Some thoughts on Types of Art

"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
-Saul Bellow


I am sure that many a people have already spend countless hours in discussing and writing about a commonly agreed upon definition of aesthetics and its classification. I certainly can't have any pretentions of coming up with anything novel or more exact or more comprehensive than what is already known. Reams and reams of philosphical literature is dedicated to concept of beauty and its relation to art. Many great philosphers starting right from Emmanuel Kant uptill Benedetto Croce in the previous century have come up with novel ways of defining the concept of what constitutes art and what is its relation to beauty. Much of it expressed by means of almost huge mounts of logical analysis and is usually very complex.( Though complexity is no gaurentee of correctness, as in many cases the complexity of the logical thesis is sometimes an indicater to an error in the basic premises). My own objectives are more modest as I want to avoid all this complexity and still come up with a simple enough definition of art and its types, which is satisfactory to my intution and compatible with my daily life and which may help me in better appreciating my own like and deslikes regarding it. It would also help me in explaining those like and deslikes to my friends and kin and provide a context for comparisons. To avoid all the mountains of logic and definitions which are usually resorted to in defining aesthetics, I will let go all objectivity in relation to quality of art. I would also consider the concept of beauty to be purely subjective and deny any universality in its appeal. This would ofcourse make the job quite easy, which is exactly my original goal. In the term "art", I would include the classes of cinema, literature and painting. Though, while making my definition, I am limiting myself to those few categories only, I am sure that those definitions would also make sense for most other fields which are commonly held to come under the purview of the the term "art".
Now let us move to the definition.

Art is an artificially constructed stimulus whose only goal is to affect our state of mind.

Not much information here, and unfortunately I couldn't come up with any better definition. But then, the definition of Art itself is not my primary goal. The commonly held beliefs and associations with real life instances would suffice to define the term for me. What I am more interested in defining is a generic classification which would apply to all categories of art equally and would additionaly provide some psychological insight into its effect. The primarily classes which come to my mind are those listed below.

1) Reflective Art
2) Escapist Art
3) Intellect based Art

I define Reflective Art as the art which act as a reflection of the society or an individual. In the psychological context the primarily object of study is the mind. This may be collective mind, as in behavior of the society or it may be solitary mind as in the mental habits or feeling or prejudices of an individual. Sometimes instead of the mind the thing reflected may be purely physical as in a landscape painting or literary description. But even this purely physical reflection is linked to the quality of perception of the artist and is ultimately indicative of the artists mind. It still tells us something about ourselves. Like a mirror it makes us aware of something which we may already know partially or unconcisously. Many times the artist may choose the reflection to be purely non-judgemental, e.g. a comedy or tragedy or an impressionist painting. Other times it may be more judgemental and take a form such as satire.

Escapist Art is the second primary class. It purpose is not to make us aware of that which we are or what we already know to some extent. Instead here the primary purpose is to create new mind content or reinforce the existing content. Here the author may create new notions in the mind of the reader and helps him escape his own reality. Sometimes the existing stereotypes of the reader may be use and enhanced for the use of the artist. Notice the difference with the reflective art. Reflective art may also use the existing prejudices of the reader, but only to make him aware of them. On the other hand escapist art would usually enhance the readers stereotypes taking them as a fact rather then pointing to those. Genres like Science Fiction or Fantasy may be taken to be forms of Escapist Art. In fact almost all of the Hollywood and Bombay Cinema is also form of escapist art.

Both the above types have their uses depending on the need or state of mind of the person viewing at a given time. Escapist art lets us escape our everyday existence, by making make use of our imagination and escaping into newly created worlds. Reflective art help in understanding our true being and being more aware of it.

Intellectual art can be considered the third kind of art. It is very rare I am not sure if this can be rightly considered a form of art. Here the artist or producer relies entirely on stimulating our intellects rather than our feelings. Since art is most of the times directed towards feelings or sensation, without the intervention of logic, this form may be very different from other two categories. Here everyday existence is neither studied nor are new worlds created. Most of the times some intellectual problems are put forth which helps to get the involvement of the logical faculty of the reader . Another much simpler way of delineating intellectual art from the other two forms is that it is the only form liked by Colonels.

Visit to my childhood Home (Manali and Dharamshala)

Visited my childhood home at Manali last week. Manali lies in Kullu Valley, sandwitched amidst the tall snow-covered Himalayas. I hold the himalayan region to be my favourite among all places I have visted. You will see why in the photographs.

View from front of my former home


View from the backyard


Flanked by my parents at Solang Nala. This place is a popular skiing resort for most part of the winter. These days hand-gliding enthusiasts take over during summer.




My Sister with another one of those things she finds to be cuuute...




Colonel would ofcourse not approve of my choice of the mountains and valleys shown above, since they would hardly agree with his idea of beautiful geometric shapes and topologies.

J Krishnamurti and Humor

J Krishnamurti was one of the greatest philosphers and spiritual teachers of the past century. I can't call him a great thinker, because that may go against the basic grain of his teaching. And though the word philospher is also not accurate as well, it is vague enough to prevent any misunderstanding. Throughout his life he held talks and discussions around the world in which he would put forth his ideas and reflections. Many times people would seek him out and hold one to one discussions with him. Among his greatest admires and friends are included people like Aldous Huxley and David Bohm. You can always find him to be highly logical, atleast for things that can be discussed with logic. As Ludwig Wittgenstien wrote in his Tractatus-Logico Philosphicus "What we can't speak about we must pass over in silence". And he did pass over the many a things in silence. But for the rest he was known to be brutally honest and would not spare anyone with half lies. Not many people were able to appreciate his honestly, let alone understand him. Though always extremely polite, he was sometimes not able to fully appreciate the concerns and sensibilities of ordinary people. Or maybe he chose not to. Hence many a times these talks, when viewed from our everyday life point of view, talk an almost humourous joke-like quality. Here, I plan to make a collection of some of those instances :-

1) I am reminded of a story a friend of mine told me. One day he listened to a conversation between Krishnamurti and a man who did not want to be enlisted as a soldier and sent to Vietnam. He did not want to kill people. After explaining all this Krishnamurti interrupted him and said, "Yes sir, I understand all this. But what is your problem?" Again the man, being an American, explained that he probably would be sent back to the States as a conscientious objector and he might be put in jail. "Yes sir," said Krishnamurti, "but what is your problem?" "Well," said the man, "the judges may not accept my arguments and then I will have to desert because this is a filthy war!" Once again, Krishnamurti said, "Yes sir, I know, but what is your problem?" Whereupon the man said, "Listen, they might shoot me, as a deserter!" "Yes," Krishnamurti said, "they probably will, but what is your problem?"
2) Friedrich Grohe was a middle-aged German industrialist who got interested in Krishnamurti after reading one of his books. After retiring from his business, he approached Krishnamurti asking him to allow seting up a Krishnamurti school in Switzerland. Krishnamurti dissuaded him from such a step since it was very difficult to get teachers. When krishnamurti asked him whether he was married, he replied no, he was divorced. On which Krishnamurti grabbed his hand and said "very good".
3) ...

Kung-Fu, Tea and Zen

Bodhidharma was a Buddhist monk, credited with bringing Zen-Buddhism to China. Zen Buddhism is a school of Mahayana Buddhism popular in China and Japan. Derived from the word “dhyan” which means meditation in Sanskrit, it was later transliterated to “Chan” in china and “Zen” in Japan. Bodhidharma is considered the first Zen patriarch in China and 28th Patriarch of Indian Buddhism. He was born around 440 AD at Kanchi, in south India, in the royal family of Pallava dynasty. As the prince and heir to the throne, he was expected to follow his father’s footsteps and become the king. However, in his youth he encountered Buddha’s teachings and decided to renounce the kingdom and devote his life to their study. His father objected, but he offered to change his mind only if his father could save him from death. Having no way out, his father obliged. He studied Buddhism under his teacher prajnatara, who was 27th patriarch and a woman. In due time Prajnatara asked him to go to China and spread the teachings there, since Buddhism had started to die out there, and the Chinese emperor had asked the Indian Sangha to send an enlightened master.After a long and particularly arduous journey across both land and sea, he reached south China by ship in 475. Upon his arrival in Guangzhou and thence to the capital Nanjing, Emperor Wu-Ti, who had done much for revival and spread of Buddhism in china, asked for an audience with him. The meeting is most remarkable for the dialogue that ensued between them. Emperor Wu started by asking him “what merit have I incurred by his building many Buddhist temples and monasteries, translating scripture and supporting countless monks and nuns”. Bodhidharma replied “none whatsoever”. The Emperor was taken aback but persisted with his next question. He asked “What is the essence of Buddhism”. The reply was, “Vast emptiness and no essence”. This made the emperor angry and now losing all patience he asked, “Just who do you think you are”. “I don’t know”, Bodhidharma replied.Having been unable to impress the Emperor much, bodhidharma left the palace and crossing the Yangtzu River moved north to reach the Shaolin monastery (yes the same one of Bruce Lee films) in Ho Lan province. The monks initially refused him admission and he spent nine years meditating in a nearby cave. Later when the monastery admitted him, he noticed that years of sedentary lifestyle of copying scrolls had made the monks physically weak. He devised a regimen of martial arts from the synthesis of Indian forms like kalaprayat and Chinese fighting style of five animals, and taught these to the monks. These from later evolved in modern martial arts, which are known today by names of kung fu and tai chi chuan. Even today, Shaolin monastery is visited by students from all over the world and is considered as one of the foremost school for martial arts. Another apocryphal story attributes him with bringing tea to China. It is said that one day he got so upset at falling asleep while meditating and cut his eyelids in anger. Tea bushes sprung up from where the eyelashes fell. Even this story may have a certain symbolism, since the monks in ancient times did use tea many times for helping in wakefulness, a use that we make of tea even to this day.During his lifetime, he was able to make only four disciples. Among the four, his first disciple, Hui Ke, who cut of his hand to show his determination, before being taken by bodhidharma as a disciple, became his successor. Another strange legend is associated with his death. It is said that after a couple of years of his death, a government official reported seeing him in the Himalayas with a staff and from which hung a single sandal, and he told the official that he was on his way back to India. When this story reached Shaolin monastery, the monks decided to open his tomb. Inside they found only a single sandal.
And even though I so impressed by bodhidharma, I know what Colonel would say on reading this piece. "If only he were credited for inventing tomato soup instead of tea ....."