After reading reams of regret expressed by artistic admirers of Husain as to how he was hounded for his 'Saraswati' and other paintings, I decided to find out what the fuss was about. Here is his sketch. I am afraid my sympathy for this great artist has dimmed after seeing this sketch. Here are the reasons.
An artist is first and foremost in search of a viewer to see his art. Some artists like Husain sell their paintings for good money. Therefore an artist needs to have a sensibility and a sensitivity to the viewer. For example, if I were to paint a sketch of Husain eating crap along with a pig in a gutter, however famous an artist I might be, I would not be serving art or respecting the sensitivity of the viewer, even if he were himself a liberated artist like Husain.
Because the fundamental principle of art is not to cause revulsion or disgust in the viewer but a sense of beauty or wonder. On this score this painting fails the test...since it is meant for people who know who Saraswati is. For such people Saraswati represents grace, wisdom, art, knowledge and enlightenment. Just putting together a woman, a peacock, a veena, a lotus and a fish does not become a painting of Saraswati. For those who detest Saraswati, it may have some appeal. But such an intention would be perverse.
Second, from those tributes to Husain, it seems he researched Hinduism. I am afraid his knowledge of Saraswati is dismal. Saraswati is a Vedic goddess, the mother of Vedas, who is pictured as seated in the middle of a lake (saras), is also identified with the mythical river of knowledge and as one who imparted Vidya or the ultimate knowledge to mankind. She is clad in white, seated on a White lotus, plays a veena, carries prayer beads and a book of scripture. There is no fish or lotus in her hand mentioned. Husain's woman is holding up a lotus and a fish is gurgling bubbles(!!). Looks incongruous.
The woman is sitting voluptuously and has let the veena slip from her grasp. Why? To hold aloft a lotus. And then the left hand is busy holding up an invisible load...
The veena itself seems abandoned, whereas all Hindu imagery of Saraswati extols how beautifully she holds the veena, with grace and dignity. The lotus held aloft seems disjointed, maybe Husain's depiction of the optical principle of refraction.
Now let us grant Husain all artistic liberties. Is this sketch truly art? Here is a wanton woman, who has let slip her veena so she can hold up a lotus and gesture something. It is the image of a senseless woman. It calls for stupidity or perversity to call it Saraswati, as Husain did. What a far cry from the depiction of the Vedic goddess! What a shame compared to Kalidasa's Shyamala Dandakam!
I think Husain's repeated attempts to scandalise Hindus with his imagery of gods and goddesses would give rise to only two options. Either pronounce him mad, or lock him up. Driving him out of India wasn't perhaps a nice thing.
