SANDHYA BORDEWEKAR: HAS YOUR WORK EVER BEEN TARGETED BY the Moral Police? If so, how have you responded? If not, what was your response when other artists were targeted?

Surendran Nair : Unfortunately, moral censorship related to creative expression is not something new in India. It dates back to the early 1950s, when Akbar Padamsee’s painting of a naked couple was confiscated by the police from an exhibition in Bombay on charges of obscenity. A court ruling however later declared that since the work was within the premises of an art gallery, it could not be deemed obscene.

It is therefore paradoxical that my own encounter with censorship occurred at the NGMA, when the director, Mukta Nidhi (a bureaucrat appointed by the NDA government), along with the Secretary of Culture, declared that my painting, titled, An actor rehearsing the interior monologue of Icarus (which was in an exhibition that had been approved of by the advisory committee members), was considered to be offending the “sentiments of the nation”, and insisted that it be removed from the show. The “problematic imagery” was the rear view of a tiny winged male naked figure atop the Ashoka stambha, and it was this that the moral brigade of cultural policing interpreted as an insult to the national emblem. When the artists’ community protested against their action and a constitutional lawyer refuted their interpretation of the Ashoka stambha as the national emblem, the issue died down. After this incident, I have chosen to boycott the NGMA, and will not participate in any event organized by them, unless I get an official letter of apology from the institution regarding this matter. I have responded to the issue of censorship as an artist through my work. For example, the painting, titled, Temporality: A study for an epic scale installation of 330 million cloud forms (of variable size) on poles (of variable length) motorized for animation, on a stretch of 786 sq. miles of barren plain, on an April day, when the sky is clear, between 11 A.M and 3 P.M, had the inscription, How to rob(e) a naked sky and for those who find the nakedness of the sky morally or legally offensive, integrated as visual/textual elements within the work.  Subversive irony becomes the critical vocabulary that becomes the tool by which I combat the invasive forces of fundamentalist bigotry that attempt to de-stabilize democratic freedom. I also believe that it is essential that we, as artists, need to collectively resist these assaults, and condemn them forcefully.

B. V. Suresh : Often, artists are targeted, even if nothing contentious exists in their work, because the ignorant have acquired the power to target them by cultivating narrow-minded beliefs about religion. Well, anything and everything can become a shocking subject for fetish-ridden minds. I have been one of the more fortunate artists in that I have not been targeted by such people. However, while I have never experienced a direct confrontation, I have shown solidarity through signature campaigns – for M.F. Husain, Surendran Nair, Salman Rushdie, and Taslima Nasrin, among others.

But, when an institution rather than an individual is the target, especially an institution one belongs to, it can become a nightmare! Since the mid-1980s, one has noticed this problem and extended moral support to those victimized. I always deal with this issue in my work. But now, one has to take a different stand. You realize that the institution you have believed in all these years does not only have people who believe in progressive ideals – in autonomy and in the freedom to cultivate knowledge. Surely, teaching is more than just a bread-earning profession?

S.B: According to you, what constitutes ‘hurting religious sentiments’? Do you think art is capable of doing this? Can you recollect any work of art that has allegedly done this?

Indrapramit Roy : Contemporary art uses all kinds of imagery and religious iconography. Take, for instance, Andres Serrano’s Piss Christ, a photographic work, where the image of an immersed crucifix in fluid is bathed in an ethereal light.

The conservative right in the USA was up in arms because the fluid concerned was ‘piss’. However, blood, which is also a bodily fluid, is freely referred to in the liturgy along with flesh. The work forces you to ponder about the nature of an image and how one can read it. Serrano’s intention was nuanced and designed to provoke thought. The work was certainly not meant for consecration in a church.

It is an abiding irony that in the Hindu religious tradition, where the ‘lingam’ and the ‘yoni’ occupy a central space, reference to nudity can so easily hurt sentiments. It is a convenient ruse to browbeat the artist into conforming and to enforce self-censorship as well as to rabble-rouse.

S.B : The situation that M. F. Husain is in at the moment is quite disturbing. Do you think the obvious communal baggage of this issue is something that Indian artists should get together to resolve? Do you think there is a will to resolve it?

Vasudevan Akkitham : In the history of modern Indian Art, over the last sixty years, I cannot think of any Indian artist who has been so consistently targeted as M. F. Husain. It is very clear why and by whom. It saddens one all the more because he is perhaps one of the few artists whose work has been continuously inspired by Indian myths and the Puranas. His fractured language is often misunderstood. There is no attempt to hurt religious sentiments or denigrate national pride in them.

I really feel that there isn’t enough done by us regarding this issue – we seem to have left it to the visually illiterate ‘custodians’ of culture.

There is a need to make an effort to clear up the misunderstanding and to impress upon people the importance of constitutional guidelines regarding the ‘freedom of expression’. This will, hopefully, discourage lumpen elements from going to court and creating trouble every now and then.

Mayyur Kailash Gupta : Art and religion are both creations of the human mind. If we take the trouble to understand art and religion correctly, then, we can feel their true emotional content. Just like science, art aims to be understood; just like religion, it is trying to expand the human mind.

S.B : Do you agree that the right to the freedom of expression is something that artists must use responsibly?

K.G. Subramanyan : All faiths, myths, and institutions, need to be subjected to critical scrutiny from time to time. To protect them from this is to undervalue their worth.

Criticism and dissent are essential parts of our culture. Here, even so-called revealed wisdom is subjected to refutation and reinterpretation. Naturally, we honour the freedom of expression. In a sanctimonious establishment, a youthful outburst of irreverence is often part of this process. The result may be extreme and inelegant – a Piss Christ, a Dung Madonna, a comic strip that caricatures a world preacher, a religious icon that is silk-screened on a cod-piece. But these are better scotched by neglect than glorified through censorship. If such juvenile gestures incite people to violence, it is a negative comment on their maturity and wisdom.

Mahendra Pandya :  I think that concepts are extremely important. Otherwise, when we talk of freedom and art, we are using words without understanding what they mean. Any talk of the freedom of expression, when it is not backed by concepts, is vulgar. For example, there is a subtle difference between ‘nudity’ and ‘nakedness’ – it is left to the artist where he draws the line.

There is also a second angle. The artist exhibits his work. He exhibits it for public consumption. The reaction of the public may not be what he expected it to be. But if he believes in his concepts, he will continue to adhere to them; his adherence will depend on his faith in his convictions. Socrates drank poison because democracy was in the hands of the illiterate. Now, times have changed. Socrates would probably have to take poison because democracy is in the hands of ‘intellectual terrorists’.

S.B : What is the role of the artist in society? Do you think that the role is different in India to what it is in the West? India is a complex society, with numerous religions, castes, communities, and differing levels of literacy and general awareness. What challenges do artists face?

Jeram Patel : The artist’s role is much more challenging in India today. Artists have to find their own contexts and work from there. If you choose to ‘stay in the society’, you have to listen to the dictates of the society and work accordingly. The artist has to look for his own tools and has to be true to his art. Otherwise, sooner or later, he will be exposed.

Gargi Raina : An artist’s role anywhere, but especially in a fractured, diverse, and multi-layered society like ours, is under pressure to change and to keep changing. Primarily, an artist’s role, I feel, is to be a witness, a sakshi, and to reflect on our time and society. The levels of intolerance are rising. Ironically, levels of tolerance and apathy are also rising. When there is a conflict, artists need to protect their freedom of expression by resorting to the law. The need of the hour for the artist is to question, to think, and to be alert. The madness we see afflicting society from time to time may start to strike closer home. We either have to be more proactive or sink deeper into our art practices, in order to find more subtle ways of dealing with it.

S.B : When the Mob becomes the Censor, what choices are artists left with? How can artists remain true to what they believe in?

Surendran Nair. An actor rehearsing the interior monologue of Icarus. Painting. 2000. This work was meant to be part of a group show, Combine: Voices for the New Century, an exhibition by Contemporary Indian Artists, at the NGMA, New Delhi. It was objected to, and the curator, Prima Kurien, refused to go ahead with the exhibition. Later, it was presented at Vis-à-vis & Art Inc., New Delhi, from November 25th to December 5th, 2000.

Surendran Nair. Temporality: A study for an epic scale installation of 330 million cloud forms (of variable size) on poles (of variable length) motorized for animation, on a stretch of 786 sq. miles of barren plain, on an April day, when the sky is clear, between 11 A.M and 3 P.M. Painting. 2000.

Rekha Rodwittiya. From the Evocations series. Acrylic and oil on canvas. 6’ x 4’. 1998.
This painting was part of a solo show that travelled to Studio Barbieri, Venice, Italy, 1998. On its return, the entire show was confiscated by the Customs at Mumbai Airport on charges of obscenity. While the above work was the focus of the attack, the entire body of confiscated work was threatened with destruction. The intervention of a senior IAS officer from New Delhi finally led to the safe return of the works to the artist.

Rekha Rodwittiya : As an artist, I will not accept the dictates of moral vigilantism to become the guidelines by which I make my art. I conceive my paintings from the politics that constitutes the governance of my life, and if within a democracy, this is viewed as transgressing what is considered to be appropriate by fundamentalist political agencies, then I think society should recognize that the functioning of our constitution is impaired, and legal recourse must be immediately sought. Mob violence has been legitimized by political parties in India and atrocities committed in these situations are left unpunished, using the convenience of the anonymity of a crowd to excuse the apathy of political will to enforce lawful civil coexistence. There is the suggestion that artists must be ‘responsible’ and many believe that we desire controversy and create sensationalism via our art expressions. This is completely unfounded and a total myth that fundamentalist groups circulate to be able to use as an inflammatory tool to stir the emotions of the public, in order to perpetuate the communal divide and gain vote-bank political mileage. Retrogressive ideas of morality and Victorian notions of representation are being touted by these lumpen elements as emblematic of ‘Indian Culture’.  Art can be viewed as a chronicle of time that is informed by circumstance, and which bears testimony to the lived experiences of human existence either through direct or subversive methods of articulation. Every artist must endeavour to protect and maintain her/his autonomy as a creative person and oppose even the smallest infringement of the freedom of expression. Every voice that is silenced through censorship spells the death of a pluralistic secular nation, and diversity will ultimately be wiped out in the zeal for political “over- correctness”.

Nilima Sheikh : Of course, artists must resist, over and over again, all attempts to capture their space for debate, and endeavour to stretch the limits of their creativity and imagination. If we do not, at all times, do this, we will be failing in our apportioned role in society as artists and citizens. But, in times like ours, in Gujarat, this is easier said than done. The battle here is not just for the individual artist’s right to creative expression. The fight to retrieve and protect the space we took for granted in the days of our new nationhood – the right to speak, use language, metaphors, ideas; to debate, dissent, inspire, incite, indict; and to have institutions and curricula that facilitated ferment and growth – is now being fought from the valiant shoulders of young student-artists.

It is also a time for some soul-searching. In our complacency, we have allowed this space to shrink. Newspaper spaces for reviews and dialogues have given way to spaces for adulation/envy – personality profiles, Page 3 trivia, and price statistics. Informed outreach and public interface has been swallowed up by market forces. Dialogue has become in-house for fear of watering down the intellectual quality of debate (the present forum being one exemplary exception). The admirable phalanx of critical writers on art that we can boast of in our country are confined to writing eulogies on artists in their exhibition catalogues or write for spaces outside the country, where opportunity and happier price structures are available. The pedagogy of art and critical writing needs to be center-staged.

It is sad and ironic that one of the few places where this was being done, the Faculty of Fine Arts in Baroda, is under siege, and for exactly these reasons. We, as individual artists across the country, will continue to paint what is true to us, but that is for our own sake or else our art will begin to stink. For the future of art in our country, we have to do a bit more than that to sensitize ourselves and our community to the responsibilities of art practice and perception.