|
|
|
| Free E-magazine |
| Subscribe to our Free E-Magazine on Sculpture. |
| Learn More |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Home > Types Of Sculpture > Techniques and Expressions > Static Aspects of Sculptures
| |
| | Static Aspects of Sculptures
| |
| |
In Indian sculpture, the principles of the art are stated in easier way to understand by virtue of the exceptionally close relationship between the imaginative forms of sculpture and the terminology of cultivated speech. Therefore, a long tradition and the synthesizing habit of the Indian mind have combined to form a system of conventions that allied visual art and poetry very closely. Actually, Indian sculptors had never developed units of form, a basic indivisible forms covering less ground than the terms of poetic speech.
 This is concluded from, the classical Amarakosha Sanskrit dictionary, provides separate terms for the upper arm, the forearm, the hand and the elbow; but the wrist is merely known as karabandha that is the `hand attachment`. Triceps, biceps, vastus externus, and so on were not found in the poetic consciousness, so certainly, they were never developed as units of form in visual art.
Therefore, to gain static or plastic form various techniques were used.
In the same way, the face is conceived both in speech and sculpture as a simple & straightforward additive summary of forms used for indicating `nose`, `eyes`, `eyebrows`, lips`, `chin`, `cheeks` and `forehead`. But in western Hellenizing art, all sorts of systems consisting of many smaller units relating to bone structure, musculature and flesh-folds were developed.
The main strength of the Indian technique is that its forms were never multiplied and subordinated beyond a reach of the poetical understanding. Almost all compositions are articulated from a single enclosed shape, which do not overlap with other so can be understood clearly one by one. The Indian sculptors were also careful so that lesser details never infringed upon the major masses into which the composition was laid. For example, surface ornament is often reduced to linear patterns that is raised upon or incised into the major masses without altering their shape.
 The forms used for draperies or jewels are usually closely subordinated to the forms of the body, therefore most of the carvings in Indian sculptures of clothed figures look as if they were nude. Similarly, the draperies can only be visible when they hang free of the body. Draperies that are appearing in this way as a mere appendage to the nude body are also a mark of status, like the elaborate jewelry.
The most complex & difficult formal group is the head; into it all the features that are having emotionally salient characteristics, have to be incorporated. Then too it remains as a compendium of clearly distinct and self-consistent units that are identical with each other. As a result of this, the character, inflexions and individual meanings of the individual forms were able to convey very subtle exploitation by means of plastic metaphor.
Convexity Used in Forms
After all, the most striking characteristic of the forms employed by Indian sculptors is use of forms. All the units of form in which the surfaces of Indian sculptures are divided are convex, and the only true concavities in the whole of Indian art are seen in special cases. Strongly influenced from the west the art of Gandhara has traces of western touch in the treatment of the leading ideas of skeletal or demonic figures, as the eye sockets and belly of a disease goddess, and in the free-hanging parts of draperies.
But, not at a single place in the whole fabric of Indian sculpture do concavities appear in the picture & treated as the formal units, only by the Donatello, Michelangelo or the artists of Gothic Europe it is noticed. Actually, the hollows on Indian sculptures are only the places where convexities can be seen, and so, appear as smooth linear channels. It is even possible to establish a connection of this fact with the Indian theories of reality.
It is very much real to the Indian eye, like a pot or fruit gives evidence of its content of space by its convexly curved surface. Similarly just as Indian medical theory stated that the life of the body is completely dependent on its content of vital breaths, pranas, so the adequacy of a visual form in expressing a reality is dependent on its containing space. In this way, Indian sculptures define and limit their own space because they do not fit into an already existent space continuum, where they can move freely. Therefore, the system of relationship, which is used to compose the work, depends upon this factor.
Unless this characteristic approach in the form of the Indian sculpture has realized, one can not draw proper meaning out of this work. It depends on the method of making of his single figure, a total self-contained continuity & building them further out of volumes with its deeply rounded sections that are intelligible from the main viewpoint and change smoothly and continuously. Then appear the exterior lines and channels primarily for defining the eyes or the wrinkles on the belly. So it looks as if one experiences them from inside the skin of the sculpture, as rhythmic punctuations in the contained plastic continuum. This is the main reason for Indian sculpture offers to the spectator an invitation to self-identification.
Linear articulation of changing and varied volumes mainly demands that both sides of the volume be clearly intelligible in relation to each other. The Indian art could not accept the view of such as, the volume of a calf-muscle offered by much European art, in where only part of a contour is made visible to us, and the rest is lost in a hollow that does not allow its other contours to get defined.
This consideration is mentioned before, as it was stated that Indian sculpture is fundamentally relief sculpture accounting for another of its characteristics. This clearly shows the absence of any kind of crossings or complications of contour on the figures. Resulting in emphasizing the great stress on the recessions of the side surfaces of sculptures.
Powerful Impression
Truly, much of the impact of the greatest Indian sculpture from the earliest times has been a product of careful exaggeration that is made in the depth of the continuous recessions of the side surfaces. The distance from the edge of the frontal plane to the bounding contour at the back of the recession is often as per the criteria of pure measurement, greater than its natural proportion. To preserve the plastic effect of the carving, it is kept continuous. This results on the spectator positively, as the emphasis on the depth of purely convex forms can be seen through it. The impression generated from employing plastic or statis forms denotes the strength of the sculpture.
 So, it can be said that most Indian sculpture has been made to produce an over-ridingly powerful impression, just in a single viewpoint. Excellent examples of this are the figures of musicians carved on the upper stage of the Surya temple at Konarak, and the sculptures of the Elephanta cave temple.
But this is also true that there are exceptions to this general rule. Seen in the art of many South Indian bronzes that have been carefully constructed to offer `truthful` aspects for showing all four sides. This type of image was primarily mean to show procession and viewed from many sides, unlike iconic images of Indian sculpture.
Due to the adherence of Indian sculpture to the ground, the conceptualization of the empty or negative spaces between figures and parts of figures indicates an important positional feature of it. In fact, these negative spaces are often carefully formulated in sequences of clearly articulated closed and simple forms. So, it won`t be an exaggeration to say that the aesthetic effect of many of the works of Indian art depends upon the total effect of solid form and negative space, each carried to its highest formal power.
| |
| |
|
