Folio of Sursagar (Sur’s Ocean) depicting the poet Surdas and the cowherds of Braj. Udaipur, court of Amar Singh II, ca. 1700.
Session 09: What does it mean ‘to see’?
How does sight work? Is it possible to see without being seen? Is there a realm of visuality or imagery that does not require the physical organ of the eyes? In this session we will map the conceptual terrain of ocularity and imagery.
We’ll begin by considering the concept of darśan, which can be translated as ‘sight,’ ‘seeing’, and ‘vision,’ and that implies being seen as well as seeing. Diana Eck has sketched a general outline of the valence of this term and how it works in practice; we will try to see both how this term helps us understand certain phenomena as well as the limitations of this idea for understanding modes of seeing and visuality in South Asia.
We will also explore the ‘meaning’ of vision by studying a case in which literal vision (ocular vision, use of the eye) is subordinated to a different type of vision (that of the mind/heart): this is the case of Surdas, a sixteenth-century saint known for his enchanting poetry about the god Krishna. We’ll read John S. Hawley’s reflections on what Surdas’s supposed blindness ‘means’ for the tradition and listen to Hawley’s thoughts on blindness, age, and religious devotion from an interview in 2020.
Finally we will read two lyric verses by Antal (ஆண்டாள், originally Kotai), a ninth-century saint from the region of Tamil Nadu. Antal in considered to be one of the Alvar saint poets of the early bhakti (devotion) movement in southern India and is famous for her poems articulating loving devotion to the god Vishnu.
Readings:
Antal. The Secret Garland: Aṇṭāl’s Tiruppāvai and Nācciyār Tirumoli. Edited and translated by Archana Venkatesan. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. 22. Aṅkaṇmā Ñālattu, 23. Māri Maḻai Muḻañcil, pp 72-73.
Eck, Diana L. Darśan, Seeing the Divine Image in India. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996. Chapter One: Seeing the Sacred, pp. 3-22.
Hawley, John Stratton. “Why Did Surdas Go Blind?” Three Bhakti Voices, 248-263.
Session 10: What do images ‘do’?
How do visual images (be they two-dimensional or three-dimensional, representative or abstract) convey meaning? Can images sometimes do something more than convey meaning, such as compel us to perform certain acts? What is the difference between visual and aural language? We will explore these questions by closely studying a number of different objects from South Asia—including paintings, carvings, statues, and graffiti—in the context of primary and secondary readings on the nature of sight and visual perception.
We’ll begin by reading Christopher Pinney’s essay on what images ‘want’ and the multi-sensory, embodied experience that constitutes darśan and other forms of seeing in South Asia. The essay challenges us to reconsider our relationships to the objects of our perception.
Peter Graif, on the other hand, challenges us to reconsider the transparency of language—in particular visual, signed language. What is really going on when hearing and deaf peoples communicate with one another? Graif sheds some light on these questions by writing about encounters with deaf and non-deaf peoples in Nepal.
Readings:
Pinney, Christopher. “Piercing the Skin of the Idol.” In Pinney and Thomas (ed.) Beyond Aesthetics: Art and the Technologies of Enchantment. New York: Berg, 2001. pp 157-179.
Graif, Peter. “Language as a thing seen,” Being and Hearing: Making Intelligible Worlds in Deaf Kathmandu. pp 85-96.