Fish Design

Sanjul Mandal’s painting of fish swimming in a pond amidst lotuses and flowers is a rare example of what Neel Rekha refers to as the Geru (ochre) style of paintings. In her historiographical analysis of Mithila paintings, Rekha examines Pupul Jayakar’s The Earthen Drum, [1] suggesting that Jayakar attempted to correct some of the colonial paradigms introduced by William Archer and sustained by later writers. In doing so, Rekha implies that Jayakar was wise not to base her categorisation of Mithila’s paintings on the basis of caste. Instead, “the differences in the stylistic techniques and colour were used by her as the determinants in explaining and classifying the various types of paintings prevalent during that period [1980s]. Of special significance is the reference to the Geru style of painting in view of the total extinction of this style in the present times and absences of references in any other literary source.” [2] Rekha lists six different styles developed in Mithila art post commercialisation (some discontinued): Bharni, Kachni, Geru, Gobar, Godana and Tantric. [3] As Jayakar had begun to do, Rekha characterises them predominantly on the basis of colour, linework and compositional arrangements, so while Bharni refers to densely filled compositions in profuse colours, and Godana adopts a tattoo aesthetic, Gobar and Geru are characterised by the materials (cow dung and red ochre respectively).

Mandal uses mostly geru here, though she highlights the burnt sienna-like red ochre with yellow, teal, a deep indigo-violet (used very sparingly) and a brilliant magenta that pops and makes the whole painting come alive. Her lines are fluid, and the small, interspersed flowers provide a foil to the dominant, broadly painted lotus plants. Note the striking eyes of the fish, which are mirrored by the centres of the small flowers all around. Fish are a favoured theme in Mithila paintings, which often show ponds brimming with fish and turtles, with birds and flowers around them creating a life-affirming scene.

Based on clarifications offered to him by Kaushik Kumar Jha in personal correspondence, the art historian John H. Bowles writes that prior to marriage, the artist was known in her community as Sanjul Kumari. In Mithila, it is customary for unmarried girls to be referred to as kumari (literally translating to virgin). After marriage, kumari is replaced by devi (goddess). “Sanjul’s father, Ramdev Mandal, worked as the cook for the American anthropologist Raymond Owens, who was then living in Jitwarpur, and it was Owens who first referred to Sanjul as ‘Sanjul Mandal’— the name he ascribed to her paintings later exhibited and published through the Ethnic Arts Foundation. The family belongs to the Dhanuk caste, and Sanjul’s husband’s surname is also Mandal.” [4] According to Kaushik Kumar Jha, who has met the artist, Mandal painted for just a few years during her father’s time as Owens’ cook. As only Owens appeared to be significantly interested in her art, she stopped painting but has recently expressed interest in resuming such work.

See Szanton and Bakshi [5] for another example of her art.

Aurogeeta Das, June 2024

[1] Pupul Jayakar, The Earthen Drum: An introduction to the Ritual Arts of Rural India, (New Delhi: National Museum, 1980)

[2] Rekha, Neel, “Maithil Paintings: An Enquiry into its [sic] Historiographical Trajectory (1947-1997)” in Folklore and Folkloristics, 4:2 (Howrah, December 2011), p.8

[3] Ibid., p.22

[4] John H. Bowles, “Trees of the Honey Forest” in India’s Mithila Painting, eds. David L. Szanton and Paula Richman (Seattle: University of Washington Press, forthcoming, 2025)

[5] David Szanton and Malini Bakshi, Mithila Painting: the Evolution of an Art Form (Berkeley: Ethnic Arts Foundation in association with Pink, 2007), pp.24–25