FINE ARTS AND POLITICS

                                               

Normally the people having expertise in fine arts are treated to be elite. It is believed that they are men of chaste tastes and can do anything in a better fashion. However, we know that many scholars and celebrities have opined that they are worth  nothing as far as politics and governance are concerned.

Aristotle had expressed that the philosophers are the best material for assuming the mantle of kingship. Fortunately, India had a practical experience of a philosopher king. Dr Sarvapally Radhakrishnan was our vice president for complete one decade and on the demise of Dr. Rajendra Prasad, became the President of the republic of India. He was a globally acclaimed philosopher scholar. His persuasive oratory was so famous that he could influence even Stalin while in Russia as the Indian ambassador. His birthday, 5^th of Sept. is observed as Teacher’s Day in the country. Besides that, what else you remember about his tenure of 15 years to justify that philosophers are ideal kings?

Similarly, Plato said that the poets are sentimental and slightly mentally imbalanced and hence they are never fit for rulership of a country. If you see the history books, you will find the names of some kings who were poets, but we will have to check up if they were successful. We know that Bahadurshah Zafar was a poet but then he made a very week emperor. On the other hand, In India, we had a poet as the prime minster, who is rated as one of the best. Yes, I am talking about Atal Behari Vajpayee. Both the examples cause nothing but confusions.

Even music has not been spared, rather badly condemned. The Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb was so unkind to the fine arts including music that he prescribed them to be drowned so deep into the ocean that its tunes were not audible to anybody. We know that while Rome was burning, its emperor Nero was playing on flute. Despite this old adage, Nero had done several good things for the betterment of his subject. On the other hand, due to his aggressive and orthodox policies, Aurangzeb was decried by the people and the real downfall of his empire ensued during the last phase of his rule.

In the above backdrop, is it not quite challenging to take a side?