[Reader-list] 'The Tiger' lives in an image, but...

[inder salim]

please have a look at the images before you read the following:
http://indersalim.livejournal.com


1.         On Tipu's Tiger www.victoria&albertmuseum  reads :
 " …and Tipu Sultan's (The Tiger of Mysore) macabre model of a tiger
devouring a British soldier, a mechanical marvel prized by Tipu and
kitted out with an organ that simulated the growls and shrieks of its
British victims. After Tipu's defeat at the Battle of Seringapatam in
1799, "Tipu's Tiger," shown below, was seized by the British and
became the most famous exhibit of the East India Company's collection,
later transferred to the V & A."


 Before one can go into 'the tiger' as a natural symbol for a national
representation or so,  let us re-read the text in the site of V&A.
"Macabre model of a tiger"  or "The British victim" are clearly from
the their  understanding of history. Fine, but that is the difference
which continues till date, and is unfortunately poised to shape our
contemporary  history even. Be it the devastation of Afganistan due to
their cold war tactics or war in Iraq or something else, the foreign
policy of 'the west' is still emanating from an old and cold
understanding of the other. Mr Count West west of the The Castle by
Franz Kafka is still questioning Mr.K about his existential choice to
enter  the Inn without his permission. The tiger is still around. A
golden 100 dollar Australian coin is carrying 'a tiger' leaping out
for its victim.  And before the British devoured the whole of India,
Tipu Sultan fantasized to let his imaginary tiger devour the dangerous
British in uniform. This British tiger afterwards had to control India
through a Leopard on an Indian coins.  There are some other animals
which helped 'the state' to control its subjects, but 'the tiger' is
special. Greatest  great God  knows why ?

2.         A forest fire once looked very beautiful from a distance,
but not now, not now anymore. This is how a couplet in Urud by Bashir
Baddar lucidly conveys us about the change of aesthetics value
judgment.  In 1799, ((  all the Lady(s) and Lord Curzon(s)  and
numersou other dead tigers too )) a dead  tiger under your feet for a
photograph with a gun around represented the status symbol and pride
of a person or family. The tradition of hunting has a history and some
elites want to live with this tradition even when they enjoy the best
of technological gadgetries to stimulate their pleasure nerve ends and
all that.  Alas, the skin of tiger is the requirement of a drawing
room, and the demand of it is coming from the rich people only. The
poachers  are only fulfilling this demand. So are we still living with
that old aesthetic form(s) which talk about colour and material
without the understanding of changed times. The new aesthetic paradigm
must engage 'the environmental' as its primary shift to its manifesto
besides 'the mental' and  'the social', as Felix Guattari puts forth
in his most poignant and profound writings.



3.           I took the photo of the photo and it contains: a master
with a cane looking at the tiger who is about to enter the arena.
There is at least one clear frame in front of the tiger to enter from
other end. The Tiger's destiny is this frame, lower end of which is
solidly merged with the circus floor. A small but significant
reflection of myself on the black trousers of the poor circus
employee, which is darker than the dark of his trousers, reveals a
half face, a fragment of the shirt, ear and a shadow like face with no
eyes. There is a girl witness, standing next to a tiger upon a woman,
but is she actually looking at what the tiger upon the girl like
figure is all about ?  Although the gallery walls, which I remember
were all white, but there is a small blue reflection with the entrance
door of the room in which the images are exhibited.  There is one more
tiger upon a stool like an art object in a gallery space, here in
front of many empty chairs of the circus. In the gallery it was real
circus of the black and white images, but the actual images of the
circus were taken during a rehearsal time. The photographer of these
images used the protective glass like the circus people use iron
frames to protect people from tigers in the circus. ( although the
fact is reverse ).  As we all know, in the circus the reality of iron
simply stays on the eyes of the tigers even when they are released
from the cage to perform. The iron exists for the tigers while we
don't see it, which is almost similar to the image under the
transparent glass. So if the image is like a tiger with or without
cage, then it is the very transparent glass which incorporated some
meaning to the image for my understanding of this image of the image
thing. The image of the image is surreal in form but tragic in
content.  I am part of the circus-in-surreal  and yet a witness to it
from outside.

However, still the most interesting part of the image is the
theatrical gesture of the tiger upon the woman like figure. The gender
of the tiger is immaterial, because it performs the role of that tiger
like male chauvinist, a mask, and for the same reason there must be a
buyer for the image in the gallery space as well. The idea sells in
the real circus and the image of the idea too sells in the gallery.
Wittingly or unwittingly, I am also writing about the image because
something is too loud in the picture.

Is then the image of the image still performing the role which it was
designed to perform in the gallery space in the first place?  I see
there is hardly any trace of life in it, because everything is dead in
it. I see a tiger buried under the woman who is almost buried under
the tiger. It looks like a grave. The wax model like girl next to the
grave is standing in front of it as if mourning the death of her own
sister-self. The so called master is too melancholic. Every figure in
the image of the image is looking else where, and yet they are all
players to perform in sync for an audience that is not in the picture
but in front of it anyway. The image happens to be like this only to
generate meaning for the eye. During rehearsal it is unlikely that
they are not in sync within each other. Obviously there is no space
for a joker, and even if the joker is around, usually a dwarf, has to
behave reasonably within limits, lest these looking-tigers but blind
misbehave.

The beast is already out of the human living space, and human being
has already encroached upon the most of the space which actually
belongs to this so called beast. The space controlled by human beings
offers a living space to the tiger either in a circus, or in a zoo or
in a protected sanctuary. The tiger also lives in an image, but on our
terms.  The tiger was too sad while i went a little closer to this
tiger, and if I go nearer 'this reality' may devour me. So I better
save my skin and leave this tiger alone in the wilderness of form,
gallery dynamics and meaning of an image.

Still , the  more important question is 'The Tiger' who is…

-