ART IN GENERAL EDUCATION
M. S. PRAKASA RAO
‘General
Education’, the new entrant in our curricula, has found a name and a habitation
in the courses of study leading to the Three-Year B. A. Degree. Although the
basic question–“How general should General Education be?”–still remains to be
satisfactorily answered, there seems to be unanimity of opinion that Art must
needs be one of its essential components. In the
If
‘General Education’ is introduced as a modest but effective measure to correct
a certain academic imbalance in our educational system, its Art ingredient
should be particularly welcome. With the new awareness of the responsibilities
that universities must discharge in a free country, it has been realised that “steps had to be taken to integrate
university education with the main streams of the cultural life of India”.3
We often talk with a tongue, glib and oily, about the glories of the Gupta Age,
which are hardly conceivable without any idea of the Dharma-Chakra
Buddha at Sarnath or the XVI Cave at Ajanta. And it is precisely these monuments of Indian
achievement that, till now, our curricula left severely alone.
Specialisation
is a blessed thing; it is, however, not blessed enough to cover the ignorance
of the learned about the expression of man at his best in the realm of Fine
Arts. Einstein desired that “the school should always have as its aim that the
young man leave it as a harmonious personality, not as a specialist”.4
A lop-sided development of the human mind may largely explain the collapse of
conscience that is writ large on our contemporary public life.
Stressing
the need for a balanced growth of the pupil, the Radhakrishnan
Commission observes: “In a well-planned educational system, opportunities
will be provided, at every level, to the pupils for the exercise of their
reflective powers, artistic abilities and practical work.” 5 In
fact, to this end the Commission indicates the function of each one of the
courses of study which it prescribes for the first university degree. Among
them, “Arts like music and painting help to educate our emotions and impart a
certain grace in living”.6 It will be
remembered that the ancient Greeks put Music and Mathematics at the centre of their curriculum.
Culture,
a rather elusive concept, expresses itself through language and art, through
philosophy and religion, through social habits and customs, and through
political institutions and economic organisations. As Prof. Humayun Kabir observes: “Not one
of them is separately culture but collectively they constitute the expression
of life which we describe as culture.” 7 If so, it is clear
that a nodding acquaintance with fine arts is an indispensable element in
culture. The ‘Nagaraka’ of Vatsayana
is not merely a town-dweller but a man of culture, and among his ‘Lakshanas’ which the sage enumerates, is knowledge as well
as practice of painting.
Although
the term ‘General Education’ still covers an area bounded by uncertain and
shifting frontiers, its aims have been stated in more or less precise terms. In
the language of the First Study Team of experts “it seeks to restore
transmission of culture as an essential function of the university, thus
helping it to escape the consequences of producing civilised
barbarians”.8 Again, according to the latest opinion, it serves “to
bring to awareness, and transmit to the individual, the distinctive features of
his great heritage of ideas, ideals, institutions and achievements”.9
A
genuine attempt at the appreciation of works of art is sure to develop in the
pupil a sense of proportion and harmony, of grace and delicacy, of design and
beauty. It is not inconceivable that a mind that lovingly dwells on things of
beauty, such as the Elgin Marbles, ultimately grows into the image of what it
contemplates. Kalidasa illustrates his theory, “Akara
Sadrsah Prajna”, through
the words of Priyamvada that nothing but virtue
imbues a body so handsome as that of Dushyanta. 10
The Expressive Arts
It
is, of course, not the purpose of General Education, that
has Art on its curriculum, to produce poets and painters; it would be enough if
it enables the student not to feel that he is an utter stranger in a company
where Art is the theme of discussion. At this juncture, it is perhaps in order,
if the value of the study of a specific fine art, say Painting, is briefly
re-stated. Painting is as old, chronologically speaking, as civilization; more
than that, it is a faithful index of that civilization at every stage. It
happens to be not merely the earliest but a constant and unfailing medium
available to man to convey his meaning or message. Nothing can be more
revealing, more fascinating, than a study of his progress from the Cro-Magnon
drawings in the
From Precept to
Practice
The
case for Art in General Education may be made out easily: it is, in fact, very
much like pushing at an open door. However, in translating the idea into action
lies all the difficulty, which might well reduce an
incorrigible optimist in educational reform to the verge of despair. For
purposes of experiment, the theory has to be rewritten in terms of curriculum,
syllabus, equipment, staff and even techniques of teaching. Precisely in this
realm of practice, unity in proposing a reform immediately gives way to
diversity in policies and programmes. The following lines of procedure are
suggested as the safest and the barest minimum which is not likely to invite
any serious difference of opinion.
Arts
are usually classified into fine and applied arts, presumably on the ground
that the aesthetic element predominates in the former, and the utilitarian aspect
in the latter. (It may incidentally be remembered that Croce
holds that, since the arts have no aesthetic limits, “any attempt at an
aesthetic classification of the arts is absurd”.) 13 Still, as the
arts are, physically speaking, innumerable, any suggestion regarding their
total and simultaneous introduction, in view of the prevailing acute shortage
of resources, amounts to a counsel of perfection. Hence the choice of fine arts
alone, however arbitrary, is enforced on us, tailoring our aspiration to suit
our capacity. In the American institutions the term ‘fine arts’ seems to be
limited to mean only painting, sculpture and architecture; special mention of
music and drama as separate subjects is often made; while, curiously enough, no
specific mention of dancing as such is ever made.14 (It may be noted
in passing that Bharata Muni’s
Natyasastra treats dramatic art (Natya) as a blend of both dancing and play-acting; but at
present these two are regarded as distinct and separate arts.)15 The
Bhagavantam Report recommends for Indian universities
a course in fine arts under Humanities Section-C, restricting the scope of the
subject to its American counterpart.18 Now, even after we limit the
field of study to fine arts alone, the problem still remains whether all of
them are to be introduced simultaneously or in a phased programme. The solution
will be in favour of the first alternative, if it is
based on an academic approach, and the second alternative if based on the
resources position.
Content of Curriculum
A
good beginning could be made by introducing in our collegiate curriculum two of
the fine arts–music and painting–for the simple reason that they require the
minimum equipment. But any observant educationist would have noticed that the
allied arts of dancing and acting are by far the most popular with the student
community. On this account they may be accorded priority; the only factor that
might prove a deterrent to this procedure is the rather elaborate equipment
that would be necessary; if not actual dance recitals or production of plays in
the class-room, at least appropriate films have to be projected, taking
advantage of the audio-visual education apparatus. Even in the case of music,
this kind of difficulty is not altogether absent; but it could be overcome by a
gramophone and a set of records, supplemented occasionally by demonstration by
experts brought from outside. With regard to painting, all that is required is
to assemble a sizeable gallery of prints of Old and Modern Masters and keep them
in the form of a permanent exhibition in the lecture hall. More desirable
results in teaching this subject could, of course, be obtained if slides of
details of masterpieces are projected by means of an epidiascope.
Sculpture
and architecture could be introduced in the late stages of this
experiment. The suggestion, however, is to be understood not as a reflection
upon their importance but simply as a recognition of
the money costs and practical difficulties involved. In respect of these
subjects, showing a few prints or photos of carvings and of monuments is only
the beginning of teaching; it should be supplemented by an exhibition of
three-dimensional models; indeed, the lesson is not to be regarded as complete
unless and until the class is actually taken to the real work of art at the
historical site and exposed to its full impact.
There
is a strong argument against this kind of introducing the arts by stages, which
merits serious consideration. Art is indivisible, in the sense that, while a
piece of art may have parts, its appreciation has none. A line of action that
detracts from the totality of impression stands condemned. Again, all arts are
alike in their origin, springing out of creative joy, and also in their
end-product, fructifying in things of beauty; they differ in means and modes of
expression alone. For Michael Angelo, painting and sculpture were but
alternative techniques; Tagore presumably took to painting when he found poetry
inadequate to fulfil himself. Further, the works of
art of an age reveal a family likeness, although no two of them are twins. The
striking similarity that is to be found in the sculptured reliefs
and panels of the Amaravathi
Stupa and the contemporary frescoes in Cave X at Ajanta, are to be traced to the influence of
identical canons and traditions of art.17 The same religiosity
inspires a mediaeval illuminated manuscript and a Gothic cathedral. Therefore
it might be in the interests of effective teaching of the subject if the fine
arts are simultaneously introduced.
Technique of Teaching
Imparting
General Education may be equated with training in world citizenship, characterised by a cosmopolitan and universal outlook. In
my opinion, one fairly effective way in which this consummation, devoutly
wished for, can be achieved, consists in arranging the content of the
lessons as a sort of random harvest; the golden ages of all civilizations must
compulsorily find a place in the syllabus; for instance, a lesson on graphic
art should encompass a Chinese screen, a Moghul miniature,
a page of Persian calligraphy, an Egyptian hieroglyph, a Greek vase design, an Ajanta fresco, a portrait of Rembrandt, a Pompiian wall decoration, and an Altmira
cave-drawing,–all drawn from the ends of space and time. Such eclecticism is a
safeguard against the type of orthodoxy that found true art, till the end of
the nineteenth century, only west of the
Only
the essential strands that form the pattern of a syllabus in regard to the
subject of Art can be suggested here. Whatever else it may or may not contain,
the syllabus should not fail to include
(i)
a course of lessons, in broad outline, of
the history of the arts selected; and
(ii)
a
course of lessons in appreciation of the nature and products of each one of
these arts.
Yale
and Harvard universities, among others, in
Whether
a third section on tools and techniques is to be included in the syllabus or
not, is a debatable point. Some knowledge of the craftsmanship of the artist,
and of the discipline imposed on him by the nature of the material he handles,
would certainly help in assessing the value of a work of art and getting at the
heart of its creator. Unless we learn something about the ‘rock-cut’, as
different from the ‘structural’, process of building, we will hardly be able to
understand the marvel of the cave temple at Elephanta called by Havell the Parthenon of the East. What poor compliment would
we be paying to the drawings of Durer if we remain
totally ignorant of the exquisite process of dry-pointing or etching?
Nevertheless, it must be remembered that technique can easily be the pitfall of
the teacher. Owing to misguided enthusiasm, if he expatiates on the brush work
of Van Gough and overlooks the spiritual agony of that Modern Master, he passes
quietly from ‘General’ to ‘Special’ education. So the decision must be left to
the discretion of the teacher.
I
suggest that the art lesson should proceed from, and revolve around, a specific
work of art. The direction of teaching is to be from the example to the thesis.
It is more desirable that clearly defined and indelible impressions of a few
select master-pieces of the world are left permanently stamped on the student’s
mind,
rather than that a mass of nebulous theory, a catalogue of
names, and a kaleidoscope of images is deposited in it. For instance, a lesson
in music would be truly educative if it were to centre
round such outstanding illustrations as one of the Pancha
Ratnas of Thyagaraja, a
sonata of Beethoven, an opera of Wagner, a devotional song of Mira Bai, a piece of Sama Veda, a chorus of gypsies, and even a
simple air of pastoral folk.
I
further suggest that teaching in this context should consist in revealing the
meaning and message of the artist and his work. For example, it should be
easily possible to convey the message of G. F. Watts’ famous painting
‘Hope’–that hope, often blind to adverse facts, tends to hang on by a single
thread. However, difficulties are bound to arise when the meaning of the artist
can hardly be separated from the mode of expression. For instance, in the case
of the well-known statue of ‘The Thinker’ by Rodin,
the rough and bold chiselling of the surface is an
index of the rugged shape of ideas in their formative stage, and the muscular
robustness of the body indicates the vigour of
thinking. Every artist has his own ‘language’, in which he conveys his meaning,
and this language is none other than the ‘technique’ of expression. Still
another problem which confronts the teacher of art, is that in respect of
certain modern schools of painting and sculpture, which pursue art for art’s
sake, ‘expression’ is an end in itself; a painting has no ‘story’ to tell, no
‘message’ to convey; for it is simply a play in patterns of line and colour, an exercise in formal relationships. Here, theory
and practice, meaning and expression, are all intertwined. Therefore, unless
some idea of all of them is given to the class, justice can hardly be done to
the subject.
Despite
these difficulties inherent in the situation, the purpose of General Education
would be served so long as the basic principle, that the lesson is to be art-centred, is scrupulously followed. The student is to be
exposed to ‘art experience’. “The aim should be to see that he has fed his soul
not only upon great books, but also upon great pictures and great music.”
20 And during such a process, gently and by degrees, mostly unawares, the
mystery and magic of art should steal over the student through a myriad,
subtle, subterranean channels; Beauty has to cast its spell over him and
possess him. “All art depends on experience, and if one is to know art he must
know it not as fact or information but as experience.” 21
Consequently, the student should be helped to live in a climate of art, and to
contemplate its finest manifestations at first hand. That is how he would learn
to see Life as he sees Art.
1 The
Encyclopaedia Americana, Edn.
1959. Vol. IX. Page 649.
2 Proceedings
of the Academic Council, dated 24th February, 1958. Branch X, Syllabi to be
prescribed later, Pages 106 and 133.
3
“University Education in India”, Government of India, publications Division,
Page 15.
4
Statement quoted by the University Education Commission Report, 1948-49, Vol.
I. Page 120.
5 & 6 Ibid,
Page 40.
7
“The Indian Heritage” by Humayun Kabir, November,
1955. Edn. Page 44.
8
“General Education”, Report of the Study Team, 1957. Ministry of Education,
Government of India. Page 13.
9
Report of the Third Indian Team, as stated at the Faculty Conference on General
Education, S. V. University, October 7, 1958.
10
‘Sakuntala’ of Kalidasa, Act IV.
11 Discovered
in 1940; reproduced in Life Magazine, International Edition; said to belong to
the period 26,000 to 12,000 B. C.
12 Report
of UNESCO on “The Artist in Modern Society”, 1954. Page 106.
13
“Aesthetic” by Benedetto Croce,
1955. Page 114.
14
“General Education” Report of the Study Team, Ministry of Education 1957,
Government of India. Pages 33 to 52.
15
“The Natyasastra” of Bharatha
Muni, translated by Manomohan
Ghosh, 1950. Pages 8 and 48.
16
“General Education”, Report of the Study Team. Pages 77 & 79.
17 Vide:
my article on ‘Painting in Andhra’, Telugu Encyclopedia, Cultural Volume,
Telugu Bhasha Samithi,
1959.
18
‘Aesthetic’ by Benedetto Croce,
1955. Page 8; and “Vision and Design” by Roger Fry, Pelican Books, 1937. Page
238.
19
‘General Education’, Report of the Study Team, 1957. Pages 37 and 40.
20
‘General Education’, Report of the Study Team, 1957. Page 77.
21
‘The Humanities’ by Louise Dudley & Austin Faricy,
1951. Page 4.