Customer Reviews

Indian Art

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Vidya's book is a delight not just for the scope and content of the written material and references, but also for visual pleasures it provides to the users. Indian art is nothing if not immensely varied and rich, and Vidya brings this to the fore. I was delighted to see the way the Madurai Meenakhsi temple was treated, to see its Gopurams teeming with mythological figures and dieties of all kinds : an apt symbol of the diversity and richness of this civilization and of life that it celebrates, for in many ways Indian art is like life : beautiful and confusing at the same time, a buzz of forms , shapes, and materials, all with their own rationale for existence and appeal. Vidya's book tries to a give a very good idea of this, from the earthy Khajuraho to the elegant Elephanta, from the ancient Indo-Greek Gandharan Buddhas to the naturalistic Nayaka. A book to please both scholars and lay readers alike.

This is a significant improvement over Roy Craven's colonialist take on Indian art. This book is much more sensitive to the culture of India and its rich amalgamation of Vedic thought, the religion and philosophy of Buddhism, what we now term as Hinduism, and of course, later Islamic influence. Especially significant is the explanation of the narrative sculptural relief panels at Sanchi and Amaravati. Dehejia explains their rich narratives clearly - and what at first appears confusing becomes instead a rich tapestry of imagination. Her explanations also merge style with context; in effect, we understand these panels as they were understood at the time of their historical inception. She rightly de-emphasizes the dynastic and stylistically rigid categorizations that are so predominant in Western scholarship. A worthy and timely text. I highly recommend it.

While no expert in Indian art and architecture, I have been studying in this area off and on for about fifteen years. I have not encountered an introductory survey that was more balanced and illuminating. It is also well written and beautifully illustrated. The eccentric reviewer who accorded this book merely one star is obviously carping--perhaps because his or her own work was omitted from the necessarily selective bibliography. The other reviews have all been favorable up to this point, and for a good reason.

Vidya's survey is outstanding.Her exposition of the 'Rasa' theory in Hindu aesthetics should help non-Hindus to understand the alternative basis of art appreciation.She points out that according to this 'Rasa' theory the contemplation of a work of art must evoke in the viewer a state of "heightened awareness" of an emotion, the emotions being, erotic, comic,kindliness, furiousness,heroic,terrible,odious, wondrous and peaceful.Hindu aesthetics thus stressed the prominent role of the viewer's response in the appreciation of art.This theory was crystallized in the fourth century ACE.
One may recall Eliot's criticism of Shakespeare's Hamlet that it lacked 'objective correlation',i.e.,that when certain external facts which must terminate in a sensory experience are given, a relevant emotion should be immediately evoked.
Vidya also points out that in the visual story-telling adopted by sculptors in Ancient India, viewers understood that the lower part of a panel was near to them and the upper part further away.When this has been basically understood, displaying the objects in the 'background' of a relief as large and clear as those in the 'foreground' led to a legible telling of the story. Vidya says that ,therefore, perspective was a non-issue, clarity of of visual comprehension was the objective.
On the whole a very impressive survey. The photographs are also very good. I only wish Vidya had said more about Chola Sculpture like Dakshinamurthy and Bronzes like Parvathi in the Sackler Art Gallery, Washington.

It was a very good book. Very informative and helpful for classes. Beautiful pictures back up the writing and help you get a good idea for Indian art and architecture. "Indian Art" also helps you learn about the history of the Indus valley civilization and different archeological finds and theories based on those finds.

Excellent high quality product, lots of good photographs, well written, concise overview of complicated subject

I so wanted this book to be a good book on Indian art. But the truth is, very little in this book is worth anything. This book is written like a Lonely Planet guide, without the directions about how to get there.

After studying this book, you learn practically nothing about Indian art; nothing about the rules, why those rules were put in place, nothing about the depiction of emotions, style, geometry, use of colors, concept of beauty. You learn nothing about the technical aspects of Indian art. In fact, this book does not describe even in the smallest measure, the art culture, the detail work, and the life-long dedication of the artists and the teachers of art. Indian art did not just happen mindlessly by some cave dwellers with loads of free time to kill.

First gripe: Indian art is not about nudes. Absolutely not. No way. Despite all the fixation of the author about this. I can guarantee that the author will not be able to produce a single quote that states the nudes are more artistically important than the main subjects of the sculputures or the paintings. Lets be very clear here; that fixation on nudes promoted by the author is her own, not a traditional thinking in Indian art. The author appears to rate Amrita Sher Gill's drawings very highly. Ok, I understand, it is a matter of personal choice. Govt of India declared her work as national treasure. And, quite a bit of Amrita's drawing was about nudes. But Amrita's worthless opinions about Bengal school of art? Well, the author values them highly as well. Shocking!

Second gripe: most photos are atrocious, simple snapshots at high noon, most of the detail lost in dark shadows and sunlight specularity. In fact, the photos match the quality of the text, both equally shoddy and pepared equally carelessly. Often, she made comments about things not related to art. Page 37: "Latin mater and pater may be compared with Sanskrit matru and pitru". Those words are not pronounced as matru and pitru in Sanskrit, but roughly as matri and pitri. Matru and pitru pronunciation is simply regional language influence on Sanskrit. In the same page, she describes Indra as god of war. Indra is not a god of war, certainly not vedic Indra. She quotes an obscure Vedic verse to make her claim. Puranic Indra engaged in some wars with demons.

The comments related to art are superficial at best. I will not bore you with lots of gripes. I was shocked that she made no distinctions between Hindu art and Buddhist art. Many Hindu monks have commented on the subject. Therefore, this is not a trivial issue.

I cannot agree with the previous reviewers. The illustrations may be wonderful, but the text is vague and uninformative. There are some puzzling omissions. Dehjejia wrote a book some years ago on Orissan architecture, but there is only the briefest coverage of this topic (and she does not even list her book in the bibliography. Speaking of bibliography, there are so many important omissions that it would be difficult to list them all. For the general reader, or for use as anintroductory textbook, it would be better to use Craven's by now classic Concise History of Indian Art.