The western world had an impression since the thirteenth century that India has a tradition of the ancient art of sculpture making. Still, due biased opinions propounded by the orientalism, no efforts were made to elicit the true nature of that marvel and miracle until the nineteenth century. Before attempts were made to seriously look into the aesthetics of the traditional Indian art, it was believed that our ancient art depicted and followed some pagan culture and only portrayed the demonology. They also conceived our religions as bizarre and absurd.
This misplaced opinion was floated based upon a few confused and partial anecdotes and journals compiled by credulous travelers. Some credit for doing such impartiality towards the Traditional Indian art of sculpture-making goes to the art books that illustrated the artistic wonders of the realm. Indian sculpture making was stereotyped for no reason for centuries. This gave birth to an entirely anti-Indian ideology in the minds of westerns. This could be proved by empirical pieces of evidence.
Among circles of so-called intellectuals, Indian sculptures were disgraced through their spiteful speeches who never even made an effort to actually understand them. One instance proves the height of hypocrisy that persisted in those pseudo-intellectuals. How could one criticize something of which they know nothing about? One of the eminent philosophers, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel while delivering his university lectures criticized the art of Indian sculpture making despite the fact that he never saw any of the sculptures. He claimed that those were the “irrational forms of a fermenting fantasy”. These lectures formed the baseline for one of the most cherished books i.e. Hegel’s Ästhetik.
On the other hand, he wrote elucidation for Greek sculptures. He claimed that they served a definite purpose as they were perfectly balanced in the subjects of form and artistic vision. When Hegel was passing his corrupted judgments on Indian art, Indian art was going through a transformation of the highest order.
Europeans conducted the archeological studies of Indian sculptures that led to the systematic and corrected study of Indian aesthetics. The Regal interpretation of Indian art led to a different opinion altogether and that changed the ongoing perception regarding this glorious art form. But, intellectuals of the nineteenth century were hostile towards the Asian ways and they severely influenced and interfered the appreciation of beauty in Indian art. For a long time, the true nature of Indian art was shadowed by misinformation.
During this period, Greek art which was similar to that of Indian art was deeply appreciated. This was a great distraction for artists and this took all their attention from Asian art. Indian art got the attention but it was all negative and derogatory. John Ruskin is known for his denunciation of Indian aesthetics. He said, “Indian Art is the archetype of bad art of all the earth.”
These types of slurs were highly common in those times. India art and culture was a constant and easy target. James Fergusson was a pioneer of Indian Art. He was also a dedicated student who was intrigued by the beauty of the sculptures of Amravati. But, due to some reason, he couldn’t appreciate the artistic beauty in those sculptures independently. He could only do so after taking refuge in the Greek form of sculpture making.
Alexander Cunningham was also of a similar opinion. He also believed that Indian Art had a balance because it resembled Greek art. James Burgess stated in the state of such things, “high art has never been with the Hindu, as with the Hellenic race, a felt necessary for the representation of their divinities.” Despite the fact that Indian sculpture was a rich source of artistic beauty, they were never appreciated by the western world as their opinion has been influenced by biased orientalism, they were not able to break free from the dogmas and form a free and independent opinion of their own.
They defied the rules of reasonable judgment prudence that as intellectuals they should have shown. The reason was simple; because they thought that as colonialists they have right to look down upon whoever they want. They particularly and consciously wanted to judge the ways of the Indian artists.
But, sometimes, some words of praise graced the dignity of Indian art. Fergusson once remarked about the Buddhists stupa of Satna, Madhya Pradesh that goes by the name of Bharhut, “though very different from our own standards of beauty and grace, are truthful to nature, and were grouped together, combine to express the action intended with singular felicity.”
This trend was broken after India got independence in 1947 from the British. An exhibition displayed the art form India and Pakistan at Burlington House, London which changed a lot of people’s opinions about art. This freed form their long-held prejudices. Therefore, Indian art started to get recognition at the international level. Now, the might of art and culture and its diversity and richness is hailed by all.