mfh

Art has always come under the control of vigilante groups. The freedom of expression through non-conventional methods (unlike verbal) has been a grey area. Writing, painting and speaking have been commonly targeted forms and the divisions have been mostly on religious grounds, with little care for the real issues behind them.

M.F. Hussain is a celebrated artist. He has been acknowledged by the powers that be, in the world of arts, as an artist par excellence. So when he drew those paintings of Lord Saraswathi baring all, it should be looked at as an expression of something more profound than obscenity. The pedigree of Hussain begs you to look at it with an artistic eye. And that is not too hard too do either. Temples in India are filled with sculptures of women scantily covered. The temples at Khajuraho are dedicated to acts of love-making. And Hindus celebrate these as a part of their society. So, is it right to say that Hussain’s paintings drew the attention of Hindu extremists only because of his Muslim religion. I think it would be.

This is a poor reflection of the state of arts in India. Art has always enjoyed patrons in the form of rich kings, in ancient India. The Indian republic though, seems to be constrained by the tender fabric of democracy and can do little but provide inadequate security after violence breaks out. In the absence of strong protection artist are often left bare in facing up to such threats. Most often the mobs get to impose their will, or the artist will have to face ostracism. And the result of all these is skewed creativity which acts akin to cancer on the human body. They pave way for death (in creativity) without one realizing it. Art, as was in the past, may never speak for true human conscience.