Tipu Sultan's Dreams and Michelangelo's Visions

1. CV Raman Pillai's classic Malayalam novel 'Ramaraja Bahadur', published over a century ago, is set against the backdrop of Tipu Sultan's invasion of Travancore (c 1790). 'Ramaraja' is actually Ramavarma, the then Maharaja of Travancore, a brave and stoic (and ageing) statesman. Tipu is a formidable antagonist, rather like a 'Kathivesham' villain in Kathakali.

It would be interesting to translate (with edits) a comparison made by the late scholar-critic N Krishna Pillai:
"CV invests Tipu with character traits diametrically opposed to those of Ramavarma. A benevolent and devout king, Ramavarma has no territorial ambitions on neighboring kingdoms and abhors any kind of violence except when mandated by the interests of his subjects. His prayers to higher Powers center on the welfare of his subjects. Tipu, on the other hand, thinks it his religious duty to attack and subjugate, with every power at hand, a neighboring territory controlled by an alien faith. The Travancore king leads a spartan and unostentatious life whereas Tipu is all for regal pomp and ceremony. Ramavarma tends to view those who failed in their duties with leniency and hates handing out punishments; Tipu is merciless with those who disappointed or betrayed him - and the severe losses suffered by people and places of worship during his innumerable campaigns never bother him. But the Sultan also has a royal sense of justice and chivalry and respects true greatness. His grand speeches in the novel - delivered in a suitably weighty dialect - show tremendous strength and a lofty presence."

IMO, a key point to be noted here is this: Keralan Hindu folk memory (especially upper caste) views Tipu as an abominable temple-destroyer but CV, despite being often accused of being an arch-conservative and upper caste sympathiser, treats the sultan very well.

Now let us look at Girish Karnad's acclaimed play (originally in Kannada, translated into English by the author) 'Tipu Sultan's Dreams' and see how Travancore and Ramavarma appeared to the Sultan - in the playwright's interpretation. Admittedly, Kerala is rather peripheral to the play and features only very fleetingly. Also note that exchanges between other characters happen mostly in Tipu Sultan's dreams and so they reflect what Karnad views as Tipu's concerns and anxieties.

-----------------

An exchange between the Maratha prime minister Nana Fadnavis and Malet, a British official:

Nana: Who are your friends?

Malet:Apart from your honorable court at Pune, Sir, there is the Scindia, the other Maratha chiefs, the Nizam of Hyderabad, the Nawabs of Carnatic and Oudh, the Rajahs of Travancore and Cochin.

Nana: A dreary lot. I can't stand Shinde or the Nizam and I mean to give them a good hiding soon. The others are beneath contempt! .... and I see Tipu Sultan of Mysore is missing from your list!

.....

Malet: Shall we stick to the facts, your Honour?

Nana: That's better; the facts!

Malet: Of which there is only one that matters to us. Tipu has attacked the Rajah of Travancore, who as I said before is one of our friends.

Nana: The Raja of Tiruvitankur is a mischievous little rat who would have kept a respectful distance from Tipu Sultan had he not been certain that (the Brits) would supoport his antics.

-------------

Tipu talks to Hari Pant, Maratha leader:

Hari Pant: We only want (to recover) what's ours (so we supported the Brits against you).

Tipu: And how long will it remain yours? Where's the Raja of Trivitankur in whose honour the English mounted this compaign (against me)? Thrown on the dung heap!

------------

At the end of the play, Karnad weighs in with full authorial force:
"When India became free, the families of Maharajas who had bowed and scraped before the British masters where granted sumptuous privy purses by the Government of India while the descendents of Tipu were left to rot in the slums of Calcutta."

Note: I have read elsewhere that Tipu used to consistently refer to Ramavarma as 'Raman Nair'. To the Nawab of Arcot, the same Raja was 'Maharajadhiraja Ramaraja Bahadur Shamsher Jung'. Not sure what this difference signifies, indeed whether it really signifies anything at all!
--------------------------
2. "Up above the milling and gazing, He Moons" (adapted from Borges's 'Tlon, Uqbar and Orbis Tertius')

I have known this 'dynamically powerful' figure on the Sistine chapel celing for several decades:

The Great Artists volume refers to it as 'Creation of Sun and Moon', which it manifestly is.

And quite recently, I saw the fresco being referred to somewhere as 'Creation of Sun, Moon and Plants'. Plants? Where? One went back to the Sistine and saw this fuller picture of the panel:

Sure enough, the plants are visible, sprouting from a hillside in an obscure corner. And the floating figure that seems to be blessing them into being is the same God who has just made the heavenly lights - I had totally missed Him!

As everyone knows, the immense Sistine ceiling is so teeming with striking figures that there is nothing very odd about one failing to notice this, er, faceless vision of the Almighty.

But on looking closer, I noticed something unusual about the plant-creator and searched online about how Michelangelo's cosmic vision shows God's backside so conspicuoisly, rather wickedly so. And lo, I was flooded with pages and pages from so many others, all struck by the divine derriere and trying to explicate it - some have imagined Michelangelo visualizing Exodus 33:20 - "You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!” - and some see the artist getting God to show His backside to some Pope he (Mike) detested - when the latter would be stationed at the altar in the Chapel celebrating Mass!

My two cents: God wasn't very evenhanded; He made the Sun and the Moon but did not Sun! But it is best that my Readers Google and Ogle!
-----------------
And finally, North Korean strongman Kim Jong Un appears above a shop in Chidambaram, Tamil Nadu that sells dairy produce. The reasons for this choice remains a mystery. The pic was contributed by Gokul Krishna, a student.

Gangetic Visions - 2

This is the (very long overdue) concluding part of the 'Ganga impressions' picture essay. I need to keep this going!
---------------
The Allahabad museum has plenty of ancient and medieval sculpture plus assorted modern stuff - special mention should be made of a largeish collection of modern art and Nehru memorabilia. Photography is prohibited in the sculpture gallery but the ban is not very strictly enforced so one cheated a bit.

An unusual medieval 'Mother and Child' group:

A very pre-columbian looking face:

A remarkable ancient wall carving with figures that look like miscievous putti frolicking among creepers!

A rather odd medieval carving... Not too sure of the theme:

An interesting bit of Nehruviana. A sandalwood carving, a present to the great man from the civic authorities at Sirsi, Mysore, showing, of all things, Viswamitra's amorous escapade with Menaka. Wonder what was being conveyed - indeed, whether anything at all beyond the merely visual was being conveyed!

-----------
Sarnath has a smaller but vastly superior musuem. It is focussed on ancient sculpture and is very well lit and maintained. But then, the powers that be have strictly banned all photography, which is ridiculous, especially in view of the absolute treasures they have.

A couple of observations:

1. The 4-lion capital, our National symbol, was described in our primary school textbook as depicting, on its pedestal, "the dharmachakra in the middle, a bull on the right and a horse on the left". We were told, the bull represents agriculture and the horse, the military - the "Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan" thing.
A lot of it was of course bunkum. For a start, the bull is not on the right and horse on the left - right and left make no sense simply because the blessed capital is a round thing. Apart from the bull and horse, there are two more animals on the pedestal - a lion and an elephant. From another angle, the bull will be on the right and to the left will be a lion(?) and from another the horse will be on the left and an elephant will be on the right. And all these 4 beasts represent the Buddha and probably, nothing much else. So, the national symbol is not the lion quartet but one specific view thereof. As to why this view was chosen, three of the lions have suffered damage - and the totally hidden lion has a broken face - so any other view of the quartet would have put the damage on display.

The lion capital is so superbly done - there is plenty online about its Achaemenid/Greek influences and the Mauryan polish and what not - and one could keep staring away at it for an hour and more. But, it is a terrible shame that an Indian is not allowed to photograph/video his/her National emblem; a shame that is infinitely worse than the Kohinoor still sitting in the London Tower. I would say, if the lion capital were to be shifted to the Brit Museum (where it would certainly receive the kind of treatment the magnificent colossal granite head of Amunhotep III has received), it would be a welcome development!

2. Most ancient sculptures here - the famous Preaching Buddha, a powerfully built Yaksha,... while not 2D reliefs are NOT fully 3D either - viewed from the side, they appear unnaturally flattened from front to back. Don't know why. The one exception to this is of course the lions.

Near the magnificent Dhamekh stupa stand this pair of ancient sandstone pillars:

They feature these marvelous 'Green Man' faces:

A 'door jamb' that still stands among the extensive ruins here...