The Relevance of Art

Sometimes I think Marx got it right when he said that all art, should be the perogative not of the artist or the consumer, but of the public. Art cuts across various mediums and creates a platform for thought and debate. Unfortunately, in our country, art has begun to have an elitist connotation. The newspapers today are full of the financial value of a work of art, the pulling power of the artist, or the glitterati who attended them.

Whatever happened to the art?

Where is the future of art in our country going? Will we continue to fete the old masters, or allow the resurging new voices to emerge. I recently went to an art exhibition which had a group of young artists showing their installations and creative expression. The medium for the same traversed various genres, from furniture, to remote controlled mechanical devices to pop art, and digitally reworked expression. Among my favourite pieces was a piece dedicated to the commuters of Mumbai, a swinging pedal device and to the street vendors to display their wares. Another one that captured me in its still calm was a set of six crutches working through a motor on a wooden table.

Atypical, kitschy, crazy, wierd, and even disturbing would be the way I would denote some of the works on display. But then, is that not the true purpose of art? To bring out comment, dissension, praise, passion, awe, fear and even disgust?

Is art not expressed to create reaction, and not always of a financial kind?

The measure of a true work of art lies not in it's financial value, or its beauty, but in it's endurance and relevance which cuts across the modalities of time and space. That is why Van Gogh's vase of flowers, or Ruben's curvaceous angels still elicit a smile.

Closer to home, Indian art has a rich legacy, and if I may venture to add, a rich future if the young artists are allowed the financial and creative freedom to work.


In the end, its more than the celebrities and the money, so lets break the ice and talk about the work itself!