KASAULI SEMINAR 65 it is only at the risk of perpetuating a "near-existential no-exit situation" that the peopleinthe "already established realm" can stay away from the emergent possibilities of the drama of political commitment. 'Intervention' from them, which must be the result of a deliberate 'political' decision, is necessary for the latter as well, firstly because political commitment in itself is no substitute for a good theatre and the new realms of political consciousness impinging upon the theatre require a technical breakthrough for which the aid of veterans in technical innovations is needed, and secondly because, as in the case ofDalit theatre, the exploration of political reality through drama itself tends to get stalled after a certain point unless the investigative tools come from outside the sphere of Dalit conbciousness. Many of the subsequent presentations started by assuming rather than further analysing the socio-political change which necessitates a technical revolution in the sphere of arts; but the question of 'intervention', of'appropriation', of the breaking up of established aesthetic structures was reiterated throughout the seminar. Arun Khopkar and Ashish Rajadhyaksha, in a joint presentation on the "Linear and the Displaced" in cinema led a sustained attack on the linear narrative and the naturalistic techniques popularised by the 'Analytic Dramatic School'. As an alternative to the well-rounded story, Arun Khopkar, in an extremely useful formulation, upheld the 'epic'mode of narration as explored differently by Eisenstein and Ritwik Ghatak. The 'epic' mode makes possible the 'displacement' of conventional structures of response and the awakening of complex attitudes in the audience through a process of 'progressive eclecticism'. Eclecticism in itself may be the manifestation of an 'aesthetic fascism' which seeks to manipulate audience reaction from above while failing to synthesise the artistic ingredients being used. 'Progressive eclecticism', on the other hand, makes creative use of historic forms or modes of composition, relating to them in different ways ranging from parody to more complex variations than the pure reversal of intention. According to Khopkar's formulation 'progressive eclecticism' does not have a "predetermined aim", but the creative use of ingredients itself would ensure that they would ultimately synthesise. Rajadhyaksha added to this by pointing out that the 'epic form' is related to the development of revolutionary historical movements and put up Ritwik Ghatak's use of the archetypal image as an example. The 'epic mode' and 'progressive eclecticism' came up as extremely fruitful concepts again in Vivan Sundaram's presentation on "Modern Narrative Painting" which included a demonstration of the slides of his own paintings as well of paintings by Bhupen Khak-kar, Gulam Shaikh, Nalini Malani and Sudhir Patwardhan. Experimentations with the narrative-dramatic mode in painting, as one finds in these artists, signify a breakaway from the post-independence preoccupation with 'flat painting' which deliberately rejected