Don't silence minds that create art

Conform or perish - if artists dare to be different or original, society wields the stick across their back.

Six hundred years ago, Michaelangelo was accused of obscenity by the cardinals of the Roman Cath­olic church because he painted nude figures on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel to portray the creation of man. He was ridiculed, tortured and deprived of payment by the pope who has now faded into oblivion while the artist lives on.

Punishing artists who do not conform to established practices is nothing new. They can be painters, sculptors, singers or writers — if they dare to be different or original, society wields the stick across their back. It takes courage and unwavering commitment to their art to continue despite the censure, especially in the world of performing arts.

Today’s musicians and dancers may not be thrown into the Golconda Fort like Bhadrachala Ramadasu. But, they can be punished in other ways if they choose to veer off the beaten track. Ignoring them in major festivals or worse still, threatening their accompanists is society’s way of “teaching them a lesson for being different.”

The 21st century is not unlike the 15th in this respect. It can be a Salman Rushdie or a Charlie Hebdo. A Nahid Afrin or a Perumal Murugesh. Writer, cartoonist, musician or poet, it does not matter. Conform or perish is the watchword. Their self-styled judges are all alike; Christian zealots or Muslim fanatics or Hindu fundamentalists – it makes no difference.

The attack on painters, singers and filmmakers by self-styled moralists questions an artist’s right to communicate without fear. But, this is nothing new. If not on moral grounds, artists have been punished and ostracised on various counts in India.

The reason could be social, religious or even political. The recent episode of banning films with actors from Pakistan because of an attack on a military base in Kashmir is too bizarre to comprehend.

 Perhaps, it is our general attitude to the arts that is to blame. We, in India, are worshippers of Mammon. We respect professions that rake in money. Right from school, children are brainwashed to aim for lucrative careers even if they are otherwise talented.

It is a rare parent who will encourage a child to opt for the fine arts. And even then, it is more often due to poverty. Eminent dancers and musicians confess that they were sent to famous art institutions like Kalakshetra just for two meals a day.
This disdain for the arts has placed the artist on the lower rung of the social order. True, artists may not be millionaires. Many are also left penniless in the end. The story of indigent artists in this country is painful.

Art is not free
In a milieu where money is the mantra, artists are treated like second-class citizens. What is more painful, the same society that views them so, uses them freely for its entertainment.

This is the season of music and dance. Ramanavami witnesses a spate of performances in many cities. Every temple, school, college or public space in a city like Bengaluru becomes a performing theatre. The best of artistes are invited from different states. Art, at its best, is offered on a platter for nearly a month. But here comes the sad part of the story.

Audiences are unwilling to pay for this lavish fare leaving organisers of such events bankrupt. ‘What are artistes there for if they cannot sing, dance or paint for free?’ is the general view.

The very people who are held in contempt for their profession are expected to entertain the public at no cost. And, it has been so at all times in
all ages.

No wonder, artists have to survive on patronage. If it was royalty that supported the arts in India, the church did it in ancient Europe. In the 21st century, the arts are supported by corporate houses or rich benefactors. However, this benevolence comes with a price.

The best of painters, sculptors, writers or performing artistes must bow to his/her benefactor in all matters. They are the supplicants who literally have to “sing for their supper.” A cruel punishment, but there it is.

The silver lining is that their works will endure long after their benefactors are forgotten. Michaelangelo learnt his lesson the hard way. Hanging on a scaffolding, he re-created the Genesis on that ceiling.

The cardinals who mocked at him are forgotten. So is the pope who tormented him. Yet, the price that he paid to continue to create is a truth that holds good even six centuries later.

It is best described by his contemporary, Raphael: “What is an artist? A lackey for the rich and powerful. We must bow, fawn, kiss hands to do the things we must do — or die. We are harlots, always peddling beauty at the doorsteps of the mighty.”