Art once again found itself at the centre of a controversy in Kerala, reigniting debates on censorship, religious sentiments, and the limits of creative freedom.
One such debate is over an artwork by Tom Vattakuzhy that was displayed at the Kochi-Muziris Biennale. The painting, which drew inspiration from the ‘Last Supper’, was themed on the WW I era execution of Mata Hari.
Last weekend, the work was removed from the Biennale after Christian groups raised a protest, terming the work hurtful to religious sentiments.
In another instance, a lottery ticket featuring an artwork from the Lalithakala Akademi also triggered backlash from Hindu groups that alleged that the image depicted “menstrual blood falling on a Shivling”.
Responding to the criticism, the Directorate of Kerala State Lotteries clarified that, “Hundreds of paintings from the Lalithakala Akademi have been printed in lottery tickets. Since the said painting is an abstract one, no specific definition can be given to it”. The statement urged the public to refrain from misinterpretations of the artwork.
Here are some views on the art-versus-religion debate:
‘Offend religious sentiments’
Such works of art, which distort the Last Supper, which believers consider sacred, offend religious sentiments. The painter’s theme, the dinner before the execution of Mata Hari, the dancer, is an example of the excellence of the nuns’ service, who comforted her as she faced death. But by depicting the scene in a distorted manner, the artist is not doing justice to the theme.
Fr Michael Pulikkal, KCBC secretary, in a statement
‘Fearful atmosphere… a dark shadow’
I am an artist who has been constantly engaging in self-censorship of late. There is this fearful atmosphere, where the meaning of your art is taken out of context and judged wrongly. A dark shadow falls on all your perspectives and artistic sensibilities. Da Vinci’s ‘Last Supper’, to me, is an artwork, something I have studied and analysed a lot since my student days. While painting, sometimes, your growing up years, your religious backgrounds and artistic styles that you have encountered inspire you and direct you. And as a humanitarian, I felt deep empathy for the story of Mata Hari. And that’s what I tried to reflect in the painting. Another important part is that it should be viewed in context to the theatre drama based on her. This context was provided at the venue. The eroding socio-political support for art is not conducive for one to engage in creativity.
Tom Vattakuzhy, artist
‘Art functions with poetic fluidity’
Art is a practise that constantly rethinks boundaries and questions the presumptions that inform criteria by which we ajudge things/matters/identities /issues. Art functions with this kind of poetic fluidity that brings diverse things together-in fluid acts of juxtapositions- linking what we took for granted as diverse and delinking those we were trained to think were always integral wholes. Because of Art our bones and joints of thinking/perceiving, so to speak, do not become stiff, arthritic, inelastic and thereby brittle prone to breakage and immobility.What we need to do is to train ourselves to carefully spot, then respectfully and clearly critique/call out mediocrity and mere sensationalism that results from lack of rigor in thought and mental laziness. This requires a commitment to self reflexivity that most do not wish to take up to keepsafe the unquestioning easy comforts of "herd membership"
Radha Gomaty, artist-curator
‘All these seem absurd’
Conflicts of this kind are steadily increasing, and many are taking advantage of them. In our society, even minor matters are being turned into major controversies. This poses a serious problem for art and artists. Even if we look back at Salman Rushdie’s ‘The Satanic Verses’, India was the first to ban the book — before countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt did. Take the lottery issue. We have, for long, seen ridiculous imagery on lottery tickets. No one paid much attention. But today, even an abstract artwork is magnified into a controversy. All these seem absurd.
A Jayashankar, lawyer & socio-political critic
‘Reaction also a freedom’
I believe religious sentiments should not be hurt. There is a decorum by which you do not breach certain boundaries such as gender, religion, physical appearance, etc. While artists, in general, have accepted sensibilities of some sections of the society, they take liberties with others. Everyone has the right to their beliefs and faith. Hurting that cannot be called civilised, let alone creative. When one knows depicting something in a specific way will rouse feathers, why attempt it — unless it is intended to stir up emotions? If it is artistic freedom, then it is the freedom of the viewer to react in the way they feel. Artists must be ready to accept that freedom too.
Achuthsankar S Nair, academic and art historian
‘It’s a dangerous tendency”
I am against any sort of censorship. Each artwork is open to interpretation. You can criticise, disapprove of a work of art. But demanding a ban or withdrawal of an artwork is an attack on creative freedom. It’s a negative and dangerous tendency, which has been on the rise.
Renu Ramanath, senior journalist and art & theatre critic
‘A sense of suffocation’
Art has always been a space through which ideas emerge. When art is restricted, society becomes more closed. It creates a sense of suffocation. However, if a work is created purely as propaganda or to provoke, there should be safeguards and discretion.
Bushra Beegom, head, department of sociology, University of Kerala
‘Not good for the future’
The controversy surrounding Tom Vattakuzhi’s painting is totally misplaced. It is based on an inability to read the painting. In my view, Tom does not denigrate Christian values. On the contrary, he reminds us of Christ’s humanity that is based on empathy with the helpless and wronged. Christ was not a status-quoist. It is an irony that those who are attacking the painting in the name of Christ are missing this point. That this is happening in Kerala is sad. As a Malayali, I feel sorry about it.
R Sivakumar, former professor of art history at Vishwa Bharati University, Santiniketan
‘Art should stand for humanity’
Artists should transcend the borders of mundaneness, such as religion, and go beyond to depict the universality of existence. Art is not about consumerism or controversies. People who use art for such purposes do not understand the subtle and surreal relation that art shares with the beauty of the universe. I strictly do not believe in art for popularity, controversy, or commercialisation. To me, art exists in a realm beyond all these, and a true artist should bring this aspect to his or her works rather than spark any kind of divisiveness. Art should stand for humanity, and I believe in works that are so tuned to the universe.
Sajitha Shankar, artist
‘View art as art’
I do not agree with religion intervening in art. Unwanted controversies can be avoided if religious leaders choose to view art as art. However, if it is apparent that a work has violated the beliefs of a religion or sentiments of believers, there should be some discretion to keep such creations out of exhibitions.
Narayanankutty K, former principal of Fine Arts College, T’Puram
"Climate of fear"
I spoke to Tom (Vattakkuzhy) regarding the issue. His work was not against any religion. While society has progressed in many areas, unfortunately, in this particular sphere it seems to be moving backward. Ours was once a society that was open in many respects. But, can we even imagine making a film like ‘Nirmalyam’ today? There is a climate of fear or excessive caution. And that is unfortunate.
K R Sunil, visual artist & writer