data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/96c38/96c38dddbd14239ffb131b6144d3b2581d453dde" alt=""
Bhatt employed an inventive visual vocabulary,
creating deities called ‘MokshaPets’ such
as ‘MokshaBuy’ ‘Mokshasura,’ ‘MokshaBum’
‘Kundalini’, ‘Reverence’ and ‘Irreverence’, Third eye, Eye Ball and ThoughtPill.
They clearly inhabited a world of their own and the viewing experience would
have been more inclusive had the gallery space been used to present dimensions
of this unique, not-seen-before world. The spartan presentation of a few painted
canvassed on white walls with vinyl stickers sprinkled across the floor and
ceiling did not quite evoke the necessary atmosphere to enable viewers to participate in and engage more
actively with characters that most people in Delhi encountered for the first
time.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3e4d0/3e4d00a8b13e38fa289ab7e222ceedcf2cf834f2" alt=""
In the ‘MokshaBuy Mandla’ painted with acrylic on canvas
[191.92x191.92cms], a many-armed creature modelled perhaps on goddess Durga of
the Hindu pantheon was seen with shopping bags, credit cards, currency notes,
an extraordinarily long shopping-list, ice-cream, a blood-stained sickle and
more. This creature with eight arms stood atop the philosopher ‘MokshaBum’, surrounded by other
characters invented by Bhatt. She conjured up imagery depicting the life of
this goddess of retail therapy who had drawn blood too. Cloud and fire forms
found in traditional Tibetan Thangka paintings were also incorporated in the
picture. The ugly, purple deity with three eyes, evil red lips and a tongue that
extended below her feet, also held a ‘jap mala’. On the one hand the artist
purports to critique consumerism and its excesses, yet she calls it
‘MokshaShots’ or “taste of the sublime”. At the same time she also uses items such
as the ‘mala’ associated with spiritual seekers which have ascetic
connotations, confusing the issue. If consumerism is her path, of what
significance is the ‘jap mala’? Is it about the insincerity of the seeker? Is
it about the general confusion around the idea of moksha? Or is it about
experiencing the sublime through consumerism?
In the ‘MokshaBum’ Mandala [2009, 121.92x121.92 cms] a cute, all blue
creature with arms folded in a lazy, thinking posture, with a pink halo which
could have been the cushion he was seated on, looked starry-eyed into space.
His eyes didn’t confront you; he was clearly in his own world. Through this,
the artist intended to exemplify the thinker and armchair philosopher, who never got up and moved,
achieved little but expounded a lot; but the visual did not convey this. Bhatt
used the concept of over-indulgence to denote fulfilment where ‘MokshaBuy’ supposedly attained moksha
through excessive buying. She then presented ‘MokshaBum’ as the philosopher and an escapist, doing nothing but
thinking, turning the idea of indulgences around, to represent now, the
futility of a single dimensional approach, thus contradicting herself.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10096/10096a1683906a09cf45227c06f3d48c29e99cc8" alt=""