Triangle series

Triangle SeriesEver since the human intelligence derived the consciousness to segregate itself from the body, the cycle of birth-life-death or past- present -future has been his window to his world.The play, these three vital factors do to his existence is much more than its outer sheen. The realization that all manifestations do find its way through this trinity, in turn compelled all faiths to anoint these trio to the altar for their physical and metaphysical philosophy. These three factors are not only inter-depended but also have the existence only when they are inter-connected- a triangular synergyTranslating this into visual representation, Triangle series tries to explore this complex order of nature's manifestation.In triangle, altering the size of the sides and angle can creates optical illusions between the observer and the observed, true to the trinity's separation between outer sheen and inner void. Further this illusion also owes its manifestation to the basic universal element – Light and Shade-A vertical split. In our life we have created innumerous vertical splits likeCause and consequenceTrue and lieHell and heavenGod and DevilGood and BadRight and wrongPositive and negativeConstruction and destructionSuccess and failureLaugh and cryPowerful and powerlessRich and poorLove and hate …the list of vertical splits in other words the faith, goes on and on.This complementary existence of Triangle (force) and vertical split (faith) precipitates the existence. Be it a society or an individual, the manifestation of form or a feature is the fruit of this triangular act.Keeping this reality in background, triangle series tries to comprehend the reality of vertical splits and manifestation of true world, where Triangles epitomizes as style and tool that represents the force of trinity, form and feature.The beauty of Triangle is, it has a written down language, idiom, mathematical precision which cannot be broken even if they are in two dimensional , three dimensional or topographical as in the case of our society and faith- better understood as civilization.Triangle series study workshttp://www.artmajeur.com/?go=artworks/display_mini_gallery&login=narendraraghunath&mini_gallery_id=1201509&artist_id=

Tribute to Late Tyeb Mehta

A tribute to Late Sh. Tyeb Mehta, published in New Indian Express, Sunday Magazine on 12.07.2009
PDF version
http://epaper.newindpress.com/NE/NE/2009/07/12/ArticleHtmls/12_07_2009_417_001.shtml?Mode=1
Text version
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=A+nation%E2%80%99s+sketch&artid=I0P0vWIxre4=&SectionID=DQXEPnaIbtI=&MainSectionID=w44iAeuGCu8=&SectionName=JdLNkEA44noM%7CoF8hxt/zw==&SEO=+
Kindly note : There were two factual errors in the final published version:
1) Francis Bacon, refereed to is the painter not the 17th century English philosopher. -
2) Kandinsky's nationality is wrongly mentioned as French, instead of Russian

Form and abstraction in art

Derived from the Greek-Latin dialect "Abas-Traus," abstract art has found a more profound resonance in the realm of visual arts than in its literary counterpart. In the history of art, though sometimes misconstrued or misrepresented, the concept of abstraction has always been an iconic and intoxicating force. In the twentieth century, nearly every artist can be associated with at least one piece of abstract work.

In the West, during the early 19th century, a radical shift in the perception of the physical world occurred, owing to the emergence of Einstein's theory of relativity and Bohr's quantum interpretations. This shift had a profound impact on society's collective consciousness. The newfound awareness that "there exists a reality beyond single and multipoint perspectives to understand the self among the known" sparked a wave of innovation.

The effects of World War I on human beliefs further fueled this creative surge. The brutal destruction of human consciousness during this period was explored and represented in various forms of human creativity with deep dismay.

In art, there emerged a newfound vigor to seek, explore, and understand the realm of existence beyond the mortal frame, giving rise to abstract art. However, during the early days of abstract art, the form-seeking mind resisted the temptation. Most artists still sought a form, focus, and an idea in their creations as an exploration of identity within the known world. (Some, like Picasso, dissected reality in their exploration).

Perhaps the influence of faith and religious beliefs played a significant role during this period. We can discern an undercurrent of causality in all creative works, including groundbreaking concepts in relativity and quantum physics. However, it may also have been a response to the times, as the futility of material existence was exposed during the inhumane destruction of forms in World War I.

Subsequent human curiosity in the search for the imperishable, unfortunately, could not transcend abstraction beyond perceived notions of form, as form only has relative existence in our understanding (to elaborate, a physical form is merely an enclosure or set of coordinates in the Universe).

In this context, Pollock and the abstract expressionists deserve recognition. It's intriguing that abstract expressionism emerged from America, a nation untouched by the construction frenzy and mechanization of human consciousness that post-World War II Europe experienced.

Abstract expressionism was a creation without underlying currents, devoid of objectivity or meaning. Nevertheless, it still made a statement in the broader context of national identities.

Although the process of abstraction later discarded conventional concepts of art, material, color, style, and embraced social decongestant movements like hippie culture, modernism, conceptual art, postmodernism, etc., it could never fully transcend its initial liberation.

These movements often ended up as orchestrated manipulations of forms. In any orchestrated manipulation, there is typically a hidden attribute or external orientation in form. The external attribute merely supplements the subject and cannot be the essence of abstraction.

In theory, abstraction is not about attributing something external to the subject's existence; rather, it is akin to extracting sweetness from sugar, even if it's just a part of the whole.

In philosophy and science, the "observer-observation-observed" algorithm has been rigorously tested and understood for a while. In art, however, apart from the initial strides by Pollock and the abstract expressionists to explore the inner and outer realms, true abstraction has remained a distant dream.

This holds true for many Oriental art forms that draw inspiration from Western art developments. Regardless of their innovation and creativity in manifestation, they often become manipulations of form—a new creation or a protest for or against the subject. In this sense, the theoretical concept of abstraction often eludes the realm of art.

Performance art installation

Theory states that "performance art can encompass any situation involving four fundamental elements: time, space, the performer's body, and a relationship between the performer and the audience." The roots of performance art can often be traced back to the Dada movement, and it has remained a significant aspect of the twentieth century's artistic landscape. Looking back, one may perceive performance art as a response to the reduction of human existence to mechanical operations, as its primary focus has consistently revolved around the artist's interaction with fellow human beings rather than the objects in their surroundings.

An artist doesn't create another object, such as an art piece, in their situation; instead, they generate an idea or an expression to define their art. In this context, time, space, and the artist's body become essential elements of artistic expression. In contrast, installation art, as per theory, is defined as "the artistic creation in which the artist transforms an area, a situation, or a space using material objects to define the relationship between humans and objects."

In installation art, the artist often considers the viewer's sensory experience over elements like time, space, or the artist's body. To better understand this art form, we can view it in the context of the ongoing mechanization of human life, where the objects of mechanization or contextual interventions have deeply impacted personal human life. As the industrial revolution reduced human capabilities to mere operations, and with the emergence of nanotechnology, questions arise about the "presence of human existence" in a material world that's shrinking to zero size, with even operations becoming increasingly detached from human abilities. Simultaneously, technological innovations like TVs, cell phones, digital cameras, computers, and printing inundate us with countless self-imposing visual images, effectively becoming large installed objects in our human existence.

Given this backdrop, it becomes crucial for art to define its domain clearly. Monumental installations that blow up the microscopic world as a protest against the nano-culture, as currently practiced, are becoming irrelevant, as they are seen as part of the problem itself and do not depict or address the human condition. Additionally, within the complex landscape of human existence in the computer age, where mechanization itself has taken on a life of its own, as seen in the internet and computers, which have direct consequences for human life, relying solely on performing art may not be sufficient to represent or express art in its entirety.

Taking these ideas into consideration, it is time for art to explore new dimensions. One such effort is the fusion of performing art and installation art, known as "performing art installation."

Practice: Performing Art Installation

The challenge in this art form lies in defining, deriving, and expressing the human condition within life and context. Performance may occur in the "absentia" of the performer, symbolizing the elimination of the human race by technology, even at the "operator" level. Meanwhile, digital visual imaging gives the illusion of self-importance. For instance, techniques such as wrapping up the performer or deliberately eliminating the "visibility" of the performer's body have been explored in this art form. Silence serves as the sound, and natural shadows provide the lighting. With each installation, the artist retains the right to derive thematic, artistic, and aesthetic perspectives and meanings. The installation remains open-ended, allowing viewers to interpret it from their own perspectives, even if that means ridiculing the entire performing art installation. In other words, the entire creation should always remain an open-ended ideation, preserving the viewer's prerogative. The complete formation should be free of distracting objects, sounds, and lighting to isolate the objective, relying instead on "conceptual" placements of objects, time, and space (in contrast to non-conceptual objects in traditional installation art).

Concept:

Our silent performance art invites viewers to actively participate. When viewers encounter the installation, they become spectators. Upon pausing with curiosity and inquiry, they become integral to the installation. As they engage with the idea, either by accepting it (becoming witnesses, conscious actors) or rejecting it (still witnesses, but passive actors), they begin enacting the drama by carrying the idea. While artists remain motionless and silent, discussions and judgments occur.

Burn Doors – First Performing Art Installation

Venue:

Faculty of Arts and Humanities,

CEPT University,

Commerce six roads,

Navrangpura,

Ahmedabad.

Date: 02.02.2009

Time: 10.30 am to 6 Pm

Participants: Narendra Raghunath, Hansil Dabhi

Every door beckons us into an enclosure, yet we often find ourselves passing through doors in search of freedom. Behind each door, we encounter a belief, a faith, a culture, a heritage, an ideology, complete with conventions and promises of a brighter tomorrow. Burn doors...

(We extend our sincere gratitude to the Faculty, Mrs. Sharmila Sagara, Mrs. Suchitra Sheth, and Dr. Seema Kanwalkar for their wholehearted support. Their effective pre-installation communication contributed to the success of the show. We thank them for voicing our thoughts to our viewers as we remained silent throughout the day.)

Review of Performance Art Installation in Times of India dated 03.02.2009 by Mr. S D Desai

Modern practitioners of art confront form and sometimes the conventional aspect of meaning underlying a concept. In the process, at times, they dramatically blur lines of demarcation between art forms. Two postgraduate students of arts and communication at the new premises of CEPT’s Faculty of Arts and Humanities near Commerce Six-Roads did that with a piece of performance art installation Burn Doors’.An unusual spectacle greeted invitees, visitors and passers-by right at the gate the entire day on Sunday. On the right of a rostrum covered fully snow white was a navy blue door slightly damaged at the top. In the centre were statues of two human figures covered with faded yellow sheets of cloth. A closer look revealed them to be two still and mute persons, represented by two students, Narendra and Hansil.At their feet were a variety of books, fiction, mathematics, yellow pages and all open, but their pages half burnt. Thick large borders of pure white enclosed the rostrum area. The word performance’ roused anticipation, but there was no movement, no sound. Those who had gathered round the novel work of art started figuring out keenly what it signified!Portals to conventional preserves of knowledge a library, a shrine, a heritage site, a museum, for example do not open to infinite knowledge and wisdom. They lead to enclosures within enclosures. The performance art installation, involving space, time, performer and viewer, stops at making the statement. The viewer, normally a passive one at a gallery, gets animated and activated for a participatory experience.Sneaking up to performers when they were left alone, I tried to assess their role. They were agreeably sensitive and articulate. “We are experimenting communication with silence,” they said. On being asked, how many people understood their work, they answered, “There were only a few who heard and understood Buddha.” One of them added reassuringly, “Today the whole world listens to him.”SD Desai
Times of India

Contemporary art concerns on art and artistic merit

In 2003, under the title “A Dead Shark Isn't Art”, the Stuckism international gallery exhibited Eddie Saunders’ shark, which was first put on public display two years before Hirst's 1991 “the physical impossibility of death in the mind of someone living” in his Shore ditch shop, JD Electrical Supplies, and asked, "If Hirst’s shark is recognized as great art, then how come Eddie’s, which was on exhibition for two years beforehand, isn’t? Do we perhaps have here an undiscovered artist of genius, who got there first, or is it that a dead shark isn’t art at all?" The Stuckists suggested that Hirst may have got the idea for his work from Saunders' shop display”... (Extract from Stuckism group web site)

This extract from the Stuckism groups’ grouse against Damien Hirst, if read along with the failure of Stuckism and astronomical success of Damien Hirst, the idea of 21st century art (read end of 20th century art) becomes almost on face to society . Split open pregnant cow in formaldehyde, bed with dirty linen and used condoms (Tracy Emin), names of men with whom she made love ( Tracy Emin) the idea of British art was a blast in nineties to art lovers across the world.

The advertising czar, Charls Saatchi, with his new found love for art when he first saw Jackson Pollock’s untitled painting at New York gallery, the British art lead by Damien Hirst did become paranoia for art world for some time. The biggest change brought out by these new idioms for British art was the undefined meaning.

Materials, ideas, colors, forms and its presentations all have under gone a drastic make over. The taboos of conventional society were torn apart to the extent that the brinkmanship of artists often blurred the boundary between sarcasms and madness.

Damein Hirst turned out to be the biggest cult figure of this new idiom. The developments that have changed the world art may not be as simple as this, but certainly the impact had been tremendous. There were other movements in Europe itself and in America, where the power play of the national identities, like the German, French and to a great extend the revival of Russian paintings played different tunes.

Damien Hirst never did his work himself; he commissioned most of his works outside agencies and artists. For world this new art and artists were a complex phenomena difficult to accept. Social conventions were at a toss in this new idiom. For example on 10 September 2002, on the eve of the first anniversary of the 9/11 world trade centre attack in an interview with BBC News Online Hirst said
“The thing about 9/11 is that it's kind of like an artwork in its own right ... Of course, it's visually stunning and you've got to hand it to them on some level because they've achieved something which nobody would have ever have thought possible - especially to a country as big as America. So, on one level they kind of need congratulating, which a lot of people shy away from, which is a very dangerous thing." (BBC) The thing about 9/11 is that it's kind of like an artwork in its own right ...”

Although this outrageous comment has resulted in a public outcry and subsequently he had to issue a statement through his company, Science Ltd for hurting public sentiments, this was a clear exemplification of the mind of new age art.

What Hirst acknowledged in public as art was used by media for almost hundred years since the photography was invented. They sold war time and disaster photographs for circulation and TRPs. Even the Governments were using those images for propaganda for its visual impact. During Iraq occupation, USA has successfully used the coverage of “shock and Awe” to derive public support.

But when someone like Hirst claims artistic merit to it, becomes a public dismay, because for public, it may be a fact that horrendous visuals are being used for media agendas, but for them art stood for “something else.”

And the Hirst art protested against this “something else sensibility”. The public agreed or disagreed, accepted or dismissed this “shocking and its resonance”, which stood between eccentricity and gimmicky or manipulation and creativity, certainly have taken and reflected around the Globe, including in India.

In India although there were many movements and practices that were simultaneously evolved, but a “never before” global acceptance and affluence were derived by some artists who were following this new idiom.

Many new artists dare to “strip” against the conventional norms of Indian art. Many of them even stripped and converted themselves as art pieces ( Chintan Upadhyaya, Baroda, Subodh Gupta, Bombay). The idea of Indian art did not remain Indian any more. The opening up of new avenues, the reach of television and computers, the virtual possibilities of marketing and mass reach, emergence of affluent Indians across the world etc have the changed the way Indian art behaved from 1990s.

This new idiom is projected as “migration of Indian art to Universal art”. Many new artists, like Krishnamachari bose, TV Santosh, Riyas Komu, Chintan Upadhyaya, Partho, Biju Patwardan, Sudarshan Shetty, Shibu Nateshan, Subodh Gupta, Bharati Kher ,Jitesh Kallat, Atul Dodiya, Anju Dodia, Sheela Gaud are few among hundred others, who took the limelight of the new found vigor in Indian art.

Many of them become globe trotters and foreign University residents.There were changes taking place in the idea of gallery concepts as well. Gallery owners were not any simple rich house wives who were spending their past time. They become highly professional and financial consultants and had the ability to torpedo the markets. They have created global opportunities and large spaces, where the artists experiment and explored new ideas and materials with bigger possibilities.

Lot of new markets emerged with changing affluence and economic development. They meant business and sold art for prices and auctions which were unimaginable a decade ago. In India this has lead to a new found acceptance by public. More and more media space or public space has become available for art and artist.

But somewhere down the lane, another reality has also started emerging.The language of this new art is not any more remain Indian; often they were accused of facilitating the creative expressions for western sensibility.

Art was happening from metros and were showcasing for the metros (or at least the projected acknowledgement of Indian art was such to a particular segment of society who spoke English better than their mother tongue).

Here it becomes important to note that this drastic change in the sensibility is not only restricted to fine art. The changing scenario or emerging financial affluence and global reach have changed the whole priority of fine art and performing art in India. The multiplex films, designer’s dresses, food taste, architectural concerns, financial expectations, all were undergoing change.

While on one side if this new reality was taking shape of the society, on the other side a contradicting reality also was emerging. This would be better understood, if we take the cases of many counter movements shaped up during the period. The objections to MF Husain paintings, Baroda MSU fiasco and Mumbai art gallery instance where painting had to withdraw for its nudity, anti dance bar movement in Mumbai, anti jeans or anti cyber café movements in Lucknow and anti Valentine’s Day movements by Shiva sena etc are some of the classic examples. Often the public found many of these new found aesthetic idioms as outrageous to their culture (although the awareness of cultural idioms is a questionable issue).

Whether art should necessarily be responsive to a national conscious or should it be Universal in appeal? becomes a big question. Since 1920s when the progressive art movement was started, this remains as a complicated issue. If we accept the argument that art needs to be responsive to national conscious, since culture is often misrepresented as fanatical orthodoxy, history is evident that in India all such movements who argued for a nationalistic orientation finally resulted in firming up of regressive fundamentalism.

But at the same time, if we accept that art should only be for Universal in appeal, then the question of what is Universal becomes equally important. History is again evident that the oriental art becomes important in western world only when the west adopted such practice, which otherwise got sidelined as ritualistic craft.The early twentieth century experiments by western, particularly European artists in African (Picasso), Japanese art (Art deco) are classical example for such development.

Hence the question of Universal art should be considered for a serious discussion in India now. Aping western sensibility might have sufficed for the primary concerns of acceptance in world forum, but continuity of these idioms will only push the Indian art to second grade degradation in world art.

If we dispassionately asses, the much celebrated Chinese art of the day misses most of the Chinese versatility and aesthetics their thousands of years old culture offers. They are producing more of second grade European copies than the Chinese creative expression.It is not only about Indian or Chinese art. It is also about the case of all nationalities across the world.

With the changing world order and its changed priorities, the art with its big role in its cultural space, should negotiate the world with mutual admiration and contribution. It should always stand next to one another. It is not that, only political, economical and geographical priorities are changing in a globalised world, but even the way the art is considered is also undergoing tremendous change across the world.

Today the idea art as mere investment has taken a toll around the world.Kindly allow me to quote from an early note of mine)

Although it is bizarre to be judgmental in art, time and again the prevailing art of the times has always forced the artist to make a choice.

On one side, while the artist suffers from ambiguity over the objective of the art as a representation or subject on the other side, the artist also suffers from an even greater ambiguity about his/her own existence —that is, whether “art is a career to shock or a practice in self expression”?

With the radical developments in communication, medium and avenues in the last one quarter of the century, while the former ambiguity has positively contributed to the world of art with inferences and experiments, the latter one has unfortunately did not contribute much in terms of a formidable conclusion.

It always remained an open-ended debate in the minds of artists. In the past there were many, who have taken a clear stand of practice over shocking like Van Gogh, Gauguin etc, whereas some others like Dali opted for showcase over the practice.

But again in majority of artists, practice is seems have taken an upper hand over shocking as a conscience prick. Even at the height of showcasing, Picasso did Guernica and Goya did his Maja and black paintings. These instances of “conscience prick” could be seen resurfacing again and again in every master. Renoir’s Luncheon of the Boating Party(12), Vermeer’s The Little Street(13), Poussin’s The Funeral of Phocion (14), Holbein’s The Ambassadors(14). Delacroix’s Liberty Leading the People (15), Rosetti’s Monna Vanna(16), Hopper’s Nighthawks(17), Munch’s The Lonely Ones(18) and Constable’s The Hay Wain(19) are few among the lot.

Interestingly, often these works were the ones that at a later date survived as the best of these masters. It doesn’t, however, imply that these were the only works that are best in terms of skill, craft and composition. It only meant that these were the ones that stood apart in terms of its response to human expression in treatment — the meaning of art.

Hence at a time when art is judged by its price tag, the question whether art is to shock or is a practice becomes very important since price tags are mostly led by the shock waves of auction manipulations.Art shock waves are often performances and if we draw a parallel with cinema –the ultimate performance —the most successful revenue generator of the day will be dumped as an old flick in a couple of years when Eisenstein, Vittorio De Sica, Akira Kurosawa and Chaplin will be rewound again and again for the ages to come.

Film can make a killing as a gross earner for its investment in its short life with its mass subscription but art with its limited subscription will never make a killing. Either we accept art as an investment that requires well-defined artistic merit or carry on to create a ‘tulip bubble’ of 1637.

Then the answer for our question ‘art – shockwave or is it a practice’ will be self-explanatory.

But the biggest challenge would be as it has always been, remains the question of artistic merit. Since most often merit is assessed from success in terms of name, practice, marketability, money that artist command in the society!!!

Idea of form in art

"Destruction of the point is the line,

Dimension, the real.

But the point has no dimension,

From point to line,

Unknown are

The before, after, and the between

Beyond is a concern and limitation is real

Virtue to visible

And

Visible to known,

When do they begin…?

When do they end…?

A question can be a question

Only when the questionable exists..!

So, when do they exist…?

…Form….!”

When we delve into the chapters of human evolution, the concept of form emerges as a prominent factor, possibly even preceding the notion of the primordial, or God, depending on one's perspective. It's not that the idea of God supplants all other forms in human evolution as the ultimate achievement; rather, God represents faith—a form that has been practiced and manifested continuously for thousands of years in human history. While the concept of God itself may still grapple with formative issues, "What is a form?" may not be the most challenging question to explain when it comes to God.

In specific conditions, an idea can be effectively contextualized as a form within an expressive framework, such as dimensions, constructs, or continuums. However, when the idea is removed from these conditions (which are themselves a form), the question of "how does a form develop?" becomes a complex puzzle for human intellect, encompassing both physical and metaphysical understanding. Throughout history, thinking individuals have addressed the issue of conditional and unconditional explanations in two distinct ways.

One group of thinkers attempted to deconstruct the universe into its fundamental components, as exemplified by Sage Kanada in India and atomists in the West. On the other hand, science and art have sought to comprehend the cosmos by exploring relationships, dimensions, and entanglements through theories like relativity, quantum mechanics, string theory, aesthetics, and expressions. The inherent complexity of these explorations, whether in thought or practice, lies in the fact that they often employ one abstract form, yet to be fully understood, to explain another. If we define intelligence as the application of experience to possibilities based on empirical knowledge, then the concept of abstract forms explaining other abstract forms becomes an absurdity in comprehension.

The linguistic limitation of words, where individual letters or words may not carry their full meanings, perhaps explains human fascination with order and structure as forms in language and life. Intelligence, devoid of thought, is merely an experience. It's essential to note that without language, thought cannot exist, and without thought, there can be no structures or forms. Setting aside the metaphysical idea of the development of Space and the required primordial intelligence, if we focus solely on human evolution, the connection between form and intelligence becomes evident.

Furthering this argument on the relationship between form and intelligence, we realize that the process of communication, one of the first forms developed by our primitive ancestors, was not primarily an intellectual procedure but an evolutionary adaptation. The same applies to physical forms—they are evolutionary modifications, nature's deliberations on its components, and the idea of form in art. However, these natural modifications become artistic representations only when they align with the structures of aesthetic thinking in the human mind. Therefore, as far as the human mind is concerned, a form "takes shape" within the mind, not in its physical existence. This process of isolation, selecting one form among many, marks the initial step in structuring human intelligence.

Returning to the earlier argument, "intelligence without thinking is only an experience, and it's important to note that without language, thinking cannot exist," we can now see a clearer explanation.

In keeping with this argument, we must also acknowledge that if a form originates in the mind and requires intellectual intervention to perceive it, then considering intelligence as a continuum in evolution and contextually constructed, achieving a complete physical or mental form remains an elusive goal for human life.

The quest for form, from ancient days to modern virtual reality, through primitive realism, magic realism, animism, geometry, and all other human engagements with form over thousands of years, tells us this same story. The art of form is no exception.

Primitive art and possible concerns

From the time immemorial, among the dark cave interiors, when the first impressions of visual explanations were left behind by our ancestors, certainly the formations of an objectivity without intellectual trimming, should have been a reason for concern.  As noted by Gorden Childe, recent discoveries point out that   "many of these litho age foot prints of civilization are not explorations of naïve mind but were training laboratories of an inquisitive mind and later date were the submissions of a faith". There are evidence many of these drawings were rejected by erasing or crossing , indicate a preexisting idiom of language or an hierarchy and structure  of depiction. Also there are evidences of real impressions of spears and weapons in the drawings of hunting scenes indicating may be a possible sorcery or black magic. Since geometry was still a distant possibility for them, it is also not improper to assume that their primary concerns could not have been the spatial composition.

In this context the Indian myth of development of aesthetics on visual art becomes significant. It says boredom brought forth the concept of aesthetics to human civilization. It is quite evident from initial days of litho age to later date, as the social priorities changed from individual survival to collective social existence in the due course when the drawings were grown from natural depiction to a complex imagery, the gradual development of aesthetics completely was in tune with socio cultural development. Although when there is very little conclusive chronology to write the prologue, it is very difficult to derive a definite idea of historical past,  according to historians, studies show between falsification and facts,  we may be able to broadly classify the development of primitive art into three stages: primitive naturalism, Animism and geometric.

According to Arnold Hauser,(1) “primitive naturalism advances from liner faithfulness to nature, in which individual forms are still shaped somewhat rigidly and laboriously, to a more nimble and sparkling, almost impressionistic technique. It is a process shows a growing understanding of how to give the final optical impression increasingly pictorial, instantaneous and apparently spontaneous form." His observation is very significant given the fact that these drawings were remarkable in skill in terms of stroke quality and rendering to emulate a perfect realism. They drew what they saw, although like a casual photographer, their concerns had never gone beyond the idea of capturing the view. Here the question of primitive art becomes important because. After all why did it came into existence remains a big question.

What was the idea of these visual impressions?
Considering most of these drawing are found among the darkest corners of the caves, an exhibition of an artistic expression or decoration could not have been their primary motive.  Also, many of these drawings were superimposed one on the other destroying the decorative effect. Walter Benjamin(2) in his study says “ There are in fact, as has been noted, two different motives from which works of art are derived. Some are produced simply in order to exist, others to be seen. As far as the idea of “to be seen”, H Obermailer (3) argues that “ in these pictures we find – as, for instance in Trois-Freres- combined animal masks which would be quite unintelligible without a magical intention”. In this context it is also important note that if the idea of some arts were for the purpose of magic or worship, there should have been a pre-existing awareness among the race about social and physical limitations or practice. Otherwise the idea of prayer would not have been arisen. It also indicates a systemization of intelligence and communication in society to the extent an ability to concede to “fate” or “natural and super natural” came into existence.

Here it is significant to note that although there is evidence to prove the existence of magical world of paranormal in primitive art, so far we are unable to find any such conclusive evidence to indicate the existence of the magical world of illusion in those drawings. Archeological evidence across the world clearly establishes the fact that throughout the early Paleolithic period there was hardly any style change actually took place in depiction of visuals . But evidence from across the world proves during the Neolithic period with the emergence a progressive social structure, the human civilization did make the beginning of experiments in visual art.

But during the Neolithic period, with the emergence of a progressive social structure, human civilization did start an experiment with the idea of visual representation. Geometric patterns started to appear to represent forms and linguistic symbols came into effect by organizing space and they learned to isolate specific forms from rest. Human figures with triangular, semicircular and strait lines, started evolving with better details like dotted eyes, nose, weapons and breasts. But Gorden Childe(4) reminds us “ It should not be seen this change to settled community life as an all too precisely demarcated turning point and thinks that on the one hand, even the Paleolithic hunter dwelt, in the same caves probably for generations and on the other hand, that primitive land economy and cattle rearing were connected in the early stages with a periodical change of a certain time.”The gradual progression of wild insecure human to more progressive farmer and cattle breeder also had transformed human relationship and conditioning of visual art. They have acquired more effective command over communication and expression. But unfortunately also grown were the concerns for losses and destruction that they had to encounter in life. Most of these fears and concerns were attributed to the consequences of metaphysical manifestations by those limited intelligence. The birth of spirit, separated from physical body was one such development.

At this point of time,   organically a vertical division started to evolve in human life such as  Good and bad, visible and invisible, mortal body and immortal soul so on and so forth and the list began to grow endlessly. Also divided was the idea of art. Two distinctive stream of art- one ritualistic and another decorative came into prominence.Arnold Hauser (5) says “ The magic view of the world is monistic. It sees reality in the form of a simple texture, of an interrupted and coherent continuum, but animism is dualistic. It forms its knowledge and beliefs into two world system. Magic is sensualistic and holds fast to the concrete, animism is spiritualistic and inclines to abstraction. Further another historian Herbert Kuesus thinks this is one prime reason why Paleolithic art reproduces things true to life and reality, while Neolithic art appears a stylized and idealized super world to ordinary empirical reality.”.The work of art not any more were to remain visual impressions or duplication rather the frontiers were expanded, forms were explored and the ability of rational thinking for abstraction started exerting a major role in human expressions. Their visual domain surpassed the narrow confrontational idioms to an attempt to understand a comprehensive existence. But the ability of rational thinking also contributed materially to human society in comparison to animistic explorations in a big way. One such great achievement surely was geometry. The implications of geometrical innovations were so profound in human history that no other style could sustain such a long period in history of art as a major force. It continued in art from BC5000 till BC500.

Ref:
1. Arnold Hauser, The social history of art, P:5
2.Walter Benjamin 1936,V,P.45
3 H Obermailer Altamira, pp -10-20.
4. Gorden Childe – Man makes himself – P 80
5. Arnold Hauser, The social history of art, P:15

Key issues design community is preoccupied

Throughout history, humanity has continuously adapted to the evolving times and their consequences, necessitating reformation or decisive action to meet functional needs. From ancient cave dwellers to modern gadget enthusiasts, the complexities of human life demand equally intricate functional adjustments.

Every individual operates on two levels in life: the personal and the social. It's essential to recognize that people often navigate both simultaneously. Thus, whenever collective or individual issues are addressed for functional sustainability, the tension between the individual and the collective arises. Without addressing this tension, the breakdown of relationships due to communication failures will persist as a significant issue for humanity.

Mahatma Gandhi's statement, "You must be the change you want to see in the world," underscores this reality. The question of when an individual ceases to be just an individual and becomes a social factor isn't merely a matter of theory or practice. It's a clash between competing ideas and practices—communism vs. capitalism, religion vs. spirituality, science vs. faith, technology vs. aboriginal practices, automation vs. manual skills, production vs. sustainability, industrialization vs. ecology—the list goes on endlessly, like a multi-headed hydra with many facets.

When the subject of design cannot be isolated from its abstract-art holistic context, designers face multifaceted challenges in their work. On one hand, they grapple with the clash of ideas, and on the other, the collision of practices. Consequently, designers often find themselves taking ideological or practical stances in their work. Since every problem presents both vital ideological and practical contradictions, it becomes a significant challenge for designers to take a clear position in their design.

Furthermore, many of these ideological and practical issues undergo continuous shifts in meaning over time. As the meaning changes, some of the previously viable solutions themselves become problematic. History bears witness to numerous such developments. Setting aside the issue of changing meanings, let's focus on the challenge of taking a position in design.

Allow me to share an anecdote to illustrate this complexity: Once, a person was rushed to the hospital after a severe accident, leaving him with multiple wounds on his limbs and torso. In excruciating pain, he begged the doctor to save him. The doctor, assessing his condition, had to deliver a difficult message—the patient might need to have both his hands and legs amputated. Shocked, the patient asked if he would survive after such a procedure. After a lengthy pause, the doctor, with sympathy, replied that he didn't know, but it would certainly relieve his pain.

In today's world, every designer, whether in social or industrial fields, is compelled to adopt a position similar to that of the doctor—sympathetic and desiring to provide solutions. However, they can only offer pain relief based on their individual judgment, and regardless of their decision, there will be consequences.

Crucially, like the doctor, designers must earn their livelihood from these situations to sustain their practice. Hence, Mahatma Gandhi's words resonate: "You must be the change you want to see in the world."

Idea of faith and its development in Greek Philosophy- the origins of Christian and Islamic faith

Idea of faith and its development in Greek Philosophy:the origins of Christian and Islamic faith

By

Narendra Raghunath

Email: narendraraghunath@gmail.com

Scope of study/Structure: To historically understand the validations of philosophical arguments that shaped up western philosophy, Christianity and Islam in particular 

Philosophy to a certain extent is an idea developed by human civilisation in their effort to make a better understanding of his or her life. Ideas are usually built upon viewpoints and all viewpoints are to a great extend  a protest against one another. Aristotle says man is an animal that speaks. What he must have tried to explain is the fact that human is the only earthen creation that is capable of expressing an idea not only through verbally but also through a structurally coherent and rationally prudent manner.

Early Greek philosophy was not a focused effort on human centric living; rather they all were attempts by intelligentsia to seek the cosmic identity for human existence. The Homeric epics gave us pictures of the great adventurous years of early Greek settlements of 1400 BC when northern tribes conquered Greek peninsula. Sophists, the creation of subsequent development of social changes brought forth by the trade and commerce in cities like Athens with its democratic experiments could be construed as the first pragmatic effort of western civilization to address the issues of life through questioning. Sophists although detested at the later years by all and severely attacked by Socrates, but had introduced a new methodology of addressing issues of life “through justification and argument about cause and concerns where victory is important than truth” since victory is power to coerce the viewpoint.

Thales argued the world is for, from and full of God, while atomists denied its existence. Parmenides and his followers believed that all are immobile while Heraclitus argued all are in flux. These confusions of reality with not much of a material concern of living, led Protagoras to propagate “a human-centric philosophy of Sophists”. He argued a thing is either is or is not, nothing beyond. His view of world was simple. I believe, I experience, I feel so it is.

If one does not have the ability to hear, however one may try to explain sound to that person, the sound not exist for that individual. For this individual world does not require anything that has to do with sound; no creation or destruction. So one must create a world of his own according to his natural condition for living, including justice and community. This is a natural process. Protagoras argues that any artificial build-up against this natural order will not sustain or ultimately will crumble. But Protagoras interprets the “condition” also as “a virtue one needs to learn to a degree in order” to identify. From childhood one is forced by reward or punishment into an invented pattern of action (morality and ethics) to live together.

Sophists were skeptical of divine, they disavowed any knowledge of divine, whether they exist or not, “since many obstacles on the path, obscurity of the subject and shortness of life”. (At the end most of the Skepticism treatises were burnt at the market of Athens)

Protagoras believed, since all our subjects are realized or experienced through five sensory organs, the existence of a relative subjectivism proves that individual as virtue of existence is a measure of all these. Elaborating this conditioning, “everything” is either known or experienced by the sensory organs; hence to maximize one’s existence, maximizing the experience is important.

For example to keep the sweetness of sugar relished we will have to keep on consuming it or to seek the warmth in winter we will have to keep on wearing sweaters. The best way of maximization is exclusivity or monopoly. It is the fruit of authority or power. Hence Protagoras argues the “aim of an argument is not truth but victory”.

But unlike early Sophists, who had the notion of universe of immobility of confusion of transition (for example when we division a motion as static periods of continuum in other words for example in a moving image of car chase, even as the car races the frames remain static frame by frame) Socrates believed , that like light from sun gives us vision during daytime, reality of life is the product of collaboration of Universal components not entirely of human produce.

He argued just as our bodies are composed of the same matter which is found throughout the Universe, so must our reason be part of Universal cosmic reason. Hence he argues against the Hippias’s doctrine that denies as a conformist Sophist, a universal validity for traditional laws. Socrates insists a universal conformity to law by the community, since community itself may act differently at different instances, yet it remains a community with certain laws that govern them together (or may be the identity).

Socrates also rejected the Sophists’ idea expressed by Glaucon that social restraint is a necessary evil. He argued it is a necessary good, since as per his argument of interdependence in collective motion, to avoid excess of individual maximisation that will cause a distortion for the collective interdependence that sustains society, a social restraint is necessary and good to maintain the order.

Socrates was against democratic election. He argued what will happen if same methodology is applied in selection of architects and navigators. His idea was not the rule of dictator, but was that of rule of philosophical judiciary which is not keen to rule. A resembling argument could be found in Lao-Tzu when he says, “When master governs, the people are hardly aware that he exists…If you don’t trust people you make them untrustworthy… The master doesn’t talk he acts; when his work is done the people say ‘amazing we did it all by ourselves’.”

Owing to his conviction of innate order of society, Socrates had an invincible belief in divine. Socrates believed unlike the atheist interpretation of God by Sophists, this precious centre of human life acting as a primary guiding force is immaterial, invisible, known only through its effects and is not made up of atoms. This non physical soul that manifests effects through physical body has since then been the one great issues of western thought. Individual is mortal with a short life span, but in this individual, the soul precipitates the effects and development. This one argument led western society down to present day to make the human body as the most important Constituency.

Plato argues in Republic, through highly disciplined and developed system of education individual can live well in accordance with reason and virtue. For him democracy was a lawless rule of crowd. Aristotle also accepts the idiom per se though developed into five methods of rule, including monarchy and aristocracy. But Aristotle clearly differentiates logic from philosophy.

Aristotle argues human mind is capable of reaching a conclusive knowledge about physical things but at the same time it would be difficult to evolve a precise knowledge about metaphysical subjects like mind, God and soul. Aristotle agrees with Plato and Socrates that the order exhibited in nature cannot be understood without the knowledge of the first pure intelligent source (in simple terms the creator- God) of order.

For Plato the knowledge for an act (practical knowledge) must be directed by a theoretical wisdom. For example, these days the choice of one’s area of study is often guided by the career options one wants to pursue. This practical decision often can be motivated by the suggestions or recommendations by friends, elders or may be determined by the socio-economic condition. In some other instances, it can even be based on how one wants to pursue one’s own life. This knowledge that precipitates the practical action when possessed by the self (own idea of how to pursue one’s life) or not possessed by self (recommendations and suggestions from others) is a theoretical guidance in nature. Hence, argues Plato, practical knowledge is subordinate to theoretical knowledge as a practical action could only precipitated by a theoretical knowledge.

For Plato this is implicit while for Aristotle it is explicit, because Aristotle firmly believed that all practical knowledges that are concerned with concrete actions are under human control. He believed in reason as primordial manifestation of source of power for better existence. He argued, along with Socrates and Plato, that for a better society, social restraint is good. Hence the virtue should be inculcated through education from formative years of childhood.

Conclusion

The establishment of reason as primordial source of force for better existence by Socrates, Plato and Aristotle was a great contribution to humanity-Intelligence as a path of analysis that is empirically accurate and profound for knowledge.

Influences of Greek thought on future religious tradition

Due to the concept of pure first order, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle clearly led the polytheistic cults to monolithic direction that at later date exerted an influence on Islamic and Christian monotheism. Subsequent to Alexander’s empire building for Rome and other trade related voyages brought forth lot of traditions and knowledge to later Hellenistic and Roman periods. During 4th century BC schools of Plato began to interpret Socrates method of questioning in purely negative sense and Pyrrhos founded skeptical order which received able followers across the world during subsequent centuries. It remained active till AD 150.

Atomist materialism established by Democritus and its ethical corollary of hedonism were maintained by earlier Cyrenaic school (5-4 century BC) and later on by Epicurus and Lucretius. From their point of view, man is made of tiny materials lost in chaos of atoms moving through void. The swirl of atoms is neither controlled by intelligence nor is it is fixed by law. Higher divine beings are dwelling in outer space, hence have no consequence to human life. So it is possible for free will and ethical decisions. Furthering the argument Epicurus identified goodness with pleasure. He argued when we are alive death does not exist and when we die we do not exist so why should death be a predicament in life? His argument survived till the fall of Rome.

In opposition to hedonism, taking inspiration from Socrates and Plato few thinkers established Stoicism and it persisted till the fall of Rome. They argued pleasure and goodness were sharply distinctive in existence and at times even opposed to each other. Goodness is the product of virtue and virtue is from Knowledge. There is always room for choice; even at death we have the choice. Stoic sages argued that we can sacrifice pleasure for goodness and duty. This was beyond the teaching of Plato and Aristotle. Stoic influence of life in accordance with nature gave birth to the idea of “Natural law”.

After the closure of Plato’s school by Emperor Justininan in AD 529 some scholars combined Plato’s ideas with Aristotelian elements to give birth to “Neo Platonism”.

Combining both the arguments they built the philosophy, whereby advancing Plato’s confidence of human ability of knowing God, they argued that the pure first order is supreme and that we cannot attribute quality and quantity to it as that itself is the quality and quantity. Being quality and quantity, perfection and imperfection manifests in itself – the supreme. They took on a dim view of social life. Every individual should attain salvation and for that one should exercise certain moral and civic responsibilities including prayer and devotion. Then one would attain freedom from body and unity with God- the salvation. St. Augustine was greatly influenced by this and played a major role in the medieval Christian thought.

By 8th century most of Plato’s and Aristotle’s books were translated into Arabic and hence exerted crucial role in Mohammedan thought. Many of the neo-Platonic ideas were taken from very different contexts resulting in the development of new philosophical schools. Avicenna (980-1037 ad) and Averroes (1126-1198) presented two great influential works.

Reference :

1. Concept of Man, Edited by PT Raju, Dr. Radhakrishnan,

2. Routledge Philosophy guide to Plato and the Republic- Nickolas Pappas: Routledge :Tailor and Francis group

3. Nicomachean Ethics:Edited by Roger Crisp: Cambridge text on History of Philosophy

4. Spinoza :Michael Della Rocca: Edited by Brain Leiter: Routledge :Tailor and Francis group

5. Oxford hand book of ethical theory: Edited by Paul K moser: Oxford University press

6. Reasons and the Good:Roger Crisp:Clarendon press:Oxford

7. The story of Philosophy: Will Durant

8. Ancient Greek Literature: Krishna Chaitanya: Orient Longmans

-->