How Indian Design and Craft Can Stay Relevant by Blending Tradition with Modern Innovation

We celebrate crafts like Ikat, Kanjivaram and Baluchari, but why do we not see new craft traditions emerging?
Mihir Bholey:  This reflects a deeper cultural issue. We, as a society, are not inherently innovative. We keep glorifying the past — whether it’s mathematics or art — instead of creating new legacies. Bill Clinton once said, “If you talk too much about your past, you are not dreaming.” That is exactly our problem.

Innovation has not been cultivated as a cultural practice in India. Art and craft colleges often train students to replicate what their predecessors did, rather than encouraging them to exercise their own creativity. Without innovation, no new craft forms can emerge. At best, we improvise on existing styles.

What we need is a culture of dreaming and innovation. Students should be encouraged to think beyond the obvious, anticipate societal changes — in economy, culture, technology, climate — and respond with creative solutions. Design is not just about aesthetics, it is problem-solving. Unless we foster innovation, we will keep doing what we have done for 2,000 years, without adding new chapters.

When we talk about tradition and modernisation, khadi often comes to mind. How do you view khadi in the context of design and mechanisation?
Mihir Bholey: Khadi is very close to my heart. My grandfather was a freedom fighter, and my father, a political activist, always wore khadi. But this was not the coarse fabric we often associate with khadi today. In places like Madhubani in Bihar, khadi was once refined enough to rival mill-made cotton. My father’s khadi dhotis and kurtas were elegant, fine and superior in quality.

The essence of khadi lies in being hand-spun and handwoven. But mechanisation can be introduced thoughtfully to enhance efficiency and quality without losing its spirit. For example, solar-powered charkhas can increase productivity, while hand processes can still be preserved for those who value authenticity. In fact, khadi can exist in multiple product segments — coarse fabrics with their own aesthetic, fine fabrics for elegance, and blended techniques for mass appeal.

The key is context. We should not reduce khadi to mill-level mechanisation, but selective technological inputs can make it more versatile and sustainable. Both traditions — pure hand-spun khadi and mechanised variations — can coexist, giving consumers choice.

Many industries complain that design graduates are not industry-ready. As an academic, how do you see this gap?
Mihir Bholey: At NID we followed the Bauhaus-inspired principle of “learning by doing”. Students learn by experimenting, failing, iterating and finally succeeding. This allows constant exploration and iteration. At the same time, there is also “doing by learning” — learning from others’ mistakes, case studies and experiences. Both processes are important.

At NID, students are encouraged to develop their own ideas, guided by faculty and mentors. Towards the end, they work with industries on live projects, which exposes them to real-world challenges. By the time they graduate, they are almost industry-ready. I say almost because there are always nuances of shop-floor learning that only industry can provide.

To bridge the gap further, institutes must bring industry experiences into classrooms through case studies, failures and successes alike. This combination of experimentation and contextual learning prepares students better for professional demands.

What role do design institutions play in fostering innovation?
Mihir Bholey: Innovation must become part of the culture, both for faculty and students. At NID, we were fortunate to have strong institutional support, but many institutions lack resources. Regardless, design schools must think beyond current trends and prepare students for future challenges.

Design is no longer about surface beautification. It must integrate technology, user experience, behavioural insights, sustainability and interdisciplinarity. At NID, we did not have a rigid curriculum. Faculty were free to bring new ideas, case studies and experiments to classrooms. This evolving model is essential to keep education relevant.

Institutions should encourage students to think futuristically: how will society evolve economically, culturally, environmentally? What role will technology play? Anticipating such questions is the basis of true innovation.

Global brands often reinterpret Indian traditions before we do. Why hasn’t India projected itself as a global design brand?
Mihir Bholey: For decades after independence, India followed a socialist model where priorities were roti, kapda and makaan. Design and branding were not part of the discourse. Socialist economies rarely produce strong consumer brands. It was only after liberalisation in the 1990s that India began opening up.

Today, with initiatives like Make in India and Design in India, there is new energy. The shift from being mere product makers to brand creators is happening. Look at Mahindra and Tata Motors — once seen as manufacturers of tractors and jeeps, they now produce world-class automobiles with contemporary design sensibilities. These brands have stunned the world with their transformation.

Similarly, lifestyle products and fashion are beginning to take shape. Once we start consciously moving from producing goods to creating brands, design becomes central. I am optimistic that Indian design will increasingly be recognised globally.

Looking ahead, where do you see India in design over the next five years?
Mihir Bholey: I see strong growth in three areas. First, the automobile industry, which has already begun making global strides. Second, IT-driven consumer products — wearables, smart accessories and other technology-led lifestyle products. Third, furniture, where I see great potential for innovative design. Fashion, of course, continues to be an area with global promise.

India has the advantage of scale. While European brands may produce for thousands, we produce for millions. This scale, combined with our growing design confidence, positions us strongly for the future.

Finally, how do you see sustainability in the context of design?
Mihir Bholey: Sustainability must be at the core of design. Otherwise, design risks creating more problems than it solves. I have written extensively on design and environmental concerns, and I strongly believe that designers will increasingly be held accountable for their impact.

With climate change becoming a defining challenge, design must align with sustainability — pro-planet, pro-people, pro-usability. Designers need to ensure that creativity leads to solutions that are environmentally responsible and socially relevant. Only then will design remain meaningful in the future.