“It’s a Non-Western Thing!

”: Exploring the Human Body in the Works of Art under

the Religious/Philosophical Traditions of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism in
Contrast to Western Ideals

“If you read this philosophical aesthetics, you see that, slowly, this notion of being able to be moved by the beautiful
and the sublime gets more and more attached as a European capacity to get moved to that.”

-Juana Awad

In a paper by Ananda Coomaraswamy entitled “Indian Images with many Arms”, it

was mentioned that some critics such as Vincent Arthur Smith and George Christopher
Molesworth Birdwood saw Indian art, particularly those that depict Hindu gods and
goddesses where they are portrayed with several arms or heads, as something that
“hardly deserves to be reckoned as art” and “unsuitable for higher forms of art
representation”. It should be made clear that the said critics originated from the Western
regions. Mr. Vincent Smith is Irish while Sir George Birdwood is Anglo-Indian, a person
of European descent who was born in India. Though Birdwood was born in India, he
studied in England and Scotland before coming back to Mumbai. At this point, you might
think, why are the nationalities and educational backgrounds of these critics being
highlighted? It’s because their lineage and education somehow explain their view of
Indian art.

To elucidate, it is important to review the history of the portrayal of human bodies

in Western Art. In a video entitled “A Brief History of Representing the Body in Western
Painting” by Dr. Steven Zucker and Dr. Beth Harris of the Khan Academy, an American
non-profit educational organization, it was stated that the ancient Greeks and Ancient
Romans portrayed human bodies with “great naturalistic renderings”. Such “naturalistic”
style was achieved by representing the correct proportions of human body and creating
a sense of form or three-dimensionality (in paintings) by playing with masses, volumes,
light, shadow, colors, and most importantly, perspective. Most of these attributes, like
proportions, perspectives, masses, volumes, and forms, also apply with their sculptures.
However, during the Medieval times, this naturalistic way of painting was replaced with
symmetrical, frontal portraits, with symbolic elements that take away the illusion of
“realism”. The paintings felt flatter and more two-dimensional. The painters have tried to
remove these human bodies (usually religious icons such as Jesus Christ, the Virgin
Mary, and the saints) from any earthly settings in order to achieve a feeling of
transcendence to the heavens. The reason for this was due to the belief of Christianity,
one of the leading religions in the West, that the physical realm is much less important
than the “hereafter” – the heavens. But, during the Renaissance, artists saw a return to
classical Greco-Roman traditions – again highlighting the importance of the natural world
(retuning the works of art to an earthly setting) and the naturalism and realism of the
depiction of the human body. This rebirth of classical traditions included spiritual images
of the Madonna, Jesus and his disciples, the saints, and so on. These religious icons
which were once abstracted, represented in a highly orderly and symmetrical
compositions, and devoid of earthly elements, are now depicted in a vast landscape, with
smoother and flowing forms that are more natural, and body parts that are highly
proportionate rather than abstracted. From here, one can surmise how Western artists
see the supremacy of naturalism and realism in art as “the high art”. If it weren’t for the
invention of the camera, which perfectly captures and duplicates reality, other artistic
movements such as impressionism, cubism, pop art, surrealism, etc., wouldn’t have been
placed in the spotlight. And even so, with the 20th century producing “modern” artworks,
artists who are able to paint or sculpt with realism are still seen by many as the more
“skilled” artists.

However, such importance to realism and naturalism is not a widespread

phenomenon. Different beliefs, different nationalities, different histories, and different
cultures result in different art styles. As such, the art of the West is ultimately different
from the Eastern or Asian art styles. Art is so diverse that even each country in Asia has
created a style that speaks of their own. Thus, it is a naïve act to apply Western standards
to Asian art traditions. However, the immense power of Western countries, and the result
of modernism and colonialism, has resulted to the greater reach of influence of Western
thinking into Eastern countries. Thus, sadly, the ingrained standards of aesthetics into the
greater population have resulted into viewing Asian artworks as “lesser in value” as
compared to artworks of Western artists. To quote Walter Mignolo in his interview by
Alvina Hoffman of the E-International Relations regrading the topic of Activism and
Trajectory, “Non-Europeans were supposed to be educated to understand what
Europeans said and did. Imperial or colonial aesthetics is a fundamental part in the
formation and transformation of the colonial matrix of power, which means also, a
powerful tool to silence non-Western conceptions of creativity and the corresponding
place that such creativity has in the overall cosmo-sense of the civilization in subject”.

In an interview by the “Affect and Colonialism Web Lab” (a generative space for
researchers, journalists, activists, and artists who are interested in the affective dynamics
of colonialism) to Juana Awad (a member of the Decolonial Aesthetics working group at
UdK Berlin), Awad mentioned that “the capacity to be moved by the beautiful and the
sublime in non-European context and in colonized populations gets relegated to a second
level of ritual practice, festivity, (and) their relation to the natural world, but get slowly
removed to that idea of art as an autonomous and non-functional subject”. Some of the
Asian art traditions that receive this kind of treatment are the religious and/or philosophical
art traditions of Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, and Islam.

The most famous artworks of Hinduism are the gods and goddesses of the Hindu
religion which features the duplication of body parts such as the arm and the head, and/or
the replacement of other human parts with that of animal parts such as the head.
Coomaraswamy stated in his paper that such duplication or replacement of body parts
are symbolic in nature. The duplication of arms represents their divine majesty and
superhuman qualities of the deities while the duplication of heads (mostly seen in the
beasts being killed or tamed by Hindu deities) represent strength and demonic qualities.
Such themes are common in both paintings and sculptures in the Hindu tradition.
However, western critics such as George Birdwood see these deities as “monstrous
shapes of Puranic deities unsuitable for the higher forms of artistic representation”.

How did Birdwood come up with such observation? It was mainly due to the fact
that he viewed this artistic works through the Western lens. In Jennifer Padget’s
“Mythologized, Idealized, Modernized: The Human Figure in Western Art”, she stated that
the idealized figure corresponds to notions of balance, proportion, and perfection of
physical beauty, and that in classical culture, these qualities are linked to the secular or
the divine, either symbolizing the image as a god or a philosopher. Thus, for Birdwood
who holds the same Western ideals for physical representation of the human body, the
deities of Hinduism portrayed through their art does not pass the standards of balance,
proportion, and perfection. And with the West artists putting emphasis on the importance
of realism, a god or goddess with several arms or heads is far from being “real”. Aside
form the depiction of numerous body parts, Hindu deities are also portrayed with strange
and other worldly facial features. For the Western view, such “other worldly qualities”
suggest a mythological figure – something that doesn’t exist and is purely imaginary.
However, for the followers of Hinduism, their gods and goddesses are not imaginary.
Thus, using a standard of what is strange and what is not through a Western lens
invalidates the beliefs of Hinduism solely based on their art forms.

Buddhism, on the other hand, which also originated from India and is closely
related to Hinduism, is more of a “way of life” wherein they see Sarnath Bodh Gaya, or
Buddha, as an example to achieving enlightenment rather than someone to be
worshipped. Thus, in the early art of Buddhist artists, Buddha was not physically
represented, rather he was symbolically suggested through lotus flowers, a footprint, a
horse with a saddle with no rider, a shade, etc. The representation of the physical Buddha
only emerged later on. The representation of the body of Buddha is proportionate and
realistic, however, its his facial features that challenges Western ideals. The image of a
Buddha is usually portrayed with long and rounded earlobes, large slanted eyes, the
usnisa or the protrusion on the top of the head, and the urna which is the raised dot in the
middle of the forehead. For the Western population, such traits are foreign to them –
strange. So, as they did with the Hindu deities, they might see Sarnath Bodh Gaya as a
mythological figure by Western aesthetics, but he is indeed a real person who established
Buddhism.

Another issue of Western ideals of art that arises in what the Westerners view as
art. Juana Awad gives an example of this by comparing an oil painting in a canvas and
an oil painting in a clay pot wherein the first one is exhibited in a fine arts museum whereas
the second one is displayed in an ethnographic museum although both works contain
paintings that used the same medium. For Buddhism, majority of their art is carved inside
and outside of their temples. Images of the Buddha, different stages of his life, and his
achievements and life story are presented as wall reliefs. They are not there purely for
viewing, but they also serve a certain purpose – as a part of the whole architecture.
However, these works are still sculptures, and is still considered as an artform for the
natives. However, western artists and critics may differ and raise objections upon such
topic.

In terms of paintings, both Hinduism and Buddhism use lively colors when
depicting their deities and leaders. In Western art, however, the use of vivid colors
suggests a “fantasy world” since such colors are not realistic and cannot be found in
nature or the real world. However, for both Hinduism and Buddhism (especially in
Hinduism), the role of colors is of symbolic significance that represents a painting’s
emotions or message.

Taoism or Daoism, on the other hand, a philosophical thought or religion which

originated in China, has a very different art style as compared to Hinduism and Buddhism.
Compared to the pictorial arts of the first two, Taoism uses blacker and earthlier or sepia
tones but can also include colors of green, yellow, red, and white. The common subjects
in Taoist pictorial arts are the two eponymous masters, Laozi and Zhuangzi, while other
depict members of the Daoist Pantheon.

Observing the composition and positioning of the human subjects in the Western
and Taoist paintings shows a large difference between two differing art traditions.
Western painters tend to favor object centered-scenes as compared to Taoist art which
emphasizes more the context with which the subject is immersed into. Western painters
also try to distinguish a foreground and a background to delineate the main subject of the
painting. This can be done through the positioning of the human figures, sizing, proportion
with regards to the canvas, and the use of colors that shall highlight the determined focal
point or subject. Taoist art on the other hand plays more on context. The subject is placed
in an environment without overpowering the “background”. Both the human subject and
its environment receive the same treatment with colors and shading. The horizon line in
Taoist art, as compared to Western horizon lines, are also placed higher in order to form
more of a “floating” or “panoramic” scene as compared to the West’s “perspective”. The
human bodies in Taoist art are also smaller in size as compared to Western Art in which
the subjects occupy at least fifty percent of the canvas. This might be a reflection to the
Western’s selfish view of seeing themselves as more important, as compared to the
Taoist’s view of “balance” with nature and the environment.

And then finally we have the Islamic art traditions. In Islamic art, the portrayal of
human figures is seldom. This is rooted to the belief that representing living beings, being
done by “image makers”, can be compared to the creation of living forms which must be
unique to God alone. As such, human figures in painting are often stylized or abstracted.
However, when used as ornaments, such as in the miniatures of manuscripts, the said
figures were largely devoid of any larger significance.

In a way, the portrayal of human bodies in Islamic art can be likened to Taoist
pictorial arts where figures are seen as a “part” of the scenery as they blend with the
environment and does not stand out as the focal point of the art work.

As discussed in this essay, there is a large difference between the artistic traditions
of Western countries and Asia, and one should not force a set of standards upon one
another. To quote Coomaraswamy, “What we may not do is to compare them with one
another in respect of their special conventions, as a test of value; it is the besetting sin of
the present age to endeavor constantly to measure incommensurables by a single
standard” and “Every art must be judged, first in accordance with such universal
standards, and secondly, in accordance with its own special canons and conventions;
never by the special canons of another art”.

At the end of the day, the works of art doesn’t only revolve around the Western
region. Art is part of different cultures; thus, it is varied, rich, and almost infinite. As
Coomaraswamy said, “There are no laws of art”.

Asian-image making traditions is a lot different than the representation of human

images in the West. One can be proud of their own depictions of art without the imposed
standards set by a foreign land. After all, it’s a non-Western thing!
REFERENCES

Affect and Colonialism Web Lab. (2021, November 1). Juana Awad about Decolonial
Aesthetics [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgeFzpf_F0w&t=394s

Asian Art Museum, (2009, November 13). Beliefs Made Visible: Hindu Art in South Asia
(Part 1 of 2) [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX85uiG86RA

Asian Art Museum, (2009, November 13). Beliefs Made Visible: Buddhist Art in South
Asia (Part 2 of 2) [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl6S0wdeWk4

Augustin, B. (2011, December). Daoism and Daoist Art. metmuseum.org.

https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/daoi/hd_daoi.htm

Bao Y, Yang T, Lin X, Fang Y, Wang Y, Pöppel E and Lei Q (2016) Aesthetic
Preferences for Eastern and Western Traditional Visual Art: Identity Matters. Front.
Psychol. 7:1596. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01596

Coomaraswamy, A. Indian Images with Many Arms. The Burlington Magazine for
Connoisseurs, Vol. 22, No. 118 (Jan., 1913), pp. 189-191+194-196.

Mignolo, Walter. Interview. Conducted by Alvina Hoffman. 2017, January 17.

Padgett, J. Mythologized, Idealized, Modernized: The Human Figure in Western Art.

Washington University’s Department of Art History and Archaeology (2011)

TeachMideast. The Real Story of Representational Art in Islam. Teachmideast.org.

https://teachmideast.org/articles/the-real-story-of-representational-art-in-islam/

Washington.edu. Buddhas. depts.wahington.edu.

https://depts.washington.edu/chinaciv/bud/5budmain.htm#:~:text=In%20addition%20to
%20the%20mudras,story%20of%20the%20historical%20Buddha

Zucker, S. and Harris, B. (2014, December 31). A brief history of representing the body
in Western Painting [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WxPx3_ZSBI