Manohar Kaul

THE BASIC CONCEPTION OF INDIAN ART
By MANOHAR KAUL
The Hindustan Times Weekly,
Sunday, January 20, 1957

EVERYONE has a particular type of genius and a natural aptitude for a specific way of expressing himself. Similarly, each nation has a particular genius and a specialized expression of its own. This is an important component of tradition which is nowhere more important or more consistent than in India; no country could escape less from its chequered past. Indian art has a long and continuous historical background born of her innate genius which has influenced Indian life and outlook from time immemorial. Traditions are still alive. The whole fabric of Indian life from ancient times to the present day stands on the solid foundation of faith. There is not an aspect of Indian life or activity that has not a spiritual background of enduring value. Behind the changing phenomena of name and form, the Indian thinker had discovered a lasting essence—a sort of a compound of truth, joy and knowledge—which persists unchanged and forms the background of this universal flux. To know and to be that essence was declared the highest good and the ultimate purpose of life. **Basic Principle** This highest good is a subjective experience and one-pointed attention to a pitch where the knower and the known are both lost and shine as one integrated knowledge. Work of any sort in Indian life meant worship and worship culminated in the identity of the worker with the work. This state of mind is called intuitive understanding, a sort of apperception in which the thinker obtains a perfect knowledge of his thought in its idealized form. This intuitive understanding forms the basic principle in the theory of Indian art and aesthetics. In the creation of a perfect piece of art perfect meditation is the essential prerequisite before it can be translated into plastic or colour form, closed—all these give an impression of indifference towards worldly pleasures and kinship with spiritual values. The Indian artist has always submitted himself to discipline and moral life in far greater measure than his liberal brethren of the West. So trained the artist entered upon meditation on the object of the creation and when the meditation reaches one pointed perfection, the idealized form of the object of his creation arises out of the depths of consciousness and attains an intense relief in the framework of mind and spirit, until the artist feels himself identified with it. This perfect mental impression the artist later on transfers to the material canvas. Art and mysticism become convertible terms and the artist and the mystic are one. The Indian artist seldom worked before a model. There was nothing external for him. The model was his creative inner intuition with which he had identified himself and the created external piece of art was but an expression of the inner vision. In a sense the ancient Indian art may well be classed as an expressionist school of an ideal type quite distinct from Benedetto Croce's description. This is due to the fact that the Indian artist had to represent in some concrete form a spiritual concept which first needed to be mentally visualized and then reproduced. This concrete reproduction was always idealized or unique in some form or other but always true to the mental vision and not to nature. The Indian spiritual evolution from pure philosophy to pure mysticism culminates in the devotional literature of the classical age from which emerged such forms as inspired the cults of Shiva and Vishnu in sculpture in the South and painting in the North. **Spiritual Values** The mysteries of Nature played an important role in guiding and inspiring the Indian artist and thus he always concentrated on spiritual values and loved the essence of nature thereby giving Indian art in general a tinge of mysticism. He laid more stress on the inner beauty of the spirit than on the outer physical charm of the form. This inner concept of beauty induced the artist to unfold spiritual concepts through creative activity in which the mystic element is ever present. The Indian artist always concentrated on superior ideals of beauty, things to make the human function. Comparing Greek art with Indian art Sir John Marshall says, "Hellenistic art never took a real and lasting hold upon India for the reason that the temperaments of the two peoples were radically dissimilar. To the Greek, man, man's beauty and man's intellect were everything and it was the apotheosis of this beauty and this intellect which still remained the keynote of Hellenistic art even in the Orient. But these ideals awakened no response in the Indian mind. The vision of the Indian was bounded by the immortal rather than the mortal, by the infinite rather than the finite." Where the Greek thought was ethical his was spiritual; where Greek was rational, his was the more subtle and varied. Though the Indian gods have been projected as human figures translated into plastic or colour form, less attention has been paid to their physical charm. The fact that in representing the Buddhist or Hindu gods the Indian artist followed certain models to anatomical perfection, holds good. The artist's aim was not to show anatomical perfection but to express the spiritual message which it unfolds by translating them into the terms of form and colour. **Ajanta Frescoes** Though the Indian gods have been projected as human figures, the execution of these forms were transcended by the inner intuitive vision vibrant with the emotions of the artist. It is a well known fact that between the second century B.C. and the fifth century A.D. Indian art had attained highest standards of perfection. Its true significance is to stress more on the inner beauty represented in the Ajanta frescoes of painting. In "Mother and Child before the Buddha," the onlooker gets an impression of a mystery. It will be easily discernible that the artist wanted to give an impression of the sublimity of the Buddha from his colossal size and of his calm and serene expression. Unlike Greek artist, who presented the external beauty of the forms with perfection, the Indian artist gave no thought to the anatomical perfection of the human body in meditation. Mr. V. Smith remarks that "Indian sculpture, properly so called, hardly deserves to be reckoned as art." In reply to such criticism let us quote some of the Western art critics in an effort to discover some of their criteria. Leonardo de-Vinci says that "figure is most worthy of praise which by its action best expresses the passion that animates it." Mr. Holmes also remarks that "a work of art must possess in some degree the four qualities of Unity, Vitality, Infinity and Repose." If we take these tests as criteria of a true work of art, it can be said with certainty that the works of Indian art in some cases even surpass the masterpieces of the West. Dr. Anand Coomaraswami holds that a work of art is great in so far as it expresses its own theme in a form, at once rhythmic and impassioned, through a definite medium which must express motif deeply felt. Among certain modern critics there is a tendency to deprecate and belittle our ancient traditions simply because a Western critic, not understanding their true significance and the prevailing spirit of those times says something against. This is not the right way of appreciating art as it was and as it can be practised today. Appreciation is understanding of what is and not what ought to be. Ancient Indian art, still living in most of its traditions, needs proper recognition so that it may continue to live and inspire. **Folkt Art** Other forms as inspired arts like cults of Shiva and Vishnu. Buddha is shown as Prince Sidhartha, the treatment is more subtle and varied. Though Sidhartha does not possess the perfect anatomy of a Greek Apollo yet it has a physical charm of its own. This painting is also full of mystery of its own as Prince Sidhartha is portrayed on the eve of his renunciation. The main charm of his figure lies in its spiritual emotional. And to these aspirations, these more spiritual instincts he sought, at a later date, to give articulate expression by translating them into the terms of form and colour. The figures of gods communicate a spiritual message. The execution of these forms were transcended by the inner intuitive vision vibrant with the emotions of the artist. This fact has been missed by some critics who believe that as a general rule the Indian artist showed no interest in human anatomy. The figure of Nataraja is another grand concept of creative and destructive. The graceful motion of the supreme dancer symbolizes the rhythm of universe in its cyclic ebb and flow. **Sanchi Carvings** Another important point in the paintings of Indian art is that they often represented the truths, convictions and beliefs that had taken root in the minds of the people and were accepted as universally true. In one of the Sanchi carvings we find animals of all kinds gathered under the Bodhi tree where the Buddha got enlightenment. This clearly depicts the spiritual principles that were applicable to all living beings. The Indian artist sometimes introduced symbolic devices to make deep and subtle concepts understandable to the common folk. For instance, the descent of the Buddha on earth is often delineated by representing with foot prints, sometimes lotuses on it. The figures of gods do not always resemble human form. The God Shiva has three eyes and the God Brahma has four faces. These gods have been depicted as faithfully as humanly possible in the same manner as described in the scriptures, being the symbols of worship. This kind of symbolism became very important in the pictorial expression due to which this or plastic representations of the masterpieces of the contemporary art of India and world. Prince Sidhartha represented the external beauty. The different parts of the subject were subordinated to the effect of the work as a whole. Thus, the meditative eyes, his eyebrows have been stretched towards his broad forehead and his lips are closed—all these give an impression of indifference towards worldly pleasures and kinship with spiritual values. The dignity of motherhood in the woman was expressed in the fullness of her breasts and hips. Many Western critics have criticized this symbolic aspect of Indian art without understanding its true significance. Indian artist seldom focused on the anatomy of the human body in meditation. Mr. V. Smith remarks that "Indian sculpture, properly so called, hardly deserves to be reckoned as art." In reply to such criticism let us quote some of the Western art critics in an effort to discover some of their criteria. Leonardo de-Vinci says that "figure is most worthy of praise which by its action best expresses the passion that animates it." Mr. Holmes also remarks that "a work of art must possess in some degree the four qualities of Unity, Vitality, Infinity and Repose." If we take these tests as criteria of a true work of art, it can be said with certainty that the works of Indian art in some cases even surpass the masterpieces of the West. Dr. Anand Coomaraswami holds that a work of art is great in so far as it expresses its own theme in a form, at once rhythmic and impassioned, through a definite medium which must express motif deeply felt. Among certain modern critics there is a tendency to deprecate and belittle our ancient traditions simply because a Western critic, not understanding their true significance and the prevailing spirit of those times says something against. This is not the right way of appreciating art as it was and as it can be practised today. Appreciation is understanding of what is and not what ought to be. Ancient Indian art, still living in most of its traditions, needs proper recognition so that it may continue to live and inspire.