Text of a lecture conducted by Bhagya Rajapakse.
Venue: Sri Lanka Archive of Contemporary Art, Architecture and Design, Jaffna on November 2025
Tamil Interpreter: Jasmine Nilani Joseph
Special Thanks: Prof.T.Sanathanan and Prof.Sarath Chandrajeewa.
(First part of this article appeared in The Island yesterday)
What constitutes a piece of art, a masterpiece?
There are three common elements that act as crucial in elevating a piece of art to the level of a masterpiece.
1. A Work of Art That Did Not Exist Before.
2. A Work of Art that is Not Bound by Time.
3. A work of art that Establishes a Benchmark for future generations of artists.
Something new and unconventional always catches our attraction.
Exceptional creativity, craftsmanship, and innovativeness
provide impetus for an artist to create something new and unconventional.
This is how originality comes in.
How would we define exceptional creativity, craftsmanship, and innovativeness?
Let’s understand this with a few examples.
On one occasion someone inquired of Michelangelo about how his sculpting process goes.
And the immediate answer of Michelangelo was, “I saw the angel in the marble and carved until I set him free.”
In the subject of marble sculpting, the meaning of creativity for Michelangelo was to remove the unwanted chunks and pieces from the marble block and save the figure he imagined on it. In his words, it’s liberating the figure from the marble that imprisons it.
Any masterpiece by Michelangelo was a clear and prime example that demonstrates how exceptional creativity, craftsmanship, and innovativeness converge in a single piece of art.
Another example is the 1942 sculpture by Pablo Picasso, ‘Bull’s Head.’
It’s nothing more than a merger of a bicycle seat and a bicycle handlebar. In this sculpture., Picasso converts two ordinary, unrelated objects into a unique and evocative structure within which unrelated objects form a correlated entity. A BULL’S HEAD.
That’s all about Picasso’s exceptional creativity, craftsmanship, and innovativeness.
Let’s move to another example.
What can one do with a few discarded machinery parts found in a scrap metal store, an iron rod, some wood blocks, and some copper strips?
A creative as well as innovative mind could do a lot more.
By bringing all these components into one single unit, sculptor Sarath Chandrajeewa gave life to something extraordinary. That is the 2023 abstract monument titled ‘Motion and Stillness.’
In this monument the artist embodies one of the most profound concepts in the world.
Motion and stillness is a concept found in physics and philosophy as well as spiritual approaches.
The existence of the whole world depends on the dynamic interplay between motion and stillness.
Motion signifies change and transformation, while stillness symbolises ‘rest’ or ‘pause,’ which ensures the continuity of motion.
One hundred years ago, in 1925, English poet Fredegond Shove
wrote a poem bearing the same title, ‘Motion and Stillness,’ as well as the meaning.
“The seashells lie as cold
as death.
Under the sea,
The clouds move in a
wasted wreath.
Eternally;
The cows sleep on the
tranquil slopes.
Above the bay;
The ships are like
evanescent hopes.
Vanish away.”
This is a moment where the same concept is embodied in two different forms of art by two different artists of two different eras and of two different countries. It’s just about being creative and innovative.
The most important thing to be noted here is that Sarath Chandrajeewa was unaware that there is a poem written a hundred years ago that holds the same title and meaning as his abstract monument does.
Art is universal; it manifests in numerous forms, conveying the same meaning and message over the centuries and beyond.
That is the reason why some works of art are considered timeless. The inherent nature of a masterpiece is that it is not bound by time and space. Instead, it transcends the boundaries of time and space. Mediums can be changed, and styles can be changed, but the core essence of any great work of art remains constant.
Works of art that transcend spatial and temporal boundaries have set precedent for aspiring artists throughout history.
All artists follow in the footsteps of the previous masters in any field of art. The masters of early days and their masterpieces act as models of excellence for other artists.
For instance, Paul Cézanne was a monumental figure for Pablo Picasso.
Picasso was greatly influenced by Cézanne’s work.
Picasso deliberately turned human faces into mask-like forms in his paintings. This was quite evident in his 1907 masterpiece, ‘Les Demoiselles d’Avignon.’ He probably got this idea from Cezanne’s 1894-1905 masterpiece ‘Bathers.’ The faces of the human figures seen in ‘Bathers’ were seemingly carved from wood.
“Cezanne is my one and only master. He was like the father of us all.” That was how Picasso admired and respected Cezanne.
Cezanne’s approach of breaking down forms and restructuring them in an abstract manner provided the foundational inspiration for Pablo Picasso and George Braque when co-founding ‘Cubism.’
Revolutionary moves taken by artists by radically changing the existing styles are always recorded by history. And their fearless approaches to art elevate their work to the state of masterpiece.
‘Cubism’ was one such revolutionary move that radically changed the landscape of art by challenging traditional perspectives and representations.
‘Cubism’ at the beginning of the 20th century shook the foundation of visual art. It was initially faced with incomprehension and rejection by the public as well as art critics.
The fragmented appearance given to the then conventional depictions by ‘Cubism’ was not well received by many.
French art critic Louis Vauxcelles first ridiculed this new style by Picasso and Braque.
In 1908, after seeing Braque’s exhibition, Vauxcelles dismissed the work by saying, “This style has reduced everything to little cubes.”
This was how this revolutionary style got its name, ‘Cubism.’
Similarly, ‘Impressionism,’ which emerged in France in the second half of the 19th century, left the viewers indifferent towards the new approach.
The first ‘Impressionist’ exhibition was held in Paris in 1874.
Claude Monet is considered a pioneer and father of the Impressionist movement.
In the 1874 exhibition, Monet’s masterpiece ‘Impression, Sunrise’ was among the exhibits.
After visiting the exhibition, French art critic and journalist Louis Leroy referred to Monet’s ‘Impression, Sunrise’ as a mere IMPRESSION rather than a finished work.
Thereafter the entire approach was named ‘The Impressionism.’
At the end of 1940, American artist Jackson Pollock established an unusual and unique abstract art technique.
In this technique he laid a canvas on the floor. Then dripped, poured, and splashed paint onto it using sticks and cans. Sometimes he rode the bicycle on the canvas, which was covered with paint.
Pollock’s revolutionary idea was to get rid of the traditional use of the ‘PAINT BRUSH’ and the role of the ‘LINE.’ He was adamant that the ‘LINE’ should not dominate the canvas any more. So, he said goodbye to the Brush and the Line, and both were given freedom from the task of painting.
But Pollock’s works were not immediately appreciated.
Art critic Harold Rosenberg gave the name ‘The Action Painting’ to this new technique initiated by Jackson Pollock.
The term ‘Drip Painting’ was coined by Time Magazine in 1956, and the magazine gave Pollock the nickname ‘Jack the Dripper.’
However, through ‘Drip Painting,’ Pollock set a precedent that influenced artists for generations.
Masterpieces are not immediately accepted by the public, and in the first run, those were highly criticised by the ‘experts’ in the field.
Because masterpieces challenge the accepted norms in any field of art.
The public as well as the critics are initially shocked by the shapes, techniques, styles, or subject matters set by the radical artistic approaches.
It is common for many works of art to be appreciated after the artist died.
Their work stands as timeless and priceless masterpieces posthumously.
In some cases works of art gain much popularity and continue to last because of the concept they carry as well as the location they are being placed in.
One hundred and eight years ago French artist Marcel Duchamp challenged the established perception of art by bringing a signed urinal into an exhibition space as a work of art titled ‘Fountain.’
Duchamp argued that the artist’s intention, idea, and the context made something art.
The context within which a work of art is placed is capable of changing the value of the work and the way others look at it.
Duchamp’s intention was to challenge the then-existing traditions of art to reconsider the nature of originality, authorship, and the way of defining art.
‘Fountain’ is considered the founding piece, and Duchamp is considered the founder of conceptual art.
The urinal titled ‘Fountain’ was not just a mass-produced commodity but a medium carrying a concept.
A commodity was converted to a work of art just by changing its context.
‘Fountain’ was discarded soon after it was submitted to the Society of Independent Artists’ Exhibition in New York in 1917.
The work known today as ‘Fountain’ is a replica authorised by Duchamp.
But the concept it carried keeps revolutionizing modern art to this day.
Another work of art that faced much controversy, praise, rejection, and ridicule predominantly on social media platforms in the recent past was ‘Comedian,’ a work by Italian artist Maurizio Cattelan in 2019.
It was all about a fresh yellow banana affixed to a white wall with ash grey duct tape.
The ordinary banana we daily see on the racks of fruit stores became extraordinary after changing its context.
As soon as the banana was placed within a high-profile exhibition space, hundreds of people gathered at the gallery to see this awe-inspiring banana.
It was no longer the banana we see in the market or just a nutritious fruit, but a concept.
According to the artist, ‘Comedian’ was interpreted as a work of art that signifies commodification of contemporary art.
The satirical commentary passed through a banana by Cattelan, in a way, pushes the viewer to re-evaluate their preconceived notion about what constitutes art and how its value is being determined in a consumer society.
‘Comedian’ was sold to three buyers on three separate occasions, and four editions of this art piece have been exhibited in 4 different locations: Florida, South Korea, New York, and France.
In 2019 the first two editions were sold at a price of $120,000, and in 2024 another edition exhibited in Sotheby’s Collection in NY was sold at $6.2 million.
When a banana rots or when someone has eaten the banana while it’s being exhibited, the artist simply replaces it again and again, and then it continues to be an original piece of art. But the concept it carries goes on to last for ages.
Speaking about bananas, this ordinary fruit has been a medium of carrying concepts in many countries, in many contexts, by many artists.
In 1967 American visual artist Andy Warhol launches a banana design screen printed on laminated plastic. This was featured on the pop album cover ‘The Velvet Underground and Nico.
Reviews say that this famous banana design by Warhol reflects his fascination with consumer culture and showcases how a primary object, such as a banana, symbolizes the rise of mass production and distribution.
In 2004 English artist Agnus Fairhurst creates a massive installation of peeled bananas. This nine-foot-long bronze peeled banana carried the concept that “Bananas are sensual, but they quickly decay.”
In the same year, 2004, Sri Lankan artist Sanath Kalubadana, through his installation ‘Dinner Table,’ expresses his disagreement over the horrors and destruction of the war in the medium of a table of food with bananas burnt to cinders.
In 2008, Austrian graphic designer Stefan Sagmeister creates a gigantic installation, ‘Banana Wall,’ with the phrase ‘Self-Confidence Produces Fine Results’ spelled out in green bananas placed among yellow ones.
Nearly ten thousand bananas are said to have been used in this installation. I quote a fascinating Facebook post by content creator ‘Ivan’ here to read out what he has said about this Banana Wall.
“It wasn’t just about shock value; it was about time, change, and transformation. Over the days and weeks, the banana slowly ripened, turning from bright yellow to spotted brown, and eventually to deep black. The scent of the room shifted too, from sweet tropical to something far less pleasant. Visitors returned again and again to see how the wall evolved, turning the space into a breathing piece of art.
If a work of art is to last for ages, it must be received by the public constructively.
Any extraordinary piece of art or a masterpiece has its unique way of initiating a silent dialogue with the viewer.
The masterpiece transmits the message of who they are, using an iconic visual language enriched with artistic elements.
The rhythm of the visual language of a masterpiece is complex. But not complicated.
No masterpiece is easy to understand and is full of complexities. But it never confuses the viewer.
Complexity is intriguing, and complication leads to confusion.
If a work of art confuses the viewer, he or she will no longer be in favor of it. That’s exactly where the silent dialogue between the masterpiece and the viewer comes to an end.
One of the most complex masterpieces in the world is Pablo Picasso’s ‘Guernica.’
Its powerful symbolism is not everyone’s cup of tea.
So, there were many arguments among the public as well as experts about what some symbols really mean.
Responding to this discourse, Picasso said, “It isn’t up to the painter to define the symbols; otherwise, it would be better if he wrote them out in so many words. The public who look at the picture must interpret the symbols as they understand them.”
Despite all the underlying complexities, people from all over the world spend millions to go to faraway countries to see the great pieces of art with their bare eyes.
Why?
Because every extraordinary piece of art has its own charisma and aura, which no replica of the same work can possess. It is the charisma and aura of Mona Lisa, David, Girl with a Pearl Earring, Guernica, and many more that draw millions of people to their countries to see them firsthand.
They are not just paint patches on canvases or stone figures. They are living beings. They have their own rhythm of breathing, they never die, and they remain immortal, as do the extraordinary masters who made them.-
from The Island https://ift.tt/x8oa6im
Imagine walking into two shops selling the same product. In the first shop, you pay a simple 0.6% fee. In the second shop, you’re hit with a bewildering array of charges from multiple entities, and by the time you’re done, you’ve paid 2.27%. And that’s for a complete transaction: buying and selling.
The problem isn’t just the total amount – it’s the sheer complexity. While New Zealand streamlines everything into one clean charge, Sri Lankan investors face a labyrinth:
The CSE suffers from a stifling bureaucratic culture, trapped in colonial-era mindsets with fragmented decision-making authority dispersed over multiple regulatory bodies like the SEC, Central Bank, and ministries. Sri Lanka’s capital market leadership remains focused on maintaining the status quo, prioritizing regulatory compliance over innovation. Without a strategic vision to increase retail participation, possibly aiming for even a modest 10% target, the exchange risks remain a peripheral entity rather than a genuine engine of national wealth.
