It
is true that Indian art is idealistic while that of
In
their art, the Greeks sought to idealise human
beauty–in Aphrodite, Venus, Dionysus. Hence they
concerned themselves with aesthetic canons of realistic art.
The
basic divergences between Greek and Indian aesthetics cannot be denied.
Nevertheless there is a vast realm of affinity. According to Plato our love of
beautiful things on earth is due to the search of our soul for Absolute Beauty.
All visible things are types in which are mirrored the beauty of eternal
archetypes. In the symposium Plato says that man has to use the beauties
of the earth as steps along which to mount upwards to the notion of Absolute
Beauty. Socrates declared: whatever is beautiful is for the same reason good.”
In
The
basic Indian aesthetic concept is the concept of the Rasa and as its
corollary Ananda. The Rasa or aesthetic
emotion kindled in the reader or the hearer by the poet and playwright,
is impersonal and universal. In the ideal world of art even pain and grief are
robbed of their sting and can communicate aesthetic pleasure. The Greek
rhetoricians understood that tragedy for all the apocalyptic intensity of its
emotions, leads the spectator towards a state of serenity. Such is the
aesthetic pleasure afforded by the tragedies of Sophocles
and Aeschylus. Oedipus the king is caught in the treacherous mine of the
machinations of fate and is driven from suffering to suffering until he blinds
himself and becomes an outcast beggar. There is an
aesthetic element in this spectacle because it gives us an
enlightening glimpse into the ultimate powers of moral valiance of the human
will. To speak in the language of Indian rasas, there
are the vira (Heroism), Bhayanaka (Fearful), Karuna
(Pathos) and Adbhuta (Marvellous) rasas evoked by this
supreme tragedy of Sophocles. Aristotle speaks of
pity and fear as constituting the tragic emotions,
leading the spectator towards catharsis, and recognises
the comic or the droll (‘Hasya’ rasa)
as a distinct element in comedy. Thus there appears to be some affinity between
the Indian and Greek systematisation of human
emotions evoked by a work of art.
In
Poetic
experience, in Indian thought, was not merely a grace of cultured living but a
basis of moral conduct and the highest spiritual experience. Tagore believed
that aesthetic sensibility was a surer foundation for morality than moralising. The Greeks, likewise, looked to poetry for
truth and moral lessons rather than for mere aesthetic delight.
Plato always relates art to life and beauty of art is for him only an image of
the beauty of life. Hence, he declared, that the poets must be
compelled, on pain of expulsion from the state, to express the image of good in
their works. Greek tragic spectacles, for all their aesthetic beauty, served as
a basis for moralising as well, delineating man’s
duties and responsibilities in relation to the will of the gods.
Serenity
is the hallmark of Greek and Indian art alike. The Buddha, the Shiva are embodiments of serene beatitude. Even Nataraja for all the apocalyptic fury of his dance bears
the same smile that lights up the countenance of the
Buddha (E. B. Havell). In Indian art the animate and
the inanimate, the world of man and the world of nature are shown in perfect
harmony as the expression of the one spirit. In Greek art one
notices the same serenity in the sculpture of the Venus, Apollo, Aphrodite and
others who crowd the Greek hierarchy of gods and goddesses.
Even tragedy for all its cosmic turbulence leaves the spectator in the state of
Catharsis–“Calm of mind all passion spent”.