At a conference a few months back, a senior academic asked my panel – ‘How relevant do each one of you think is to study informality? Isn’t it an outdated/irrelevant term?’. I responded, rather unclearly. The unclear response has been refining in my mind. It was not the answer in itself, as I was quite clear of it, but the articulation of it via language. Thus, here is what I feel is a clear(er) articulation of what I think about research on informality.
In other words, for the world which doesn’t accepts him (as gay), he is a mere artist, and for world which accepts him (as artist) he is gay. This is the critique of the hidden oppression which the Tate misses to materialize, or chose not to materialize to cater to the voyeuristic nature of looking from the developed world to the developing world.