Sadashiv Bapat suddenly explodes. ‘Why are you dragging politics on to this platform? I thought we were here to talk about art!’ A stunned silence settles on the audience, punctuated by a few sniggers. Four hands go up as Kruttika attempts to close her jaw fallen with shock at the interruption. Pancholi signals to the audience for silence and nods to Kruttika to proceed.

Kruttika does so with a crooked smile. ‘I was trying to analyse the context in which I and my colleagues are working. Today that context is predominantly political. Painters of Mr Bapat's school of thought revile the work of painters of Mr Sen's school of thought. But their works are similar in a major respect. They paint on canvas. They may argue about the purpose and principles of art, but they have no quarrel over the tools of art. Between us and both their schools there can be no dialogue at all because we have rejected canvas, paper and the picture frame itself. Mr Bapat's interruption is proof of the breakdown of dialogue between us and painters of his persuasion. They do not concede to politics a place in art whereas our works are themselves political statements. To reject the picture frame is not a whim. It is a political statement. In doing so, we are returning more genuinely than Mr Bapat can conceive of, to the traditions of our ancient artists. They didn’t hang their works in art galleries. Their art was in public places. Temples. We look to museums for patronage because they are our public places. We wish to raise questions directly with the larger public about the world we live in. We might use everyday objects to raise these questions or the new media that have entered all our lives. But the tragedy is that the public whom we address through our work cannot see our work because museums don’t buy our art. Instead, our works are displayed in countries which have nothing to lose or gain by the problems of our world. They display our art because they have the money and a tradition of promoting the new. We also have money. But our society promotes those who look back and walk along old tracks. Our society frowns on those who look for new paths. Our society makes traditional foods in microwave ovens and eats them with relish because human taste buds are not mediated by the human mind or social consciousness. The public has fallen into the decadent habit of pleasuring itself sensuously and emotionally. Because it is moved by beautiful musical phrases, pretty colours and honey-sweet voices, it patronizes artists whose paint brushes dip into the same rut.