Of art and the audience

The dynamics of the artist-audience relationship has always interested me.

Open Questions:

1) How much of an artist's work is actually an honest reflection his or her own inner self and how much of it is tailored, albeit marginally, to win over an audience?
2) Does art need an encouraging medium to exist or is it an end in itself?
3) Can an artist produce art knowing fully well that it will never see the light of the day?
4) Does making art more accessible to the admirer undermine its value or the virtuosity of the artist?
5) Who judges the worth of a piece of art? The audience, the connoisseurs or the artist himself?
6) What determines the value of a piece of art? Beauty, creativity or intricacy?
7) Define 'value' with respect to art.

The Western Obsession with Indian Erotica

Though the title of this blog sounds rather ostentatious, it is really about one piece of literature, if one could indeed call it such, The Kamasutra. I have heard on countless occasions the comment that the Kamasutra is an erotic masterpiece imparting sexual wisdom to the libidinous but inept vouyer. I have seen it on many booksehelves, obviously in need of a good dusting. This however does not deter its owner from swearing by its greatness. And things really start to get ugly when Indians themselves start to view it as one of their seminial (no pun intended) contributions to western society.

I have tried reading the book. On more than a few occassions I burst out laughing at its quant desciption of the human genitilia. On the other occassions I was bored by the rambling account of sexual positions which would require gymanistic ability to get into. Not once was I was ever aroused ( I double checked just to make sure). And after reading the book, I was more confused about sex than ever before. What's not to say that when I'm 'locked in a writhing embrace with my beloved', in a lotus position, I might just fuck it all up by trying to access my now enormous repository of sexual knowldge gained from the Kamasutra.

A few salient facts that are made up by me but are surely true:

1) Exactly 0.0000001% of the people who say they have read the Kamsutra have actually read it. The timeline includes people who co-inhabited the world of Vatsyana, the supposed author.
2) Vatsyana did not write the Kamasutra becase he never existed. His name is actually a code-name for titfucker.
3) 'The joy of sex' sells lesser copies than the Kamasutra.
4) Atleast 78654 people have been killed trying the positions mentioned in KS. 'Sexual accident' is just a euphimism for 'fuckheads died trying shit from KS as it just didn't work out'.
5)The Kamasutra was originally the script of a TV talk show. It's just that they din't have Howard Stern in those days to better get things accross.
6) The KS is the most influential book ever written. Passages in have served as inspiration to great leaders like Kennedy, Clinton and Arnold Schwatzenegger.
7) Men: If a woman has this book on her favorite book list, she is a whore/slut/extremely debauched person. Get to know her.
8)Women: If a man has this book on his favorite book list, he is a raving, psychotic, sexual deviant. Get to know him.
9) Whoever wrote KS had not heard of faggots or dykes. Or maybe there is a KS -II that George Bush has stowed away in the catacoombs of Gihnja Ka.