The latest controversy over a movie and Salam Rushdie’s position in India provoked me to write this article. I have tried to probe into psychology of mass and artists, and tried to infer the result of reactions towards art. These are purely my views and readers have all the rights to be with them or vice versa. It would be the best to chill and read it for one view point among many views expressed all over the nation.
What is the role of Art in the society? Art has been an inseparable part of civilization. In fact we observe that the Universe itself was a creative activity by its Creator. Image of ‘The Creator’ mentioned here is ambiguous, and it is done purposely. The reason to do so is, that by very nature human beings distinguish themselves into theist and atheist, and if people are theists they stick to one or the other religion and attribute creation to the particular ‘God’, and atheists are just opposite. Some believe in Nature and creation of Universe as a natural phenomenon. But analysis of this point is not so important in this article. So coming back to the topic, Creativity is the mother of Universe; Creator is the father.
Art needs an inspiration, provoking thoughts or circumstances. It cannot be created in void. So we always find artists ready to explore the core of existence; be it nature (in form of seed) or emotions like happiness or pathos (reason), altered lifestyle (technology, needs and their fulfillment) and so on. And whatever is created after the observation and insight, is the view of that particular artist. Artist is praised or accused for it. So if expression deals with something that ‘exists, then, why do we have racists, extremists and haters of particular creation? There is dual answer to this question. The first answer is that rights from the childhood oppressor have been groomed to have particular belief which they are not able to cast off due to poor or no education. Secondly, they lack healthy environment where they may be routed to think in all-inclusive manner.
But it is not only about ignorant souls but even the intellectuals have their justification. But here the question is not of judging mentality of people, but to know the effects of all these and future possibilities of changes.
The acceptance and rejection of his/her art proves nutritional for development of art. It is the mental preparation to have firm belief in one’s own reflection of society. There is a dilemma whether to care for sentiments of mass or have the right to express and face the aftermath. Artist can completely practice his freedom of expression and should do so. Art is the unwritten record of history of any country or civilization. There are many instances even in past eras when artists faced the opposition and it is interesting to note that these opposed creation will have parallel importance in future to study art of twenty and twenty first century art history. In India M.F.Hussain is a known example in field of painting, Gulzar’s movie, Libaas was banned in for its bold topic which was non-acceptable in conservative India. Salman Rushdie still faces contempt for ‘Satanic Verses’. Pooja Bedi and Milind Soman were looked down upon because of their nude pose for Kamasutra Ad, and the latest target is Kamal Hassan for ‘Vishwaroopam’. But the reflections in these creations were/ are not fictional. Some give supportive justification and some oppose it as I mentioned the probable reasons in earlier part of this article.
An artist should continue creating without fear despite of negative reactions, because there would not be a sudden awakening in the society. Such activity takes time to nurture and create a so called unconventional environment. Changes in lifestyle, exchange of progressive ideas and most importantly interest to admire art without bias will surely change the attitude of people towards art for the good.
Should Sanity be the prey of sanctity? Answer lies within us.
Art needs an inspiration, provoking thoughts or circumstances. It cannot be created in void. So we always find artists ready to explore the core of existence; be it nature (in form of seed) or emotions like happiness or pathos (reason), altered lifestyle (technology, needs and their fulfillment) and so on. And whatever is created after the observation and insight, is the view of that particular artist. Artist is praised or accused for it. So if expression deals with something that ‘exists, then, why do we have racists, extremists and haters of particular creation? There is dual answer to this question. The first answer is that rights from the childhood oppressor have been groomed to have particular belief which they are not able to cast off due to poor or no education. Secondly, they lack healthy environment where they may be routed to think in all-inclusive manner.But it is not only about ignorant souls but even the intellectuals have their justification. But here the question is not of judging mentality of people, but to know the effects of all these and future possibilities of changes.
The acceptance and rejection of his/her art proves nutritional for development of art. It is the mental preparation to have firm belief in one’s own reflection of society. There is a dilemma whether to care for sentiments of mass or have the right to express and face the aftermath. Artist can completely practice his freedom of expression and should do so. Art is the unwritten record of history of any country or civilization. There are many instances even in past eras when artists faced the opposition and it is interesting to note that these opposed creation will have parallel importance in future to study art of twenty and twenty first century art history. In India M.F.Hussain is a known example in field of painting, Gulzar’s movie, Libaas was banned in for its bold topic which was non-acceptable in conservative India. Salman Rushdie still faces contempt for ‘Satanic Verses’. Pooja Bedi and Milind Soman were looked down upon because of their nude pose for Kamasutra Ad, and the latest target is Kamal Hassan for ‘Vishwaroopam’. But the reflections in these creations were/ are not fictional. Some give supportive justification and some oppose it as I mentioned the probable reasons in earlier part of this article. An artist should continue creating without fear despite of negative reactions, because there would not be a sudden awakening in the society. Such activity takes time to nurture and create a so called unconventional environment. Changes in lifestyle, exchange of progressive ideas and most importantly interest to admire art without bias will surely change the attitude of people towards art for the good.
Should Sanity be the prey of sanctity? Answer lies within us.
