[Reader-list] Of art, morality, etc.

[Baruk S. Jacob]

> The last part of your mail in response to mine is
> where the crux of the matter lies though. I may be old fashioned, but I
> don't think the existence of self-contradictory truths are possible.

~its not about self contradictory truths. its about truths sprining from different worldviews. 

in this case, one view is that what the tata's are doing in singur is WRONG. therefore any association with them (as an artist) is morally indefensible. 

another view, as pranesh has, is that wherever the money comes from, as long as it is being used for good,it is ok.

yet another view is that the farmers' grouse is with the government, and not with the tata's, etc etc. as worldviews change, one's perceptions of truth (in most but the real basic basics) change.

> And what is art without humanity? What validity does my art have, no    > matter what its apparent merit, if I am a mediocrite of the mind,       > if I turn a blind eye to the sources of my funding - where the funds are > coming from and at what cost (ask the family of tapasi malik the answer > to that), functioning in my own little bubble? 

~ while (again) i agree with your position personally, what extent can one take this 'evil by association' thought? do i stop buying tata salt? refuse to sit in a taxi that is an indica? refuse to answer calls from tata phones? all of these are the sources of the funding!

i did not mean to accuse you of imposition, just meant to point out that imposition was a bad thing. :)

~regards,
 baruk
 
http://bottlebroke.blogspot.com