M.F. Hussain, contemporary India's foremost artist, was hounded out of the Country and treated like an outcaste. His exhibitions were virtually ransacked and mobbed by fanatical Hindu groups whose supporters hadn't even seen the paintings, leave alone understand them.
Make no mistake about it; this was not a case of different interests, different pursuits and different individualities one wee bit. This was a political issue with Hindus unfortunately behaving like sheep, allowing themselves to get carried away by Hindu groups and political parties who were singing the tunes of *high morality* and *righteousness* for their own supper. The judgment is an extensive commentary on Hindu and Indian art and is a must read for all. Although this is a judgment on Hussain's Bharatmata painting and has no connection with his alleged paintings on nude Hindu Gods and Goddesses, there are a lot of relevant observations on Indian and Hindu art in the judgment. The entire judgment is available at the link I posted here earlier but since the judgment is quite large, I am posting the relevant portions here. Some relevant Delhi High Court Observations: Pablo Picasso, a renowned artist said, "Art is never chaste. It ought to be forbidden to ignorant innocents, never allowed into contact with those not sufficiently prepared. Yes, art is dangerous. Where it is chaste, it is not art." Art, to every artist, is a vehicle for personal expression. An aesthetic work of art has the vigour to connect to an individual sensory, emotionally, mentally and spiritually. With a 5000-year-old culture, Indian Art has been rich in its tapestry of ancient heritage right from the medieval times to the contemporary art adorned today with each painting having a story to narrate. Ancient Indian art has been never devoid of eroticism where sex worship and graphical representation of the union between man and woman has been a recurring feature. The sculpture on the earliest temples of 'Mithuna' image or the erotic couple in Bhubeneshwar, Konarak and Puri in Orissa (150-1250 AD); Khajuraho in Madhya Pradesh (900-1050 AD); Limbojimata temple at Delmel, Mehsana (10th Century AD); Kupgallu Hill, Bellary, Madras; and Nilkantha temple at Sunak near Baroda to name a few. Today Indian art is confidently coming of age. Every form of stylistic expression in the visual arts, from naturalism to abstract expressionism derives its power from the artist's emotional connection to his perceptual reality. The Nude in contemporary art, a perennial art subject, considered to be the greatest challenges in art has still not lost its charm and focuses on how the human form has been reinterpreted by the emerging and influential artists today. Art and authority have never had a difficult relationship until recently. In fact, art and artists used to be patronized by various kings and the elite class. It is very unfortunate that the works of many artists today who have tried to play around with nudity have come under scrutiny and have had to face the music which has definitely made the artists to think twice before exhibiting their work of art. Therefore, looking at a piece of art from the painters' perspective becomes very important especially in the context of nudes. What needs to be seen is that the work is not sensational for the sake of being so and hence needs to be understood before any objections are raised. The world's greatest paintings, sculptures, songs and dances, India's lustrous heritage, the Konarks and Khajurahos, lofty epics, luscious in patches, may be asphyxiated by law, if prudes and prigs and State moralists prescribe paradigms and prescribe heterodoxies." Sex and obscenity are not always synonymous and it would be wrong to classify sex as essentially obscene or even indecent or immoral. The basic concern should be to prevent the use of sex designed to play a commercial role by making its own appeal. Freedom of speech and expression In S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjevan Ram and Ors. (1989) 2 SCC 574, while interpreting Article 19(2) this Court borrowed from the American test of clear and present danger and observed: "Our commitment to freedom of expression demands that it cannot be suppressed unless the situations created by allowing the freedom are pressing and the community interest is endangered. The anticipated danger should not be remote, conjectural or far-fetched. It should have proximate and direct nexus with the expression. The expression of thought should be intrinsically dangerous to the public interest. [In other words, the expression should be inseparably] like the equivalent of a 'spark in a power keg'." Test of ordinary man The test for judging a work should be that of an ordinary man of common sense and prudence and not an "out of the ordinary or hypersensitive man". Though some might feel offended or disgusted at the very inception of seeing the alleged Mother India in nude but that by itself and nothing more in my opinion is not sufficient to qualify the test of obscenity. The said painting depicting India in a human form in no manner has that tendency to make an average person feel embarrassed by naked portrayal of a concept which has no particular face to it since the painting has not lost its artistic value/touch. An attempt to understand the said painting from the artist's/petitioner's perspective would show how the painter by way of an abstract expression has tried to elucidate the concept of a nation in the form of a distressed woman. The very theme of our Constitution encompassing liberty, equality and fraternity would abhor the non tolerance of another view. There are a few paintings brought on record which provide a glimpse of the ancient Indian art showcasing the absence of inhibition and guilt and the candour and boldness with which our society set out seeking its pleasures. Other than this, the literature of India both religious and secular is full of sexual allusions, sexual symbolisms and passages of such frank eroticism the likes of which are not to be found elsewhere in world literature. Indian art has always celebrated the female form. There is nothing salacious about it. Gloria Stienem, a feminist scholar and writer, once made a salient point about the problem behind obscenity: "Sex is the tabasco sauce that an adolescent national pallet sprinkles on every dish on the menu." We have been called as the land of the Kama Sutra then why is it that in the land of the Kama Sutra, we shy away from its very name? Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder and so does obscenity. It is our perception to objects, thoughts and situations, which rule the mind to perceive them in the way we do. It is most unfortunate that India's new 'puritanism' is being carried out in the name of cultural purity and a host of ignorant people are vandalizing art and pushing us towards a pre-renaissance era. Our Greatest problem today is fundamentalism which is the triumph of the letter over the spirit. In a free democratic society tolerance is vital especially in large and complex societies comprising people with varied beliefs and interests. An intolerant society does not brook dissent. An authoritarian regime cannot tolerate expression of ideas which challenge doctrines and ideologies in the form of writings, plays, music or paintings. Intolerance is utterly incompatible with democratic values. This attitude is totally antithetical to our Indian Psyche and tradition. It must be realised that intolerance has a chilling, inhibiting effect on freedom of thought and discussion. The consequence is that dissent dries up. And when that happens democracy loses its essence. Every time an artist portrays something different, something which is an unpopular view point, it may accompany discomfort and unpleasantness but that in itself cannot be a ground to curb the artistic freedom and quickly go on to label it as obscene. There might be people who may actually get offended by those of Hussain's paintings or others but the right course of action for them, is to simply shrug it off or protest peacefully. "These days unfortunately some people seem to be perpetually on a short fuse, and are willing to protest often violently, about anything under the sun on the ground that a book or painting or film etc. has "hurt the sentiments" of their community. These dangerous tendencies must be curbed. We are one nation and must respect each other and should have tolerance." A liberal tolerance of a different point of view causes no damage. It means only a greater self restraint. Diversity in expression of views whether in writings, paintings or visual media encourages debate. A debate should never the shut out. 'I am right' does not necessarily imply 'You are wrong'. Our culture breeds tolerance- both in thought and in actions. I have penned down this judgment with this favourent hope that it is a prologue to a broader thinking and greater tolerance for the creative field. A painter at 90 deserves to be in his home — painting his canvass! Read the complete judgment at the link http://im.rediff.com/news/2008/may/Judgment.pdf
