I love the light and shadows in this picture. Also the texture on both walls on the sides and on the floor. And the dark mystery - what is it up those stairs? where is it leading to? what is that man dreaming of? is there a point to his dreams? or is he just a prop in the picture of life? Dark imagery always evokes intrigue and interest and excitement in me. Which reminds me... a little rant coming up...

Somebody said about my last painting the "Dark Ganesha", that she didn't like it at all, that it wasn't at all like Ganesha, for it evoked dark, sinister aspects. Normally, I get very prickly when somebody whom I feel is artistically naive (ok, that sounds snobbish, but can't put it politically correctly) makes such a comment. But, strangely, I felt very calm when she said it. Firstly, because if someone artistically naive likes my painting, then I worry - I don't want to merely make pretty pictures. Secondly, dark and sinister were the thoughts churning in my mind as I painted it, so I felt pleased that that got through - so I consider that painting a success. Third, I think Hindu deities, particularly, are interpretations. The Ganesha she worships and is comfortable with and finds comforting, is an interpretation of somebody some time in the hoary past. I do feel Hinduism gives me the freedom to explore different ways to interpret them, if I feel the need to. The only place I draw the lines of limit is, not to degrade or denigrate them. But I certainly feel I can depict something different about them.

Dark and sinister are aspects of Life, Creation, as I perceive it. Just as light and joy are. And sweet and simplistic are. Hindu Gods and Goddesses depict both the light and the dark of Creation - that is what makes them and Hinduism so unique. And also not merely sweet, cute, simplistic. And yet, the great Ganesha has been reduced to this roly-poly saccharine sweet little creature, diminishing him to merely being a goody-goody depiction of the simplistic, diminished mind (or critic, if you will). That being said, yes, indeed, there are certain symbolic aspects of Hindu deities, including Ganesha. But my point is, I think I have the artistic right to give other symbolisms to a deity as an expression of myself, while I may or may not include other traditional symbolisms. What baffles me is the iron clad rigidity of these wannabe critics. "Don't play, be serious", said another simplistic fathead, when I mentioned I intended to explore the God-Goddess themes of Hinduism.

So, does that mean that I want to paint only dark, sinister themes or Ganeshas or any Hindu deity or anything else? Not at all. I love saccharine sweet pretty as much as anyone else. But, most of all, I must paint what I feel, what I am experiencing, at the moment I make my first stroke on the canvas. Art is not about just making pretty pictures, although it can be that too. Art cannot be reduced to merely xeroxing something, whether from nature or from previous concepts of deities or anything else. Art has to be about something, at least for me. Every time I face a blank canvas, I unconsciously or subconsciously delve into my inner self, to draw something out from there, even if that something has been caused or inspired from something outside of myself.

Ultimately, what constitutes art is completely nebulous - by itself it can mean nothing or it could mean everything. Dark and sinister can be beautiful too - one look at Kali will tell you so. And, as they say, beauty lies in the eye of the beholder. Though I fervently wish people would refrain from being self-appointed art critics, without being invited to do so.

Meanwhile, I have dark black crows on my mind and blue blue snow-capped mountains. Will be interesting which I will opt for when I face my canvas.