|
Exploitation makes me feel sad...
Sumedh Rajendran’s solo show is currently on at Anant Art Gallery, New Delhi. Manoj Nair talks to the artist about his new set of works and his artistic philosophy.
Let’s begin with your journey from Kerala to Delhi…
It’s been more than ten years, you know, since I came from Trivandrum to New Delhi. In many ways, that was the real journey. It gave me a certain feeling of translocation. At the same time I could relate to people who were translocated. From that time, that connection extended towards other geographical areas, especially South Asia….the migration and the permanent state of being dispossessed.
But you came here by your own choice, to study?
It was for higher education. If you look at my background, I was born in a family of practising artists. Before leaving Kerala, I had just completed my BFA. I had little exposure as far as both my knowledge and experience were concerned. Whatever I had learnt was from my family and home. I was not satisfied or comfortable with that kind of situation. I was also not happy with the entire scenario of art practice that was happening around me.
Can you elaborate on that discomfiture…
There is a basic issue about our academic scene, our education and the system of learning art. They have made the academic programme in such a way that it never allows any space for an artist to engage socially. I think that disturbed me a lot. I could not relate to the way how our art practice had become more about craft. There were some social and political metaphors that were ingrained in me, which I wanted to express. This had been happening for sometime. And then I came to Delhi and joined an academic institution to study further. But here too, the situation remained the same. My disillusionment with the system continued. Slowly, I charted my own path, my own direction…. What I wanted to become, what I wanted to do as an artist, what I wanted to communicate was something original, to develop a language of sculpture. I wanted to create a language that could communicate directly. It should also include the philosophical content; the trauma of the society; our state of being. That was the point of departure. I was working towards a language that had art as reality and not fantasy. I wanted to create something that could relate to the urban reality. So in the initial years I did not exhibit much. Neither was I mentally prepared to exhibit. This was a time of transformation and self-realisation.
You were talking about internalising some social and political metaphors. Did the change in the country’s polity influence you?
Yes. When I came to Delhi it was the time of sweeping political changes…governments changed and BJP or the NDA came to power. That was the time when the entire political scenario was changing. It was also the time when there were religious practices becoming strongly visible everywhere. They came out of closets into the public domain, so much that this began disturbing others who did not want to be a part of them. I could see that cultural transformation, and it upset me. Then after 10 years when I went back to Kerala I could see the same changes happening there also — a metaphoric transformation in the religious and social functioning. Being cut off from the land I was born in for 10 years, I could see the changes very clearly. That started reflecting in my work and thought process.
That was also the time when the country changed not only politically but also socially… The country adopted consumerism; liberalisation was introduced and we were moving towards globalization. Did that reflect in your works?
Yes. But to say whether it reflected in my work, I am not the right person. The fact is that it started affecting me. I could see a parallel struggle emerging. There is a personal struggle and there is a social struggle. And I kept my sentiments out of it, you know. I was more worried about this whole thing about India booming where the economy is supposedly changing for the better. And when I travelled to the villages, the reality I saw was completely different. The social metaphors that I could visualise after every journey disturbed me. When I was going to the hinterlands I could see the real India and also how it was different from what was being projected. The contrast between what was real and what was perceived to be the actual was very apparent.. And that provoked me. You can see that contrast, that juxtaposition of imagery from the shining India and the real India, in all my works. That contrast is consciously done in the use of images and even in the use of the material.
We will return to the imagery and the material. Before that I want to ask why there is very little of you as a person in your works. They are more about your world view. Is that a conscious decision?
. Any work of art is a conscious decision. And it is because you think of yourself as a social being that you also begin to make political statements.
And your works are overtly political and your images are taken from public spaces…
I was very particular about the imagery I was choosing. I wanted the images to encapsulate my thoughts. I am conscious about that. When you take a position as an artist then you have a social responsibility. It is not important that I express my personal sentiments but it is more important that what I say is wider and broader. My works should connect with the people — people who share the same feelings or are going through the same trauma. And it is not just about my works, art should be about the feelings of the people.. So when I began working, I deliberately chose images that were common place. Everybody, including myself, see them. And I chose that imagery because people could relate to it. It had to be a social representation.
Does that mean that you are contemptuous about personal art?
There is nothing called personal art or public art or political art. Art is art. People relate to images. Being social beings we react to a common content. We all should see it in the same way. It is something that is common to all of us. It is not that people of a particular class or location can relate to. It is something that provides a fuel to all of us to react. That is art.
Coming back to your imagery, you have always being using images from an urban detritus and then you convert them into intangible images that are captured in the mind’s eye. How did that happen? You create a hybrid of animals that are at once inanimate and yet seem to have a life of their own…
I always wanted a representation of life and beings — whether they be animals or mechanical objects in motion or anatomy of human beings. I always wanted to move away from the normal representation of living animals. In my imagery I wanted to cross the boundaries of normal representations. By boundaries I also mean geographical boundaries. A person living in India or in Lebanon identifies with them. They have something or some feelings to share in common. So I wanted my works to be located in that common space sans boundaries. When I use the image of a dog it’s not just about a dog or the feeling of a dog. It is an image that transgresses that physical shape of a dog. It can be seen as a metaphor. And I want the thought process it generates to go beyond limitations.
That’s one thing. Your works also play with some kind of ambiguity where the viewer is invited to think in retrospect whether your focus is on the animal you show or on the mechanical being that it has taken shape as…And from your works you also expect the viewer to contemplate about it after he/she has left the gallery. The message gradually dawns down after one has connected the dots.
True. I do that even when I give my titles. That’s because the purpose of the work is not served immediately or at the time of seeing it. It must have a lingering effect. My works are not a sudden process. They have a link with my years of contemplation, my journey of thoughts. The imagery should go beyond what is here and apparent. And I give my titles in a very contradictory way so that they can provoke another thought process. Their life extends beyond the week or fortnight they are displayed in the gallery. It is something more and that something has to be deciphered by the viewer. It is his decision.
True. I have often felt that the title of your works are as much a part of your works as the rest of your images.…
Yes, they are a part of the works. Because the titles originate from the focus of my work. When you see my work in the context of the title, it invites you to carry something with you. Art focus should be about carrying that something…that which will incite you into an action that I may not necessarily be aware of. When I am carrying certain feelings which have triggered my work process I feel that the viewer may or can carry those feelings with him. And that is art… when the viewer carries the same feelings as you.. He sees the same thing as you do.
Which is why I have to quote Andrei Tarkovsky who said that an image becomes unique the closer and more precise the observation of the reality is…
I have a great regard for Tarkovsky and I can connect with what you just said. You see, I have not seen much works of many painters or sculptors. I have always related more with literature and cinema. Watching and reading works of masters were a huge experience for me. Their works played a big role in my evolution as an artist. You can see those influences in my works since I want to achieve that kind of perfection in my thought process. For example, works of filmmakers like Emir Kusturica and Pedro Almodovar…. And their works were more contemporary than anything I had seen in India.
I have noticed that before starting a new series of works you devote a lot of time reading extensively. Do you use them as reference points or are they just motivational tools?
No. I don’t use anything as reference. The reference is in front of me — the life that I see when I step out of my house. This society that I live in is my reference. I don’t use any book or film as reference. But I always wish for a similar feeling that you get after seeing a film by a great filmmaker or reading a great writer. It is difficult but you always have aspirations. Yes, like all contemporary artists I want to communicate and I feel what I am doing right here right now is the best way to do that. My intention is to have the same kind of debate or dialogue……. And it has to be done with the same attitude. That gives me the energy to engage with the same kind of people. That is what reading and watching movies does to me.
Coming to your material, there is an organic nature to the way you have used your material — from perforated iron sheets to ceramics to steel…
It had to happen. When I shunned the baggage of academic life, I completely forgot my own background. I shed everything I had learnt till then and since I could do only what I knew I had to discover something which would be essential to survive as a socially conscious entity. I was searching for the material to communicate my feelings, which shows the contrast of the society that I was living in.
The images that you choose and the material that you use come from the street. Does it happen by chance?
I am completely into the process of practicing art. All of us see images and some of us who reproduce that as art have to give it a meaningful function in a meaningful way. And when you choose a certain material to depict that image it may not have a representation in the direct sense. But I question whether the material will function the way my mind works or performs. I will therefore pick up the material and bring it to my imagery in an easy way because I want people to relate to it.
When you made the choice to become a sculptor it was a difficult one. Because sculpting in India was not as accepted as painting. Were you aware of the risk involved?
I don’t know about the risk that you are talking about. But my works, even when I was studying in college, were not accepted. And I never wanted them to be seen as sculptures because these are a way to communicate in whatever way they are. Most of the materials I use, whether they are ceramic tiles or steel or iron, are industrial. I realised that one could give them an aesthetical reading. Living in an urban society where industrial materials were just serving a certain purpose, I began looking at the aesthetics of it.
What is very inherent in your works is that you pick up the most visible and make visible the invisible in them…
I think that’s what all the artists do… When you use an image there are many things that others may not see. And I use those images to make them see that. I want to show the invisible part of the society, invisible part of our feelings, and invisible part of our existence. This is the big risk of an artist — to take a common image and use it to convey the invisible part of the society. That is the real challenge of an artist.
What is prevalent in the current art practice in India is the fact that most artists use images borrowed from newspapers and television to develop their language of political statements. I find a conspicuous absence of that in your works…
I watch television, I read newspapers and magazines and what appears there is already there to be seen and understood. And it is their job to report and analyse. I don’t see that as my job. Media’s function is to give information and one can use that second-hand information. But if you take it directly then there is no art in it. What I saw with my naked eye caused a transformation in me. And those images took the form that you see in my works as a result of that transformation. Here I am forced to be a conscious being aware of my surroundings and the sadness inherent in them.
Being a conscious being. Is it natural to you or is it cultivated?
I think I don’t know any other way to exist. This is the natural way. Whatever is coming in the form of my expressions is the natural way. One can’t cultivate that because if it is not natural then there is no contribution you can make. You can’t add to the images.
You are an urban being and you live in a metro and being an active participant of the modern society there is lot of mendacity attached to it. There is lot of falsehood that you unconsciously become a part of…
That is a wrong notion. Actually the fact that you have moved to the metro doesn’t mean that you have cultivated some new faculties in you. Even if you are living in a city it is a natural way of existence. It is a natural transformation and a necessity — that you change with the present condition and there is nothing artificial about it. If as an artist I try to cultivate something then it becomes fake. When I use tiles and images of a public urinal I am aware of what I am going to do with it.
Your metaphors project a deep concern for this constant state of displacement. Does it bother you a lot that you have been uprooted?
There are different kinds of uprooting happening in the society. One is the typical rootlessness that happens with the migration from one place to another, from one climatic condition to another, one living condition to another, one situation to another. The other is what happens in your mind, intellectually. You are uprooted mentally when you are forced to move from a point of thought process to another. And this happens more often in our present condition. In fact, it happens all the time when you have to depart from one kind of thought or understanding to another. Ideological shifts happen. Sometimes it is political issues, sometimes it is physical issues and sometimes it is personal issues. It depends upon the state of reality that the person is facing at that particular moment.
One thing that intrigues me is the complete absence of hope in your works, almost predicting a doomsday scenario. They are tantalisingly poised at the edge of an abyss.
Actually, the very state of human being has a kind of hopelessness and helplessness within. That has always worried me. Not just the anxiety of all those near me, but also that prevails all over the world. That is there in my works. The concern about this anxiety, the lack of choice, took me in that direction…the helplessness. You don’t have a choice of your own. You are forever at the mercy of circumstances. You always negotiate and that process keeps recurring in life. I think that kind of situational contrasts keeps happening. Whether it is with religion, politics or ideology, people negotiate all the time.
Does it worry you that you are compromised?
Of course, you know when I work I think of this humanity which is constantly compromising…which has given up all values and individuality. You know, this kind of domination happening in the world where somebody else decides what kind of life you lead, how and where. It is constantly happening everywhere. Your values are not your own. They are becoming negotiable. That is the tragedy of our times….
One other thing one can’t find from your works is the hidden you. There is very little that they say about you as a person, where you come from or what your background is. Is that also a conscious decision that you don’t reveal who you are, especially in a world where your identity is of utmost importance?
See, everybody has an identity or creates one for himself.. The important thing is to question the intention of the identity. My intention is not to project my own identity. But I want to clarify my position, my chosen way of art practice. People are projecting his or her identity. That is the tragedy of our present culture in which the intentions are doubtful. You take any great work of art, there will be a subtle presence of the creator but it will never be in-your-face. You would clearly see the position of the person but his identity is not projected loudly.
One other common thing in your works is the presence of violence. Even when you call your show Final Call there is a perceptive message of violence…
Yes. We are always leading a threatened life. There is the presence of an unknown aggression. A kind of violence is being provoked from different quarters — in a very subtle and silent way it’s always there in front of you. You are being constantly pushed. And you can see the subtle presence of that in my works.
Yes, but some acts of violence can’t be avoided, so they say…
True. This entire state of human existence is about justification. Who can articulate and justify his deeds better becomes the dominant party. It is all about justification. And there are several layers of social representation and politics happening because of this endeavour to justify violent acts in whatever form they may be. Is it human behaviour? Sorry, I beg to differ. This is injustice. And I am agitated about it. This disturbed state of my existence finds its way into my works.
But the politics of justification will always continue…
That is the paradox. As human beings we have learnt to accommodate and negotiate with the situation and that is where the role of an artist becomes apparent…That people should be made aware of this sad state of affairs.
Does it mean that an artist has to be an activist?
An artist is an activist. He is doing the same thing. The very fact that you have chosen to be an artist is because you see a role for yourself in the society.
So your works should have message…
. I don’t give any message through my works. It is about images and ideas common to all of us which I want to share. You see it and form your own understanding. You may also find a lot of other elements. There is no need for a message to be extracted from it. You know it is like doing a play or singing a song. The reading is upto the person who receives it. And there is a certain kind of uncertainty.
What is it?
We all know that there is uncertainty. When I began my social engagement I could feel it. Nobody tells you that there is uncertainty, but you can feel it. It is perceptible.
What is remarkable about your works is that all your shows are open ended. There is no beginning or end. It is almost in a state of ‘to-be-continued’.
I don’t begin from a point or take it to another point. Before each show I have no clue as to what I am going to do. But in the subconscious there is a churning happening and you are taking in images and thinking about them. Once you start working for a show they all come together and the pattern or theme unfolds on its own. When you were born you didn’t know you would be doing all this. As situations develop, you decide what is relevant and what isn’t. All you need to be is to be aware.
You also don’t use any idioms from your background or Kerala where you come from?
... But there are certain images from my childhood that are common everywhere. For example, a briefcase. It is the same everywhere. I was trying to create a visual language for myself, which should shared by everyone everywhere. My works are not about a particular region or its culture or the way people speak. Whether it is Kerala or Delhi the language is the same, only pronunciations vary. I use the common language and not the different pronunciations.
Do you think the future of the world is bleak?
Well, being part of a society you cannot see things in a detached manner. And you become automatically involved because you are a person who thinks. And you see a lot of things that can’t be approved. These hierarchies that have been created for exploitation makes me feel sad. They have to change.
|
