditor General. In spite of the Opposition, the civil society, and the media, vigorously taking up this issue, the government continued to hold up the appointment by irresponsibly pushing for an appointment acceptable to President Dissanayake. The JVP/NPP is certainly pursuing a strategy contrary to what it preached while in the Opposition and found fault with successive governments for trying to manipulate the AG. It would be pertinent to mention that President Dissanayake should accept the responsibility for the inordinate delay in proposing a suitable person to that position. The government failed to get the approval of the Constitutional Council more than once to install a favourite of theirs in it, thanks to the forthright position taken by its civil society representatives.

The government should be ashamed of its disgraceful effort to bring the Office of the Auditor General under its thumb:

* The JVP/NPP government’s hotly disputed decision to procure 1,775 brand-new double cab pickup trucks, at a staggering cost exceeding Rs. 12,500 mn, under controversial circumstances, exposed the duplicity of that party that painted all other political parties black. Would the government rethink the double cab deal, especially in the wake of economic ruination caused by Cyclone Ditwah? The top leadership seems to be determined to proceed with their original plans, regardless of immeasurable losses caused by Cyclone Ditwah. Post-cyclone efforts still remain at a nascent stage with the government putting on a brave face. The top leadership has turned a blind eye to the overwhelming challenge in getting the country back on track especially against the backdrop of its agreement with the IMF.

Post-Cyclone Ditwah recovery process is going to be slow and extremely painful. Unfortunately, both the government and the Opposition are hell-bent on exploiting the miserable conditions experienced by its hapless victims. The government is yet to acknowledge that it could have faced the crisis much better if it acted on the warning issued by Met Department Chief Athula Karunanayake on 12 November, two weeks before the cyclone struck.

Foreign policy dilemma

Sri Lanka moved further closer to India and the US this year as President Dissanayake entered into several new agreements with them. In spite of criticism, seven Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs), including one on defence, remains confidential. What are they hiding?

Within weeks after signing of the seven MoUs, India bought the controlling interests in the Colombo Dockyard Limited for USD 52 mn.

Although some Opposition members, representing the SJB, raised the issue, their leader Sajith Premadasa, during a subsequent visit to New Delhi, indicated he wouldn’t, under any circumstances, raise such a contentious issue.

Premadasa went a step further. The SJB leader assured his unwavering commitment to the full implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution that was forced on Sri Lanka during President JRJ’s administration, under the highly questionable Indo-Lanka Accord of July, 1987, after the infamous parippu drop by Indian military aircraft over Jaffna, their version of the old gunboat diplomacy practiced by the West.

Both India and the US consolidated their position here further in the post-Aragalaya period. Those who felt that the JVP would be in a collision course with them must have been quite surprised by the turn of events and the way post-Aragalaya Sri Lanka leaned towards the US-India combine with not a hum from our carboard revolutionaries now installed in power. They certainly know which side of the bread is buttered. Sri Lanka’s economic deterioration, and the 2023 agreement with the IMF, had tied up the country with the US-led bloc.

In spite of India still procuring large quantities of Russian crude oil and its refusal to condemn Russia over the conflict in Ukraine, New Delhi has obviously reached consensus with the US on a long-term partnership to meet the formidable Chinese challenge. Both countries feel each other’s support is incalculably vital and indispensable.

Sri Lanka, India, and Japan, in May 2019, signed a Memorandum of Cooperation (MoC) to jointly develop the East Container Terminal (ECT) at the Colombo Port. That was during the tail end of the Yahapalana administration. The Gotabaya Rajapaksa administration wanted to take that project forward. But trade unions, spearheaded by the JVP/NPP combine, thwarted a tripartite agreement on the basis that they opposed privatisation of the Colombo Port at any level.

But, the Colombo West International Terminal (CWIT) project, that was launched in November, 2022, during Ranil Wickremesinghe’s presidency, became fully operational in April this year. The JVP revolutionary tiger has completely changed its stripes regarding foreign investments and privatisation. If the JVP remained committed to its previous strategies, India taking over CDL or CWIT would have been unrealistic.

The failure on the part of the government to reveal its stand on visits by foreign research vessels to ports here underscored the intensity of US and Indian pressure. Hope our readers remember how US and India compelled the then President Wickremesinghe to announce a one-year moratorium on such visits. In line with that decision Sri Lanka declared research vessels wouldn’t be allowed here during 2024. The NPP that succeeded Wickremesinghe’s administration in September, 2024, is yet to take a decision on foreign research vessels. What a pity?

The NPP ends the year on the back foot, struggling to cope up with daunting challenges, both domestic and external. The recent revelation of direct Indian intervention in the 2022 regime change project here along with the US underscored the gravity of the situation and developing challenges. Post-cyclone period will facilitate further Indian and US interventions for obvious reasons.

****

Perhaps one of the most debated events in 2025 was the opening of ‘City of Dreams Sri Lanka’ that included, what the investors called, a world-class casino. In spite of mega Bollywood star Shah Rukh Khan’s unexpected decision to pull out of the grand opening on 02 August, the investors went ahead with the restricted event. The Chief Guest was President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, who is also the Finance Minister, in addition to being the Defence Minister. Among the other notable invitees were Dissanayake’s predecessor Ranil Wickremesinghe, whose administration gave critical support to the high-profile project, worth over USD 1.2 bn. John Keells Holdings PLC (JKH) and Melco Resorts & Entertainment (Melco) invested in the project that also consist of the luxurious Nüwa hotel and a premium shopping mall. Who would have thought President Dissanayake’s participation, even remotely, possible, against the backdrop of his strong past public opposition to gambling of any kind?

Don’t forget ‘City of Dreams’ received a license to operate for a period of 20 years. Definitely an unprecedented situation. Although that license had been issued by the Wickremesinghe administration, the NPP, or any other political party represented in Parliament, didn’t speak publicly about that matter. Interesting, isn’t it, coming from people, still referred by influential sections of the Western media, as avowed Marxists?

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Midweek Review

The Aesthetics and the Visual Politics of an Artisanal Community

Published

5 days ago

2025/12/24

Sahan Weerasooriya

Through the Eyes of the Patua:

Organised by the Colombo Institute for Human Sciences in collaboration with Millennium Art Contemporary, an interesting and unique exhibition got underway in the latter’s gallery in Millennium City, Oruwala on 21 December 2025. The exhibition is titled, ‘Through the Eyes of the Patua: Ramayana Paintings of an Artisanal Community’ and was organized in parallel with the conference that was held on 20 December 2025 under the theme, ‘Move Your Shadow: Rediscovering Ravana, Forms of Resistance and Alternative Universes in the Tellings of the Ramayana.’ The scrolls on display at the gallery are part of the over 100 scrolls in the collection of Colombo Institute’s ‘Roma Chatterji Patua Scroll Collection.’ Prof Chatterji, who taught Sociology at University of Delhi and at present teaches at Shiv Nadar University donated the scrolls to the Colombo Institute in 2024.

The paintings on display are what might be called narrative scrolls that are often over ten feet long. Each scroll narrates a story, with separate panels pictorially depicting one component of a story. The Patuas or the Chitrakars, as they are also known, are traditionally bards. A bard will sing the story that is depicted by each scroll which is simultaneously unfurled. For Sri Lankan viewers for whom the paintings and their contexts of production and use would be unusual and unfamiliar, the best way to understand them is to consider them as a comic strip. In the case of the ongoing exhibition, since the bards or the live songs are not a part of it, the word and voice elements are missing. However, the curators have endeavoured to address this gap by displaying a series of video presentations of the songs, how they are performed and the history of the Patuas as part of the exhibition itself.

The unfamiliarity of the art on display and their histories, necessitates broader explanation. The Patua hail from Medinipur District of West Bengal in India. Essentially, this community of artisans are traditional painters and singers who compose stories based on sacred texts such as the Ramayana or Mahabharata as well as secular events that can vary from the bombing of the Twin Towers in New York in 2001 to the Indian Ocean Tsunami of 2004. Even though painted storytelling is done by a number of traditional artisan groups in India, the Patua is the only community where performers and artists belong to the same group. Hence, Professor Chatterji, in her curatorial note for the exhibition calls them “the original multi-media performers in Bengal.”

‘The story of the Patuas’ also is an account of what happens to such artisanal communities in contemporary times in South Asia more broadly even though this specific story is from India. There was a time before the 21st century when such communities were living and working across a large part of eastern India – each group with a claim to their recognizably unique style of painting. However, at the present time, this community and their vocation is limited to areas such as Medinipur, Birbhum, Purulia in West Bengal and Dumka in Jharkhand.

A pertinent question is how the scroll painters from Medinipur have survived the vagaries of time when others have not. Professor Chatterji provides an important clue when she notes that these painters, “unlike their counterparts elsewhere, are also extremely responsive to political events.” As such, “apart from a rich repertoire of stories based on myth and folklore, including the Ramayana and other epics, they have, over many years, also composed on themes that range from events of local or national significance such as boat accidents and communal violence to global events such as the tsunami and the attack on the World Trade Centre.”

There is another interesting aspect that becomes evident when one looks into the socio-cultural background of this community. As Professor Chatterji writes, “one significant feature that gives a distinct flavour to their stories is the fact that a majority of Chitrakars consider themselves to be Muslims but perform stories based largely on Hindu myths.” In this sense, their story complicates the tension-ridden dichotomies between ethno-cultural and religious groups typical of relations between groups in India as well as more broadly in South Asia, including in Sri Lanka. Prof Chatterji suggests this positionality allows the Patua to have “a truly secular voice so vital in the world that we live in today.”

As a result, she notes, contemporary Patuas “have propagated the message of communal harmony in their compositions in the context of the recent riots in India and the Gulf War. Their commentaries couched in the language of myth are profoundly symbolic and draw on a rich oral tradition of storytelling.” What is even more important is their “engagement with contemporary issues also inflects their aesthetics” because many of these painters also “experiment with novel painterly values inspired by recent interaction with new media such as comic books and with folk art forms from other parts of the country.”

From this varied repertoire of the Patuas’ painterly tradition, this exhibition focusses on scrolls portraying different aspects of the Ramayana. In North Indian and the more dominant renditions of the Ramayana, the focus is on Rama while in many alternate renditions this shifts to Ravana as typified by versions popular among the Sinhalas and Tamils in Sri Lanka as well as in some areas in several Indian states. Compared to this, the Patua renditions in the exhibition mostly illustrate the abduction of Sita with a pronounced focus on Sita and not on Ravana, the conventional antagonist or on Rama, the conventional protagonist. As a result, these two traditional male colossuses are distant. Moreover, with the focus on Sita, these folk renditions also bring to the fore other figures directly associated with her such as her sons Luv and Kush in the act of capturing Rama’s victory horse as well as Lakshmana.

Interestingly, almost as a counter narrative, which also serves as a comparison to these Ramayana scrolls, the exhibition also presents three scrolls known as ‘bin-Laden Patas’ depicting different renditions on the attack on New York’s Twin Towers.

While the painted scrolls in this collection have been exhibited thrice in India, this is the first time they are being exhibited in Sri Lanka, and it is quite likely such paintings from any community beyond Sri Lanka’s shores were not available for viewing in the country before this. Organised with no diplomatic or political affiliation and purely as a Sri Lankan cultural effort with broader South Asian interest, it is definitely worth a visit. The exhibition will run until 10 January 2026.