Delhi Art Gallery's Photography Show : Typecasting of time and society

Review / Dr Ved Prakash Bhardwaj 

Photography has long been an essential tool for documenting human life and preserving moments that later acquire historical significance. The Delhi Art Gallery's "Typecasting" exhibition, shown at Bikaner House in Delhi, offers an authentic document of life during that period. Bringing together photographs from 1855 to 1920, the exhibition undoubtedly offers a rare visual history of India's diverse communities under British rule. However, the exhibition also raises several questions. One question is what the photographers and the authorities of the time were trying to convey by depicting such communities, especially the lives of tribal people or those working at the lower levels. It seems that these photographs reflected the colonial policies of the British rulers, which sought to justify India's exploitation by portraying India as backward to the world. In this context, it is noteworthy that many have attempted to prove that British rule was necessary to modernise India. It's unlikely that this exhibition will be analysed from this perspective or that any sociological study will be conducted. Therefore, it shouldn't be surprising if it ends up being merely documentary evidence.

In any case, the exhibition itself spans a wide geographical range: photographs from the Lepcha and Bhutia tribes of the Northeast to the Afridis of the Northwest Frontier Region and the Toda and Vedda tribal communities of the South Belt. These were accompanied by portraits of talukdars and wealthy Parsi figures, as well as dancing girls, porters, barbers, and snake charmers. Seen together, the photographs paint a distinct sociological picture—an attempt to present a social map of contemporary Indian society through caste, clan, and work types.

However, beyond their ethnographic surface, the photographs reveal the ideological framework within which they were created. Colonial photography often served as a means of controlling power. By dividing communities into visual "types", British colonial policy attempted to portray Indian society as static, hierarchical, and backward. The act of photographing was inseparable from the act of cataloguing—the fixing of identities within rigid visual categories. The exhibition subtly highlighted this aspect, encouraging viewers to recognise photography not simply as documentation but as a political tool.

Over time, the meaning of these photographs has changed. Separated from their original colonial context, they now serve as essential historical documents. Today, they invite critical scrutiny rather than tacit acceptance. Details of clothing, posture, gestures, and atmosphere provide insight into the reality of nineteenth- and early twentieth-century India. The books and printed materials displayed alongside the photographs further strengthened this archival commitment, demonstrating how closely photography was intertwined with publishing, research, and systematic documentation at that time.

From a contemporary aesthetic perspective, many photographs appear structured and rigid. Subjects are often formally posed, sometimes against neutral backgrounds, emphasising clarity and classification rather than spontaneity. In contrast to today's creative photography—which places a premium on experimentation and subjectivity—these early works appear relaxed. Their visual language prioritises legibility over expressive detail.

Yet such restraint must be understood within its historical context. Photographers were frequently guided by ethnographic and administrative objectives rather than artistic ambition. Technological limitations of early photographic processes, combined with the colonial desire for systematic representation, shaped their compositional choices. In several instances, the emphasis on impoverished or marginalised communities suggests an underlying narrative strategy designed to reinforce colonial claims of civilisational superiority. The camera was not neutral; it operated within a discourse that framed difference and destitution as defining characteristics.

At the same time, the images inadvertently preserve moments of dignity and individuality. A fleeting expression, the texture of traditional attire, or the quiet assertiveness of a stance resists complete typification. Contemporary viewers may find themselves drawn less to the colonial taxonomy and more to the human presence that endures within the frame. The very rigidity that once served administrative ends now allows for a meticulous reading of historical detail.

Ultimately, “Typecasting” demonstrated how photographs transform across time. What once functioned as instruments of classification now serve as archives of memory. They reveal not only the diverse lives of Indian communities but also the mindset of a colonial administration that sought to define and regulate them. By revisiting these images within a contemporary gallery context, the exhibition encouraged viewers to engage critically with both the subjects depicted and the structures that shaped their representation.

Not just this exhibition, but all such photography must be viewed and understood from a new perspective. The agenda of our parallel cinema was often to showcase the negative aspects of Indian society, and this continued after independence. Therefore, there should be no doubt that the photographers nurtured by the British rulers took photographs that were exactly what their masters desired. In many cases, the emphasis on poor or marginalised communities is indicative of an internal plan designed to strengthen colonial claims of civilised superiority. Much has been written about these photographs, but most of them treat the photographs as objects, without attempting to examine the reasons behind them.

All photographs are Delhi Art Gallery's property.