Indian Nudes and Prudes

Nudism has long been a controversial issue in art through the ages. The artist has always
argued on the grounds of the beauty of the human form and artistic licence. The ‘keepers of
morality’ have argued on the corruption of the human mind with art that is dubbed ‘indecent’.
Indeed even the famous Michelangelo had to face censure when the Pope asked him to paint
fig leaves on Adam and Eve!

Strangely enough India is a country of extremes and radical opposites, here we have
‘Bollywood’ which for decades was forced to portray any form of physical intimacy between
characters by a show of lovebirds or flowers coming together and which still faces censorship
issues if, heaven forbid, the actors kiss on the lips. Then we have the oft shown example of
the Khajuraho temples where not only nudity, but the Kamasutra and all forms of lessons in
physical love, are portrayed on the carved panels. It has indeed become a cliché that
whenever one speaks of censorship in art, those against it will invariably site the example of
Khajuraho and Kamasutra!

Can one trace the origins of nudism in Indian art? The Ajanta and Ellora frescos have an
element of nudity as do most temple art in India. The Lajja Gouri, is one Indian deity that is
always depicted nude, so is Goddess Kali in some instances. The miniature art of painting
that is a legacy of the Mughals also has many examples of nudity. So when did the Indian
sensibility move from almost revering the nude human form by giving it a home in temples to
almost outright banning it for the common man? Could it be a hangover from the prudish era
of British rule?

Post- colonial India saw artists waking up to new influences and experimentations in art.
Pablo Picasso’s nudes and rebellious style of painting rocked the art world. F N Souza, Akbar
Padamsee are some of the famous artists who also have a repertoire of nudes. Padamsee
himself has once lamented that people shy away from buying nudes for fear of what the
domestic help or neighbours would say. M F Hussain has received much flak for his portrayal
of Indian goddesses in the nude, even being forced to live in exile for fear of physical harm
by religious fanatics.

Essentially according to those who appreciate art, when an artist renders a nude, he is
showing the true human form, stripped of all the affectations of adornments or raiment’s of
clothing. It is through nudity that an artist can bring the king and the beggar down to the same
level – nudity could well be seen as the great leveller! Besides, why is the human form
perceived as being shameful? Artist Chitra Ganesh’s artworks abound with nudity, with eyes
in the place of breasts and gaping wounds being shown as full ruddy lips. And her works are
very much in demand, though one needs add that the artist lives and works in the US where
nudity is not such a taboo topic.

One does not presume to condone nudity in the public sphere, we are not talking here of nude
billboards being put up. If an artist chooses to exhibit his art in a gallery space where any
visitor is making an effort to go and see the work, then it should not attract censorship. Such
nudity in art is not being forced upon a person not comfortable with it. Also, most nude
paintings tend to be representational, to the extent that while appreciating the artwork, one
may not even consider the nude aspect of it.
The arguments for nudity in art are many, however, the bottom line remains that nudity
makes the Indian population uncomfortable. When a famous artist chooses to make nudes it
gives the politicians a platform to air their views about protecting Indian morality. It will be
cold day in hell before the majority of Indian society overcomes its prudish nature.

~ Razvin Namdarian