“Why do you think crucifixion is subversive here?” Dr. Sejal asked me in one of our research meetings after reading a section of my draft on Viennese Actionism. “In Christianity, even though crucifixion is violent, it ultimately symbolizes sacrifice, redemption, and spiritual transcendence. So what makes it subversive in Nitsch’s work—beyond just the visceral imagery?”

 

I paused, thought for a moment, and then said, “In Christianity, crucifixion is an act of resistance—it’s about enduring violence in order to oppose it. It stands for redemption, for spiritual transcendence through suffering. But Nitsch completely inverts that. His crucifixions don’t oppose violence—they perform it. They’re ritualistic, chaotic, and disturbing. He turns a symbol of peace into one of disruption, staging it not to console but to confront. There’s no salvation—only blood, flesh, and decay… I think.”

 

Ma’am let out this sudden, excited squeal—“Yes! That is exactly where I wanted you to reach!” “That is what you need to include here”.

 

It was in moments like these—sharp, exciting, and affirming—that I truly understood not just the sheer excitement of research, but of research with the right mentor, who, with their depth and knowledge, don’t just guide you to the right answer but lead you to the right question.

 

Working with Dr. Sejal Ashok Yadav on my research paper exploring the uncanny in Viennese Actionism has been, in every sense of the word, transformative. Her brilliance is unmistakable—not only because of her extensive academic qualifications, but because of the way she shares that intellect with clarity, grace, and an uncanny (pun intended) ability to mold it to the needs of her students. She doesn't just mentor—she collaborates, challenges, provokes thought, and walks with you through the complex terrain of research with sharp insight and genuine commitment.

 

My research—an interdisciplinary psychological analysis of the Viennese Actionist movement—was daunting in scope. It demanded intensive reading, an excavation of psychoanalytic theory, and an attuned sensitivity to art history, aesthetics, and cultural violence. At the start, the task felt overwhelming. But Dr. Yadav’s steady guidance, deep understanding of psychological frameworks, and her ability to ask the right questions gave the work its necessary scaffolding. Her feedback was always rich, specific, and incisive—capable of identifying both the subtle weaknesses in my writing and the hidden strengths in my argumentation.

 

Conversations with her were intellectually scintillating. While her high expectations demand rigor and pace, they are also what made the entire journey so rewarding. With her, mediocrity is simply not an option—and I found myself reading more, thinking harder, writing better. She has this rare ability to gently but firmly push boundaries, all while making the process feel exciting rather than exhausting.

 

What I’ve valued most, perhaps, is the layered mentorship she offered. Beyond the academic space, our post-meeting conversations—always short, always meaningful—left me thinking. Whether through a shared anecdote, a reflective comment, or a brief philosophical tangent, she consistently embedded intellectual curiosity into every interaction. That, to me, is the mark of a true educator.

 

Thanks to her, I was able to craft a paper that I not only felt proud of, but that felt mine—one that emerged from deep research, authentic reflection, and honest critique. I hold immense gratitude for having had the opportunity to work with her. She has left a lasting imprint not just on the research I produced, but on the way I now approach thinking, writing, and learning.

 

 

Avishi Bohra Student Researcher,

Neerja Modi School April, 2025