"The eye sees
only what the mind is prepared to comprehend." - Henri Bergson,
French Philosopher and Educator
So true!! You can only grasp what your mind is prepared to. So
does this mean that artistic creations will suffer as they do not compliment ideologies
of certain sect of people. What conspired in the murder of Charlie Hebdo, a French
satirical weekly magazine, can be perceived as either “end of democracy” or “a
start of an era of revolutionary art”. It all depends upon the pre-conceived
notions of people who read this.
This French magazine’s new cover of Prophet Mohammed has
drawn mixed reactions worldwide. To avoid racial criticism the magazine
explained what the drawing is portraying however you cannot change the pre set perspectives
of people. Hence many Muslims worldwide are feeling insulted. So who decides
the division line in art? Does the religion give their dos and don’ts? So in a particular
religion who will get this powerful role? Should government be given the power
to censor art? Is that democracy?
The world of art is not new to criticism hence addressing
racism both real and perceived is a sticky task. Historically artists, writers,
painters and film makers worldwide were killed, slaughtered, disappeared and
even send to exile because their art was considered racial. Recent image
circulation of Russian socialite and Garage editor-in-chief Dasha Zhukova sitting on a
bondage chair held up by a mannequin in the likeness of a black woman
published on Dr. Martin Luther King Day drew attention worldwide. The message understood
from this art was white dominance and black women as objects. However the real
message portrayed by the artist was symbolizing chair as bondage and women
their prey. This art was to bring out the message that even today women are
being suffered in various aspects of society. One of the main roles of art is
to talk about disturbing things and make people confront them in themselves.
And both the artist and Russian socialite had to come out with apology.
I am not advocating acceptance of art as it is but where do
we draw the line. How do we fence the creativity that is required to come up
with art. Freedom of speech and expression is a right for all and protests should
be expressed if artworks are deemed offensive. With intellectual understanding
of a certain subject, real implications need be drawn of a certain art and artist.
I believe in meaningful art and society. Revolutionary art
is what our world need today badly.
