Mind and universe series 3 (2019) Pittura da Balucharan Us

For modernists Art was a means to express the self. Modernism has produced volumes of discussions around this founding principle of it which in a closer look is an emphatic declaration of the authorship of the individual who produces something called Art. This definition, by its very nature presupposes Art to be a finished product (produced through a process of self-analysis by the artist and made of the elements which constitute the self) than a process. What is at stake here is the communicative aspect of Art. In modern art the attempts to define ‘the self’ through creative expression, more often fails to acknowledge the communicative aspect of art. The tragic plight of the modern age, according to Herbert Read is that“we have no sense of community of a people for whom and with whom we can work”. But it does not mean that the whole of modern art is fallacious. Modern Art has, indeed produced some of the timeless marvels in the history of Art. It should also be noted here that even while keeping the ‘dark chaos of subjectivism’ as its stamping ground modern art has thrown light into, at least for the initiated, some of the hitherto unknown territories of human psyche. But as C.G Jung writes, “certainly art, so far as we can judge of it, has not yet discovered in this darkness what it is that holds all men together and could give expression to their psychic wholeness”. Art, thus with its intrinsic quality of fusing together the known and the unknown attains a mythical aura around its objects of sanctity. We may further develop this thought in line with what Jung calls ‘symbol’. For Jung symbol is a function of psyche. Without much effort one may reach to a definition of Art from Jung’s definition of symbol when he describes symbol as image based associative thinking which is also an outcome of the interplay of the known and the unknown. Further he adds that its function is transcendental keeping a complementary relation to elements of psyche that are binary opposites. In the Jungian perspective, we may argue that Art is related to that function of psyche by which symbols are produced.
Art creates symbols as it is rooted in associative or mythical thinking. I have before me a collection of paintings to prove my point. All most every painting in this collection is a manifestation of the psyche as Balucharan, the painter of this series would like to call them. There is a conscious effort from the side of the artist to follow the associative imageries emerging in his mind on confronting a particular situation. As a result, what Balucharan paints becomes symbols which try to narrate the known as well as the unknown. His canvases are also an interplay of opposites in the Jungian sense. It is the very conflict and tension created by antithetical forces that makes these canvases a dynamic field of symbolism. Balucharan’s deploying of archetypal imageries in this war field of the opposites is also intriguing as they assume the role of personal narratives. For instance, the image of a girl child symbolizing the anima of the artist is an oft-repeated image in his canvases. The wise old man is another archetypal image in his works. You may also notice the unusual coiffure of the figures which is a symbolic representation of the ego.
“Since all individual experience has an archetypal core, issues from personal history and archetypal patterns are always interwoven, often needing first to be separated and then linked back together”.(Sherry Salman, The creative psyche: Jung’s major contributions).
Indeed, some of the paintings in this collection reveals the personal issues of the artist but there is always an attempt from the part of the artist to present his personal experiences along with its associative thoughts which more often than not results in a mix up of personal history and archetypal patterns. It is certain kinds of repeated experiences that prompt us to think about the universal pattern of human experiences and the meaning inherent in it. Balucharan works with these kinds of repeated experiences till he can find out some links to connect them with a large pattern embedded in the collective unconscious. I think this is what his allegory of ‘the parrot and the wiseman making rotis’ (one of his paintings in this collection)tries to speak about.