The Other (as) Self
The discourse of the self and the other has now gained a great significance in understanding the politics and the polemics of existence of any being within the social and natural spheres. The significance of such a distinction in understanding any phenomena (individual, social, natural) is its emphasis on the ‘difference’. Difference which helps in respecting/accepting the other with its own specificities without forgetting and negating ones own existence and specificity. Such a position has helped to understand any polemic within a dialectical framework which unables! a problem’s ideal solution.
The reason to title the show as “The other (as) self” is to read the works of Rollie within the above mentioned framework. Her body of works can be seen as an attempt to formulate a language which is based on personal experiences, secondary know ledge and art historical references. Differing from the general stereotypical representation of women Rollie tries to identify her with nature and also at times tries to distance and see nature as an entity in itself thereby reacting consciously/cautiously to the patriarchal stereotypes. This she does by placing herself and her immediate experiences within the discourse of what may be called “eco feminism”. Eco Feminism tries to relate the oppression of women with oppression of nature in general. “The Basic argument which underpins ecological feminist approach is that the ecological crisis cannot be attended to without reference to the underpinning assumption in differences between entities, such as that between men and women, mind and body, human and the rest of nature, are related to one another in hierarchical fashion. This hierarchy requires that one element of the pairing is given a superior position.”* She tries to take help from such an approach and brings the idea of male as the primary cause for displacement and uprooted ness. This identification also stands for the destruction of nature by the male centric western capitalistic mode of production. The works like “uprooted” “curse of the wild” and….can be seen within this hierarchy of male/female, human/ nature binaries. The recent works have also tried to make comments in direct ways which doesn’t only take gender positions but comments on various social and political happenings of which “The Fall of Icarus”, “Entrapped Promethus” “Will-o- wisp” are best examples. Though they seem illustrative at one level in their comment its symbolism and the handling helps her in taking the language bit further.
Her realism is a blend of expressionism and stylization which is very personal particularly in the case of handling the figures. Though the references are photographic baring the flatness and the postures it doesn’t remain static because of her personalized way of rendering the figures. The rendering is more painterly and the colours allow still the possibility of thinking beyond the imagery. Interestingly she appropriates images from western masters (male) but puts them in a context relevant to conditions and questions here. This is also supported by images and photographic references from magazines and newspapers, thus allowing possibility for an aesthetic which is not closed. Having academically trained in an art historical discipline her references are particular to issues addressed rather than formalistically random. The appropriated imagery still holds reference to its original context by the associated meaning and also in some cases an attempted critique of the “original representations”.
[This can be evidently seen in the works like the “portrait of Madhu master”, Will –o-wisp, curse of the wild and The fall of Icarus. The landscape of Bruegel often represents the peasantry as symbol of foolishness and stood for human folly which was itself a bourgeoisie idea of seeing themselves as better of from the peasantry. This she tries to question by juxtaposing the now urban idea of a rural retreat which is a lustrous picturesque landscape. The spoilt ambition of the farmers by the state can be seen as the falling Icarus which is again an appropriated image from Chagall. This can be seen as the boastful rhetoric of the modernist advancement and industrial progress at the cost of ruining the agrarian systems and peasantry. The great urban rural divide particular to the erstwhile colonies is a problematic which the native systems never tried to address. Rather the state and its repressive machinery suppressed the voices with neglect and bloodbath. The legs in the houses are the representations of the continuing suicides of farmers. The figure lying dead is the killing of the voices in revolt. The psychological trauma is represented as the man hitting against the door of the house.]
The set of ink drawings bring to fore the medium’s ability for instinctive and spontaneous expression. The conflict of the various selves becomes very evident in these drawings. The problems of identifying oneself with a stream of thought particularly when the question of sin and guilt becomes apparent. This contradiction happens when the self itself becomes a shadow of the conditioning ideologies. The medium helps her in a cathartic experience due to its immediacy and spontaneity.
Also included is her earlier bachelor’s work which clearly shows her present concerns shaping up. Here rather than seeing a linear progression in the works I would try to see her earlier works as her present references. In the earlier works the self becomes almost a site of confrontation. Allegories, portraits and nostalgic references were the very part of the vocabulary she was dealing with. Though academic influences are easily recognizable the ‘excess’ of the personal easily broke the monotonous academic approaches. The absence of grounding in theory particularly when dealing with gender is though apparent those could be seen as honest and direct experiences worked out for commenting some relative problem.
Those initial experiments in handling with medium and a definitive thematic gets a theoretical support with her schooling in art history and helps her in positioning her argument in more subtle ways now.
V.Divakar
No comments:
Post a Comment