Controversial nude paintings of M.F. Husain

In May 08 Delhi High Court has exonerated Husain from the charges, which led to filing a case, of immoral depiction of Indian women nude and more particularly as Bharat Mata and Hindu Goddesses. The judge stated, inter alia,

Quoting Pablo Picasso:

“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.”

Recalling the richness of India’s 5000 year old culture, the judge added:

“ 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 couples in Bhubaneshwar, Korarak and Puri in Orissa ( 150-1250 AD ); Khajuraho in Madhya Pradesh ( 900—1050 AD), Limbojimata temple at Delmel, Mehsana ( 10th centure AD ), Kupgallu Hill, Bellary, Madras, and Nilkantha temple at Sunak near Baroda ( are examples of this )……..Even the very coincept of ‘ lingam’ of the God Shiva resting in the centre of the yoni, is in a way representation of the act of creation, the union of Prakriti and Purusua. The ultimate essence of a work of ancient Indian erotic art has been religious in character and can be enunciated as a state of heightened delight or ananda, the kind of bliss that can be experienced only by the spirit.”

“ 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.”

Describing the nude as a “ perennial art subject,” the judge observed that

“some paintings have been called ‘ obscene,’ ‘ vulgar’ ‘depraving ‘ ‘ prurient ‘ and ‘ immoral ‘ - but it was important to look at art from the artist’s perspective. As a judge he had to balance ‘ the individual’s right to speech and expression and the frontiers of exercising that right - to prevent a ’closed mind’ becoming ‘ a principal feature of (our) open society’ or ‘ an unwilling recipient of information ‘ from enjoying a veto over others’ rights to the same information.

The judge added

‘ obscenity which is offensive to public decency and morality is outside the purview of the protection of free speech and expression……..but former must never come in the way of the later and should not substantially transgress the latter.’

‘ The test for judging a work should be that of an ordinary man of commonsense and prudence and not an out of the ordinary or hypersensitive man.’

‘ Obscenity ‘ the judge opined, ‘ is treating with sex in a manner appealing to the carnal side of human nature or having that tendency.’

‘ As an artist he actually celebrates nudity and considers it as the purest form of expression.’ In the case of his painting of ‘ Bharat Mata ‘ which had offended several petitioners, the aesthetic touch to the painting dwarfs the so called obscenity in the form of nudity and renders it so picayune and insignificant that the nudity in the painting can easily be overlooked.’

‘ It seems that he complainants are not the type who would go to art galleries or have an interest in contemporary art, because if they did, they would know that there are many other artists who embrace nudity as part of their contemporary art.’

‘Art and authority have never had a difficult relationship until recently.’

While I have no truck with the fundamentalists who see everything in black and white with no grey area whereas on most maters it is the grey area which is important, at the same time I loathe those who with a veneer of emancipation try to put down beliefs and ape the approach taken on various issues by societies or rationalists or intellectuals in the West. I respectfully disagree with the reasoning and decision given by the judge.

1. ‘In this land of Kamasutra and Khajuraho sculptures……….’ bemoans the so called emancipated souls. For a long time this country was ruled by kings. Each King had the absolute right to do what he wanted in his kingdom. So a King allowed and accepted Kamasutra. A few other Kings allowed sexual depiction in sculptures, paintings and poetry. But it cannot be said that this was the culture of the country. Had it been so such erotic sculptures, paintings and writings would have been there in most of the places in the country. But that has not been the case.

2. Without making a value judgment, most of the Indians have been in the past and present are uncomfortable with these depictions of erotic culture because it has not been our culture.

3. Belief is belief, transmitted from one generation to another through genes. It is part of the tradition and changes in the tradition happen at times slowly and at times fast, depending upon the resilience of people to accept or seek for such changes. Belief or faith cannot be explained rationally. Unwed mother of God in a faith or thousand children for another incarnation, etc., are no issues with the follower of the faith of a particular religion. It is members of other religions or atheists or rationalists who question these. To the believer, belief is sacrosanct while to some others it may be an intolerance or ‘no change’ syndrome.

4. No time frame can be fixed on change in beliefs or what is acceptable to society. Even thirty years back in this country it would have been shameful to horror for those who see a young girl with head hair coloured, midriff bare, tight hugging dress with a cigarette. Even in Bollywood such a character would be the vamp. But not any more. Nudity is becoming less and less touchy subject.

5. For most Hindus the fact that it is a Muslim who had depicted Hindu goddess in nude is perceived as an attack on their faith. That is the psyche of human beings. It is not a question of good or bad. It is a fact and hence has to be accepted. To quote an analogy, when five pucca Brahmins are discussing mythology of Hindus, especially areas related to erotica, if a non Hindu expresses his views the same would be taken amiss. That is how human beings are.

6. The judge is trying to find rational explanation to a belief, which need not be rational.

In short, it is possible that Husain’s paintings would not ruffle the feelings of many Hindus twenty or forty years ahead, but it has done so now. There is a Laxman Rekha for beliefs and crossing that would invite wrath, be it art or any other subject.