interpunct: February 2012

Memorizing Performance art:

“Carefree-Hairfree: get a free hair-cut”

Performance by Dharitri Boro.

15th and 16th February 2012

Venues: in front of Rabindra Bhawan and roadside in front of Guwahati Commerce College

The activity was under R. A. P. E 2012

Blog written by Samudra Kajal Saikia

One day a girl called me telling that she wanted to cut hair of men in public.

One day an artist called me telling that she wanted to cut hair of men in public.

Now most of the following discussion will be precisely around these two sentences only. Why a girl wanted to cut hair? Why she wanted to do this in public? By saying ‘men’ did she mean men only? If so why only ‘men’?

Now the set of questions around the second sentence are following: how does it matter that an artist (who is by practice a painter) wants to cut hair in public instead of putting colors on canvas? How does the artist stand in front of public, in a much literal sense? Why does she go for a very temporal or momentary experience which might not have any ‘visual’ or ‘aesthetic’ values? Does it matter in any way when we said she is an artist and not just any other girl from any corner?

Dharitri Boro, the girl, and the artist, did exactly the same thing she told me over phone, and though she (along with us) went through a lot of brainstorming process around how to execute or how to materialize a concept, what could be the other derivatives, finally took a much minimalistic step and remained stuck to her initial idea only: she wanted to cut hairs of men in public.

For her minimalistic stand the initial sentence itself remained explanatory for everything: she wanted to cut hair in public.

As no art only exists only upon the object just out there, neither only upon ‘what the artist intended to mean’ but largely on what is not said, now let me explore the process of developments as a spectator. (spectator: bystander, observer, witness, cooperator, viewer, collaborator…)

the girl, the artist

The girl, the artist is Dharitri Boro. After doing her masters in Painting from MSU, Baroda she is now pursuing PhD in Kalabhavana, Santiniketan. In early phases she used to paint with lyrical quality with vibrant colors. Her outstanding compositions with figurative drawings were having prospects.

But gradually she inclined to more abstract experiments in her MVA and controlled her ‘subjects’ to more detailed small things and everyday ordinariness. In her case abstraction started with much closer look into things.

As a person she is very happy-go-like, open minded and jolly. Yes, it matters while saying about her work and performance.

Dharitri Boro Painting

Dharitri Boro setting up her performance space, in front of Rabindra Bhawana, 15th Feb. 2012

Dhariti Talking to Media, DY 365, in front of Guwahati Commerce College, 16th Feb. 2012

Tracing the two experiences: two SPACES, two TIMES

Dharitri experienced the same thing twice. To understand the time and space specific nuance of a performance this matter offered a great scope to study. On 15th Feb. 2012 she starting hair cutting in the premise of Rabindra Bhawana. It is the most famous state auditorium and cultural hub in Assam. In those days a national level theatre festival was being held, hence, so called cultured people were around. Personalities like Nipon Goswami, Dinesh Das, Abdul Majid the great legends of Assamese Film industry were around, and other theatre lovers were coming across to ENJOY the theatre festival.

People in front of Rabindra Bhawana, before the National level Theatre Festival

Dharitri Cutting hair of Nila Saikia, actor, film and television, also a coordinator of R A P E 2012

In that space Dharitri Boro started cutting hair, and itself became a gesture: doing a very ordinary activity in a very culturally significant place on a very highly significant moment. As a gesture the act was successful, since it at the first sight questioned the grandiosity of the great cultural production system. On the other hand regarding the public interactivity it was a failed practice since no MAN came forward to cut hair my a woman. People with suiting and shirting were hesitant to take participation in the event. Some ladies came forward where as Dharitri mainly intended to cut hair of men.

set up in front of Rabindra Bhawana, 15th February 2012

Next day, the similar practice took place in a real pubic place, real roadside, in front of Guwahati commerce college, and there many strangers happily came forward and took participation. The event became a grand success since people were taking participation not only by stopping by, not only by observing intensely but also by physically being a part of it and moreover by explaining or describing multiple readings of it.

Public gathering centering the event

People intervening from various class

people observing the entire activity for a much longer time...

At that moment Dharitri called me, instantly I suggested a possible for Title the performance (if anybody has any problem with the word performance then just take it as an action, activity or event) : “The Complete Man”. I thought it relevant since the action is something related to shaping your outlook, giving you an identity through fashion, and moreover, it is all about a girl shaping a man’s identity. Additionally, on public sphere “Complete Man” is a caption already popularized by a mainstream commercial brand of suiting and shirting, thus it might be more catchy or communicable in public sphere.

Dharitri liked the caption “The Complete Man”, but she felt it too narrow to the man-woman relationship, and she believed this action might bear much more connotations. Then after having discussions with others, mainly with Rahul Bhattacharya, the matter came up that it would be a free service. The ‘free’ness is doubly implied, free in monetary terms, and free in social norms. Thus it associated the matters of desire implementation and power relation on the ground.

I’m giving you a free service, so I may not follow all the requirements from your side. I’ll cut you hair, I’ll cut according to your wish, but on the way I might imply some of my own desires, as not only concerning how you want to see your hairs (your outfit, your identity) but also incorporating my wish: how “I” want to see your outfit. So as a ‘customer’ or service taking person I’m not fully authorized as I was in a fully commercial regular saloon. The person might not follow all my instructions since I’m not paying him or her. So my power is not working in the way it works inside a regular monetary deal. This was the point where the everyday power relation manipulated. And secondly the service provider is not earning money, or saying in a better way, s/he is not doing it for the sake of living hood, but s/he is doing it for her own fun and desire. At a point of saturation, it is a fact, it was fact in fact, she was fully enjoying her power (as we witnessed the actions on the spot), in shaping some ‘others’ body in the public.

Well the power she was enjoying was not only in the “free” economical senses. The matter of being a “girl” “cutting hair” in “public” to the “unknown strangers of the roadside” gave her, in fact, more power on the moment(s). Here comes the other senses of “making it free”, and “being free” regarding the existing social norms. This was the point mainly focused by the popular audio-visual news broadcasting agencies. We’ve collected some footage from the satellite news channels where you can see how they propagated the entire event as a ‘protest’ of a highly educated young girl on street against the existing social norms.

a satellite TV, DY 367, explaining the work as a PROTEST venture of a young educated girl in public sphere, broadcasted at 7 PM, 16th February 2012

Intimacy: Details: Small things of Everyday

Other than the issues around economic freedom, normative freedom, the binary between male female practices, there was another point Dharitri mentioned to us and experienced in the work: that is intimacy. Cutting hair and shaving a male is a very intimate act in fact. By practice also, we have experiences from childhood, the hair cutting persons used to have conversations with the customers and to have gossips around the other persons coming to his saloon. Dharitry was doing the same. She was talking to persons in personal levels, she was touching some parts of their bodies, she was talking to them. She was closely observing them and developing a very personal and intimate conversation.

Noteworthy that, towards the end of her BFA she was largely exploring the DETAILS of everyday things. For some reason she started finding her materials in much closed and intimated objects. When she says about intimacy, this thing I could relate instantly.

Dharitri's work gradually focusing on much details...

Details

Details and intimacy...

A person, roadside stranger expressing his feelings and intimate experience to media

In the process of developing the concept I was also putting into the note that: cutting hair means you your shaping some body parts of a human being. In that sense hair dressing is a completely different matter than any other fashion or outfit exercises. In other cases you design cloths or other outfit materials. In case of hair it is not an additional outfit but a very part of your body.

Dharitri use to cut hair of her friends. She enjoys it. It is nice that as an artist she tries to convert her act of enjoyment into a work of art. Her closed look into small things eventually going to hair and she is developing it towards her further engagement. Here are some examples of her further engagements with details, small things, everydays, and HAIR.

Recent works of Dharitri Boro

Again coming down to the process through discussions, I wanted to make it more “visually appealing”, so I personally observed some roadside hair-cutters in Guwahati and Make Dharitri into the note. I suggested making some arrangements of posters of bollywood stars (i.g. the hair cut of Sallman Khan in “Tere Naam”, hair cut of Aamir Khan in “Gajni”, juxtaposing to the haircuts of villagers in Majuli which were captured by Dhaaritr herself during some documentation projects much earlier). For some reasons, she didn’t incorporate them in the act. However, that actually lessened nothing to her act. In fact finally witnessing the event I realized that it was good to stick to the initial idea, she wanted to cut hair of other men in public.

The famous Tera Naam Hair-cut

Gajni hair cut of Aamir Khan

Salman Khan Dabangg Cut

Roadsite Barber Shop. (photo taken from Internet)

One major observation I’d like to put forward again and again, that this act served a major purpose for a larger intellectual benefit. We don’t have the habit of seeing. In practice we are more associated to the worlds of WORDS than VISUALS, whereas in everyday life essentially we are largely associated to the visuals. Again remembering the famous quote from John Berger: “a child start seeing things before it can speak”. However, in the north-eastern parts of India, the habit of seeing a art work is much poorer than any other parts in the country. I doubt if there is anybody from any class, caste, age-group who have ever just stood by a painting or a sculpture or an art work for five minutes observing or enjoying the work of art. Moreover, I can claim that there is hardly anybody who will go searching for the process of doing it. In this case, we noticed some people were just standing by the ‘work of art happening’ for much longer times. Some were just standing there observing the situations thoroughly up to almost three hours. I sincerely believe this a mush successful attempt in regard to engaging the eyes of a spectator to an ‘art work’.

This person was observing for long time from various positions and angles...

Response to the Accusations and debates in Facbook:

Someone named Sumeet Chaudhary in Facebook started a debate after this performance on the basis of some uploaded photographs. I found it interesting because the debater was accusing on some very fundamental questions around art, performance art and aesthetics. I am grateful to him in some ways for his responses. But the only thing I want to put his concerns is: Criticism without a sense of appreciation is dangerous.

In brief: Dhariti did incorporate very less things from the discussions in the developmental stage. But as an event on the spot it was meaning so many things. As Anupam Chakraborty, who claims he is not from art-fraternity but from a journalism background, asks me a response, I would prefer to take a safe side: I framed the entire series of events as “art, performance and events”. If you have any problem to take it as ART with capital A, feel comfortable to take it as a mere event. Neither I have any problem, nor Dharitri, the artist, has any problem with that. The only concern is, please come to a discursive field. If we take a derogatory position saying “so what”, it will lead us nowhere. If I make a landscape you are free to ask "so what?". If I make a portrait you are again free to accuse "so what?" In that manner I have much more problem with Mona Lisa as a great art. I found Vinci as a confused person about what he was trying to do, a landscape or a portrait. And about aesthetics and beauty, I don’t see a girl beautiful without even having eyebrows. But still I hadn’t put any comment because I consider that taste is entirely a matter of time and space specificity. One need to understand that how difficult it was to put a performance as performance art, without having a phenomenal grandiose visual and 'cultural' outfit in a place like Guwahati. Again one need to understand how it was difficult to establish a performance merely as a performance on its own value, not in terms of theatrical terms or not through some literary textual sources behind it. The action was taking place in a place where people were more accustomed with THEATRE and LITERATURE.

And Dharitri knew how to do acting on stage, she is an actor. She is a writer also, sometimes back she used to write poems.

Dharitri Dancing

Dharitri acting on stage

Additionally she is now doing her PhD on mask making traditions in Assamese Vaishnavite cult, particularly in Majuli. So it was not that big deal for her to make the action "Visually appealing" or "Aesthetically Valued" by using some word-art.

Mask in Majuli

It was actually your genuine task to search for the reason, on what ground an artist from such a rich 'cultural ability' came down to do an activity from everyday nuance, and why she rejected to ENACT in front of public.

Among the success and failures one also need to observe the other parallel events and how people were treating to them. How there were made 15-16 public toilets in several public places without naming them as "Art", and how people were putting their responses to them on spot.

Here I want to address Sumeet Chaudhury, you started claiming or accusing something instead starting up a debate in a healthy manner, which is very much derogatory. After following the debates happening in Facebook I got to know you have a habit of reading, but I’m not sure, do you have a habit of seeing? Most importantly, I came to know that you have a habit of thinking, I found you a thinker, but do you have a habit of imagining? Following Einstein science needs the power of imagination. Art, of course needs it. And in philosophy? You better tell me.

some more spectators

Details...

more from the artist's recent works, work in progress...

The controversy/ debate in Facebook:

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.3239350179998.2156093.1154093933&type=3

Sumeet Chaudhary Ever heard of garbage and decay??? Honestly speaking...that's how it looks to me!!!
February 17 at 1:59am

अनुराधा उपाध्याय hey sorry because i was really busy i couldn't ask u , that why do you think so ? and can you eloborate more like i would seriously love to know the reason .March 5 at 3:24pm

Sumeet Chaudhary

Well sure why not....i'll be glad to explain. The reason is quite simple and straight forward. I seriously think that this performing of 'cutting hair in public' has no artistic merit, no aesthetic merit, no intellectual merit, no performative merit and no creative merit. It looks like a bad second hand attempt by you folks towards doing something that has no inherent value and not even mediocre shock value.
I see this in larger context too. When supposed creative people of intellect, ability and talent bring down the level of their creative output to such dismal levels then there is certainly something terribly wrong somewhere. I see it as deep intellectual decay that is running throughout the artistic community. Most artists obviously dont realize this and they keep on doing nonsense in the name of art and in the name of activism. Ugliness seems to have become the new parameter of beauty and that is just too bad. If you have genuine concern you ought to think about it as an artist, this is serious matter.

March 6 at 7:15am

Dharitri Boro

This has come to my notice quite late...still thought I should respond to the post... yes! there’s terriblly something wrong...U paint beautifully an oil coloured still life or make a nice landscape and call that’s art... coz that has an “aesthetic value” or “commercial value”? And if not then you can put a dot and write thousand words to explain the concept and call it an art coz it has an “intellectual merit”... ? In what context you are talking about ugliness? Would you please explain how do you measure a good art and a bad art? Where lies the discourses on art in society? Also, I didn’t understand in what sense you are putting the word nonsense? Did you want to mean that the act without meaning or an intentional act to mean nothing?
It may be a “bad second hand attempt”, but how would you guarante that each and every attempt by a “supposed creative person” would result into a “good art”/ successfull attempt only? Shall I assume that it’s your denial of the scope of experimentation? And in addition I would like to say that this project was completely the artist’s idea and first attempt of this kind and no other person except for the artist and curators should be accused for this work. You are free to give your comments, but I think you are misreading the photographs. As it was a day long performance on a public domain, I consider it as totally idiotic to comment without experiencing and realizing the act and idea behind it. I think this viewer commenting from far distance is lacking the “intellectual merit” to understand it or may be not to understand the purpose of performance in public domain, but the large involved audience (most of who are not related to the art field) of the performance in a place like Assam where public art performance has a long way to explore could relate themselves with the performance, if not by getting cut their hair then by curiosity and concern to understand the act on their own level.
Thank you for your observation towards this work! But you too being an artist should realize the seriousness of commenting something on basis of half hearted concern.

March 14 at 1:12am

Sumeet Chaudhary

Dharitri, so it is you who came up with this idea of cutting hair in public. Its fine that you commented late and nice that at least you endeavored to comment than ignore it and stand back.

First...., in response let me give u some examples to make it clear what I mean....how about doing a public performance of cleaning people's nostrils by picking it with fingers...or how about public performing of cleaning of ear canals using fingers as a tool...oh wait I have another genius idea, how about doing a public performing of collecting bird droppings along street pavements and putting them in neatly labeled glass jars and storing them away in transparent refrigerators for public viewing.

You said your idea is one of its kind,,,well I guess the ideas which I outlined above would be one of their kinds too ....but so what? The point is that such ideas are a dime a dozen...easy to conjure up within seconds by anyone at all using any random momentary whimsical imagination, but the truth of the matter is that essentially such ideas don't have any serious meaningful meaning to convey. But what such ideas do achieve is to reflect conclusively and blatantly the utter naivity and inner confusion and delusion of an artist who endeavors to assign some unknowable loosely defined special significance to such acts/performances and project them to be of highly important nature. Generally such ideas are accompanied by justification by using loose flowery artistic language as is generally taught and prevalent throughout the artistic community instead of a coherent, logical and valid reasoning to justify them. In such contexts talking about 'scope of experimentation', i think, is just a kind of lame excuse for justifying such ideas as 'cutting of hair in public.' I think that offering such ideas to public disguised as 'ART' performances are equivalent to offering rotten food for consumption instead of offering healthy food which can nourish the body (in case of art, 'nourish the soul')

Second, regarding the question of judging an artwork let me tell you it is very much possible to judge an artwork into good and bad, into beautiful and ugly. If you have never come across of such judgement standards in your learning...dont endeavor for a second to presume that it does not exist and artists can get away with just about any nonsense they come up with. Regarding judging of art and regarding what can be considered as beautiful or ugly, I think as it will take just too long to get the ideas across here hence I suggest you go through the first and the last article on my blog "sumeetkchaudhary.blogspot.in"

Third, humans have a conceptual and imaginative faculty that stands us apart from other animal species by a huge gap. What I mean is that I dont need to always jump off a building top to find out if gravity still would work on me and if it would still pull me down. Likewise about this performance, even though I have been not present there physically I can very much live it in my imagination which in this case is more that sufficiently supplemented by the photographs of the event to convey the sum and substance of it.
Call my concern as half-hearted or whatever but the truth is that I have laid out my honest appraisal of this matter here even if you may not like it or approve of it. I am not carrying out a personal attack here but only an ideological one on inherent ideas and motivated solely by curiosity to discover the truth.

March 14 at 4:53am

Anupam Chakravartty

Unfortunately, I am not an artist but a journalist. (Yes! I am a part of the rotting edifice called media).

From the discussions I had with Dharitri about this project, I would like to report the same. She once told me that she could cut hair. I was quite amazed and happy also because she could be like this artist-hair dresser. She started this project, as some kind of a fun experiment in Santi Niketan. There is no doubt that such experiments could mean more than what meets the eye. May be because the outcomes are layered. A few weeks before she carried out this experiment, she told me that there she saw semi naked men from her terrace. All of them basking under the winter sun. Women of the household, mostly busy with the chores hardly got any time to sit like these semi naked men. It was a bit strange for her to be on the terrace when these men were soaking up the sun.

After a few weeks, on the same terrace, from where she observed these men, she performed this little experiment. I do not think, according to her, observing these semi naked men on the terraces and her hair cutting experiment are connected. But I could connect these almost immediately. One of her classmates from her programme volunteered. Since, it was a rented house she spread newspapers on the floor so that the hair does not fall on the floor. It is also important for me to tell you about the first volunteer. He is writing a thesis on public art. He perhaps imagined that by growing his hair long, he would be able to sheild his skin, scalp and other parts of the body with his hair from the extreme cold conditions experienced across the country this year. But I later found out, that the volunteer was too lazy to go for a hair cut. And going for a hair cut implied that he would have to go for a shower, even if most of the salon owners use the most hygenic techniques to remove hair. A shower is a must after a haircut as Hindu customs forbid a person from entering the house or the kitchen after a haircut. These customs also disregard a community of people, who start acquring the skills of trimming human hair or of knowing the latest hair trends right from their childhood.

However, Dharitri managed to convince the volunteer for a hair cut. He came on the appointed day. Dharitri was helped by two other friends. One held the mirror, the other shot this act with Dharitri’s camera. There was an audience for sure. The space on the terrace transformed to a make shift salon attracting a fair amount of attention from the men on the other terraces. For many of them it was a sight. Why is this lady trimming another man’s facial and skull hair?

About 7 kms from her house, a beauty parlour’s signboard in Bolpur warns the male from entering the parlour exclusively meant for women. Curtains protect the women trimming hair of other women from the gaze of the passers-by. I did not notice any unisex salon in that little town. And here Dharitri was doing something similar. That too, to a man.

The volunteer seemed satisfied after half an hour or so. Dharitri took more time than an average hair dresser. But the volunteer kept sharing with Dharitri what he wants his moustache to look like. It was perhaps for the first time Dharitri and the volunteer had a candid conversation about his moustache. These conversations actually happen a lot between the strangers and their hair dressers. These conversations are usually candid. If I were to document these conversations, I could possibly create a new idiom for stylistics, or a newer artistic language for shaping human anatomy through different modes. No wonder, many artist such as you or Dharitri patiently sit in railway platforms or other open spaces spending hours and hours to sketch the human anatomy. And here, I was amazed that someone was engaging with the appendages of human anatomy directly. I personally think even if a lot of artists have tried this before, Dharitri’s engagement with hair is unique and deserves to be appreciated.

Was it a failed experiment? I would like to describe this more as an experience. May not be aesthetic from how you understand it, but definitely addresses an artist’s curiousity in this manner: what would it be like to feel the hair or the face of the people crossing the streets, who I would been sketching from a distance.

Whether Dharitri was offering some rotten ideas in disguise of art? Difficult to say. She didn’t tell me that she sells rotten ideas. But her previous works have explored a rotting fruit and a fish market, amongst all kinds of things. May be she intends to transform rot into something more aesthetic. May be she has something new to say, just like how you have addressed this scenario here. There are infinite possibilities and multitudes of people. With changing times, social mores, changing idioms of art, how would judgment stay static? Don’t you think such judgements, if they remain static, would create boundaries for more people to participate in any artistic act?

But mostly, this hair cutting experience was shared. Did you hear anyone saying that this whole engagement with Dharitri to cut their hair was a horrible/rotten experience?

Did this project wear a disguise? From the pictures that you saw, there was no disguise. It was rather honest. Care free Hair free salon is all it says. There was definitely an experience to take back home.

To end it, I want to add something very interesting on your blog: “Philosophers have philosophized and intellectuals have rationalized about ‘beauty’. Have they succeeded? I think not, but what I think is that only a very few have, and the rest have only managed to build imaginary castles in the air without any solid foundations, and into these castles they have imprisoned most of the people of the world.”

This definitely opens a whole new world for me to experiment even being in the confinement of these so called imaginary castles. All the best!

P.S. I would appreciate if the curators for this act could also add something to these comments. Samudra Kajal Saikia

Sumeet Chaudhary

Anupam, I think that I can safely assume that you have endeavored to comment of your own accord and presenting your honest independent opinion here, I don't know but I am just telling. Anyway.

I have noted what you have written but let me ask you something, if you have read my previous comment you'd have noticed that I had presented three different ideas there for doing public performances. Ideas which could easily rival that which Dharitri embodies in her hair cutting performance and that of many others who endeavor to work on similar lines. Also note that It would be extremely easy for me or for someone else to come up with 'right sounding' and superficial emotional justifications to justify and even glorify these ideas and attach some sort of vague and important sounding significance to such performnces in the name of doing art and seem convincing. But this is like an old gimmick which does work well and it is sad state that it is highly prevalent especially in the art community and it is almost always employed and exploited by artists with extremely mediocre talent or with no talent at all to propagate their so called 'creative' products and build a career. Also such endeavors are supported and given popular voice and credence by critics, writers and art galleries who neither understand art properly and nor understand how to think when dealing with such matters as art but who merely go with the flow of such prevalent ideas and find it fashionable to associate in some way with art and related activities and they make the masses believe in all this as if this quality of 'Art' is includes some kind of romantic ideas of transcending importance. People tend to accept it without understanding and questioning the validity of philosophical base of such ideas,,,even the intelligent ones also fall for it whom we all so admire like our gurus and mentors and from whom we learn to become future artists.

Second, understand this....the easiest way to destroy the meaning of something is to stretch and expand its definition so much that it begins to now accomodate and mean anything. The same has happened in art and our intellectual gurus have done it before our very eyes without letting one realize the truth of the matter. The definition of art and hence its meaning has been expanded and made vague so much that mediocrities with no serious artistic bent, no passion and nothing of value to offer out of their supposed 'creativity' parade around disguised as artists and go about unquestioned. This is the state of art today, it is deplorable, it is strongly reflective of the deep moral and philosophical decay that is now running throughout the contemporary culture. Even more alarming is the thing is that so great a number of people remain so utterly oblivious to the truth of the matter and deluded that they go through their lives all the while believing some hodge podge of vague philosophical ideas picked up randomly from here and there and integrated incoherently.

You mentioned about judgement standards and if they are static as I say. Well, of course they are static and should be static, (they are as static as the idea of justice, the idea of freedom, the idea of thr right to live etc.) and not only that but they transcend time, style and media employed for artistic expression. The judgement standards to judge an artwork are objective in nature and not subjective as is widely thought. Today there is a false notion which is very widely spread that anything can be art if the artist says so.

When you ask that, "Don’t you think such judgements, if they remain static, would create boundaries for more people to participate in any artistic act?" You must first keep in mind that It is not viable to burn down the house in order to roast the pig. What I mean is that it would be not only myopic but a very foolish idea to change and adulterate the essentially unchangeable fundamental definition of art and its meaning just so that more and more people can become artists and do art. Just like we cannot and should not change and customize the laws of dispensing justice to suit the needs of different kinds of people, it would be totally unfair and would make a mockery of the very edifice on which the judicial structure stands thus imperilling the very freedom and equal treatment of people under law. When the so called intellectuals and artists go about tinkering with the definition and meaning of art they are making the exactly same kind of mockery of art. Creativity does not merely mean creating something new, it means more i.e. creating something new and something which is valid. In short creativity is improvement.

Thanks for being so kind so as to quote me from my blog, but you have absolutely missed the actual meaning of my sentence. The sentence implicitly means and criticizes that very thing which you are trying so much to defend here. I suggest you please re-read and grasp properly its implication.

Things are not as simple as they seem to be on the surface and unless one is able to identify the essentials principles and talk in those terms one can never arrive at any truth and they would be prone to merely skimming the surface and remaining confused and unclear about things as the majority of people in the world usually are.

In art too the essential fundamentals and philosophical basis is never taught nor considered necessary and hence the utterly dismal state of art as everyone is now granted the free licence to churn out trash banking on carcass of the mutilated and corrupted definition of 'Art'! Bravo!!

Anupam Chakravartty

Why creativity has to be associated with validity? just because you have two hands and two legs, a functioning eye, you think you are valid and others are not? do you think by using idioms like "You must first keep in mind that It is not viable to burn down the house in order to roast the pig" you can explain art? keep your judgments to yourself sir, if you think they are static. here 7.8 billion people travel by railways everyday, price of life is so cheap that thousands die. who cares about your judgment? i am just commenting because i think your attack is baseless and you should first clear your fundamentals before discarding what various artists and philosophers have said about art. good day! XX

March 15 at 11:12am

Dharitri Boro It is quite sympathetic to discuss about a matter dated back about a century! I think it is even useless to argue with someone who holds an ideological standpoint wearing blinders on eyes talking about conventional philosophy on art. I even regret for my respond to the post whose scornful assumptions are led by own effective conditions!!!March 15 at 11:49am

Sumeet Chaudhary

Anupam, I dont care whether you think my attack as baseless or whatever because I know from experience that people like you don't even understand the basic essentials of presenting an argument nor have the intellectual tools to grasp essentials in any matter especially such as 'Art'. Also I dont expect you folks to agree with me on anything at all because I understand that that ideologically you are now past the 'point of no-return' and the only way you can preserve your dignity, balance and self-esteem is by perpetually refuting anything contrary to your conventional ideas or else you would simply be demotivated and mentally collapse once your ideas are conclusively refuted and proven erroneous. Hence you must forever stick to your ideas even at the cost of conscious self-delusion and philosophical depravity. It is not everyone's piece of cake to understand and speak for truth nor blaze any worthy trails. Finally... what I can do is be superficially sympathetic to your rubbish art and poor defence. TC!

March 15 at 1:18pm

Saturday, February 18, 2012

day 7: House: Interior Monologues

day 7: Wild Rain inside a Mosquito Net

day 7: Discussion session

Day 6: The Everyday of Small Things_Dust

Carefree-Hairfree: get a free hair-cut