Art has often found itself tentatively poised on that delicate line of the horizon which refuses to discriminate between the tangible and the intangible, between the observed and the felt, between the seen and the sensed, between murta and amurta.

The legendary divide between the representational and the abstraction might have had an art historical significance in the context of Western modernism but could not make much foray into the ethos of Indian modernism. Abstraction and representational in Indian art made their presence felt, not as opposed to each other, but as inspite of each other. While representational images, in tradition as well as in modern, thrived on the abstract values of art, abstraction in modern Indian art is steeped in the palpable experiences and tangible memories artists are touched by.

The other way round, we are reminded of what distinguished art critic Donald Kuspit once wrote addressing the modern abstract art. He remarked, ‘In working our way through an abstract work of art we seem to be feeling our way in the labyrinth of a preconscious and unconscious world of feelings’. However, over emphasis on the ideas of purity and the kernel of truth as essential promises of abstract art witnessed a natural death thus leaving ample scope for the artists to delve into the complex visual world and the inescapable traces of the subconscious in the psychic realm. The perceived contention between the representational and the abstract, is therefore, rather a conceptual issue than a linguistic one. They share their boundaries the way the thin line of demarcation between the water and the coast on the seashore is in perpetual flux. The distinction, if any, is ephemeral.

This is where exactly the significance of MURTA/AMURTA lies.

Soumik Nandy Majumdar

Santiniketan