I happened to watch Rang Rasiya this Sunday and was quite impressed by the forward looking views of Raja Ravi Varma, the painter, who created such masterpieces of art and popularized art so that Hindu Gods and Goddesses can adore the homes of the common man, for whom he started a printing press and distributed his magnificent work widely. But it is sad to know that some elements in the society in the name of protection of religion and moral values opposed the kind of art he was practicing and even slapped a court case on him. He was deeply traumatized by such mindless opposition to his art and even though I haven’t read his biography, I can deeply connect with the agony he must have gone through. Commenting upon art and the artistic expression of various artists is a deeply personal subject according to me, and even though widely accepting that art has a deep social value, as has been aptly demonstrated by Raja Ravi Varma, there is still the personal domain of the artist that nobody can touch, which is the source of the creative energy for the artist and from where spring the greatest efforts ever attempted by man.

Thinking of the mindless opposition that Raja Ravi Varma faced from the various fundamentalist organizations who refused to hold a broad point of view on any subject, leave alone art and religion, I think such opposition is inherent in the society now withstanding the sensibilities of billions of people associated with a particular religion. In the delicate world of appreciation of art and what aesthetics of any subject really is, there is a fine line that the artist treads which if he crosses leads him on a collision course with various elements, especially who consider molarity and religion their exclusive domains.  This also applies to artists who rightly so consider art as a highly personalized experience and disregard the social significance of any work of art that has widespread social repercussions.

I cannot help but draw parallels with MF Hussain who crossed such a boundary and had to suffer a fate where he couldn’t die peacefully in his motherland India and had to take refuge in the Gulf because he had offended millions of Hindus when he depicted Hindu Goddesses in a controversial manner. While I understand the opposition to this, and personally hold the opinion that even though Hussain was not guilty by himself, but he should have considered the controversial subject of his work in his later years and may have been more considerate when he equated the female form with those of Hindu Goddesses. While I strongly feel even though the people of India were considerate with Hussain and gave him the due recognition and love noting the kind of talents he had, the same cannot be said and parallels cannot be drawn with the happenings in France concerning Charlie Hebdo.

While I agree that the drawings and cartoons of Charlie Hebdo may have caused hurt to the sensibilities of millions of Muslims around the world, the bloodbath that the office of Charlie Hebdo had to encounter in Paris recently remind us what can happen if fundamentalist organizations are given the power and authority to rule the roost. Suppression of art is the suppression of the very creative soul that we all possess, more individual than collective in this case, and its suppression is crushing the very creative process that sets apart man from his counterparts in the animal kingdom. While there cannot be a rule where art is concerned, for the human imagination should be free without any bounds, and this is the manner through which it blossoms, there should be a thought given to the social repercussions of any work of art that is ought to get widespread social exposure and the sensibilities of people should form some basis of the work of the artist, if he or she wishes their work to be displayed in the public domain.

Coming back to Raja Ravi Varma, in the late nineteenth century, I am surprised that such a broad minded person should have to go through such a humiliation by some fringe elements of the society whom consider themselves as moral police and consider religion their sole domain whom none can trespass. However, as far I am concerned, I fully stand with Raja Ravi Varma and for that matter with the cartoonists of Charlie Hebdo, who risked everything they had for the artistic expression and were brave enough to face the unwanted repercussions from the society not mature or tolerant enough to accept their views. Our treatment of art and artists of any form depicts the state of our society and reflects its evolution and maturity and also depicts how tolerant and refined the people are. However, when the artist has to suffer in the name of artistic expression and even there is bloodshed in its name, then sadly we have to admit there is a mammoth problem we would all have to address collectively in order to remain sane and productive as a society. And in this process, I implore, please leave art alone.