If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed or email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
Now pray (no pun intended) why no stone-throwing and rioting in this small restaurant? Don’t give me the twisted logic of gau-mata and baby Krishna. There are plenty of things wrong with that kind of direct symbolism.
Of course, I am not offended but simply weirded out. Forget Krishna, what the heck is the cow doing licking his ass? Is baby Krishna keeping the poor weirded out calf from seeing the strange spectacle? The calf is going to need years of therapy to get that image out of its head. Lastly, what exactly did the artist want to convey and did he take a look at his finished product and go, I know something looks wrong but I am going to put it up on the wall anyway.
by Patrix | on Friday, May 18th, 2007 at 1:02 pm | 
Art and Architecture, Fun Weird, Religion . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Tweet This Post!|
Article Tags >> art | Fun Weird | India | Religion
That’s uproarious!! It’s also instructive (and seems quite hypocritical) how so many paintings in restaurants and temples depict apparently “scared” women like Sita or Radha in curvaceous forms, dressed in see-through clothes.
Actually I discern the opposite in this picture : the painter’s prudery and sensitivity to religious sentiment. I think the painter actually wanted to depict Krishna having sex with a Gopi but thought it would be offensive to Hindus and so substituted the Gopi with a cow. Bravo Mr Painter for pushing through the concept of Krishna’s lustful decadence without resorting to vulgar display of human female anatomy. This is just great art. By the way, look at the cow, it looks almost human what with the bindi and the peacock feather in its headband and those gentle womanly eyes. I don’t know what the deal is with the calf though which looks more like a dog.
LOL. Calf needs therapy.
http://www.viweb.freehosting.net/vilit_SYK2.htm
For a G rated depiction of the same scene.. scroll down..
and I guess animals do indulge in bum licking of their kids while they are feeding..
http://www.buckleburyfarmpark.co.uk/images/calf-feeding.jpg\
ohh i love google.
Ashutosh, in fact many of our miniature paintings depicts voluptuous women semi-clad or even naked. Wonder why the prudes can’t just look away instead of trying to close our eyes too?
Gawker, Ah-ha! Now that’s interesting. You think that a Benaras wall painter is thinking to metaphorical representations in his art. I bet he went places after this piece was spotted by some art critic :) But replacing ordinary human sexual imagery with bestiality when in fact, the image might have been more representative of sibling rivalry – hey calf! get away…she is my mother too.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with the picture, but the interpretation is totally sick, what the fuck is your point, every religion in India is hypocritical so why only target only one community, who pelted stones at so called artist M.F. hussain, who likes to paint hindu gods naked as a form of purity yeah right
Raj, care to share your interpretation? And if you have been reading my blog which I feel you haven’t, then you will know that I blast fundamentalist aspects of other religions i.e. Islam and Christianity far more than I blast Hinduism. So what exactly is your point? Trying to be more hypocritical than the other religion?
BTW why get hot and bothered about one artist’s interpretation with our gods if our religion is so great?
never mind about my interpretation as it might have been
, but I surely misinterpreted your post
and sorry about the f word
Sqrl, I guess the artist simply swapped the calf and baby Krishna and thought it would still work :) Anyway, it made my day.
Raj, no probs. Regards my interpretation, it shows how misleading (and funny) literal translation (’cow as our mother’) can be.
I think it was a dirty joke played by the artist. Although it was not subtle to say the least.
Speaking of which, there was this Kamal Hassan movie (Tamil) where he plays a trade union leader (commie atheist). He is also a brilliant painter so he’s asked to paint a huge image of Lord Shiva for his evil industrialist master. He goes on to paint Shiva but instead of the crescent moon that is usually depicted on Shiva’s images, he draws a sickle, and a hammer instead of the trident. (commie interpretations)
I bet, lot of painters will depict such things in their art, although this Krishna thing was a tad creepy.
Piker, True indeed. Given the Don Juan characteristics of Krishna, the possibilities are endless so why make a fuss over other sexual imagery, right? I bet the other gods want their share of attention with the ladies too. Even the portly Ganpati had two wives. The gods certainly get around more than those who protest in their name.
The painting is simply hilarious :-). I wonder what the artist was trying to convey. May be he or she to say that the cow thought Krishna was the calf: animals do lick the asses of their kids to keep them clean. I think the picture tries to convey that the cow has accepted Krishna as her own calf. But still, it’s quite funny.
Patrix,
You’ve offended my morals by publishing that painting about the great Lord Krishna. I’m going to contact my RSS brothers (not feeds), and burn down your Internets, Orkuts and blogs :-P
(best Mola Ram impersenation) “Bali chada do Kali maa”
Amrit, I guess the intentions were noble but the end result was so not right :)
Santosh, hum bhi chupp nahi baitonga…humra haq hai aapka dharm ke chaal-chalan pe hum prashn uthaye.
I for one think the end result was quite alright. You perceive what you want to, right ? Its quite normal for a cow to lick its calf’s behind. And for balgopal, well he
is a baby. What do you expect ? Why bring all this sexual innuendo when nothing like that was intended ?
Bloghopper, as you said it is what you perceive, right? I thought of it as extremely weird. Any human-animal parental depiction especially the way shown in the picture would be.
haha! had me rolling with laughter!
You should have known, there are various forms of worship.
Let we care the way we do by the measure of humanity, and acceptable ethos. The Cow is showing it’s dedication unto the Lord, through the only means it can. When you see the world it manifests the way you would like to percieve.
Ankita, :)
Dinesh, then I guess the form of worship by Chandramohan, the artist student in Baroda should also be considered as “showing his dedication unto the Lord” albeit not by letting the Lord suckle on any of his appendages but by merely depicting him on canvas. After all, the “world manifest the way you perceive it”, right?
Actually, it looks like the cow loves krishna like his own child/calf. Cows lick their calves.. (Animals lick their babies)
The cow doesn’t mind krishna having milk, though the calf is the one who has all the rights– I think this is what the painter wanted to depict.
Cows are worshipped and have kumkum on their forehad sometimes.
Read, I am sure it looks that way to you but for me, it was quite creepy.
patrix,
If you visit Indian villages with families that own cows, you will see a cow licking her calf. The calf drinks the milk in the initial days after birth.
(even dogs use their mouth and tongue to clean their puppies after birth)
Some kids drink a little fresh unpasterised milk, which is not safe (ofcourse they drink it from a bowl and not directly). We are the only animals on the planet that consume the milk of other mammals.
and yes, Cow is referred as mother.
The whole village and animals (including cows) were fond of Krishna and Krishna was fond of Milk and Butter!
I think the painter wanted to show the affection or bond between the cow and krishna. Cow can’t use his limbs to stroke the baby krishna.
Probably the artist should have painted the cow licking krishna’s head or hand or something other than his bottom..then, nobody would be discussing this..
Read, as you said kids don’t drink cow’s milk directly from the udders but from a bowl. So you must admit, Krishna latching on to those udders definitely looks weird. The cow is a metaphorical mother to Hindus. Some things are best not taken literally. Like I said, I neither offended nor while I go flinging stones but I definitely was weirded out.
Patrix, how about categorizing this under “Fun and Weird” instead of “Religion” ?
Bloghopper, I thought I had categorized it as ‘Fun & Weird’. It is not. But I’ll still retain my ‘religion’ category as some of the comments clearly attempt to interpret this painting on religious grounds (cow as a mother).
People with mean ideas about life and contorted view of responsibilities we need shoulder, are wrecking things up.
When ever one comes up with a conflict of ones ideas of The Lord to the one identified and directed by the elders, it is the latter that overrules us.
Here the unwaranted controversy is about the Lord Shri Krishna playing with the cow.
What if the cow be replaced by a monsterous snake as
kalinga, vasuki or even the great Ananta. They all will show their servitude and dedication unto the Lord in like manner. For the Lord the All Supreme who has manifested that the Whole Universe is in his mouth to Mother Yashoda,
It is only his caring nature that brings Him to US.
Please do not regurgigate the matter with wronged notions.
Dinesh, there is no controversy. I put a picture I found weird and commented on it. And I can apply your words to the any protests against art in India these days and call them as “people with mean ideas about life and contorted view of responsibilities”, right?
finally, jai sri sri Dinesh :)
Krishna was known to be very naughty in the village. He was even called makhan chor and known for his pranks.
He is pushing the calf away and trying to get some milk and the cow is not bothered about that..
I think some people are bothered about the licking. Luckily it is the ‘animal’ that is licking..don’t know what the artist is trying to convey. It is animal behavior to lick but the artist could have avoided that.
Sush, hmmmmm….you see nothing weird with what Krishna is doing?
>>Sush, hmmmmm….you see nothing weird with what Krishna is doing?
Are you equating cow’s udder to breasts and trying to look at it in a sexual way??
Sush,
Well, cow’s udders are its breasts. And I haven’t really heard of a human latching on them to get milk. No matter how much you like dairy products, I would definitely find it weird if someone did that.
Patrix: in rural India sometimes when a baby/infant refuses milk from its mother, people often take it to a cow — it’s a very well-known fact in India; so Krishna having milk straightaway from the cow’s udder/breast is not as bizarre as it seems.
Amrit, well that’s news to me. Thanks for letting me know but as I mentioned in my post, it simply seemed too weird to me. Still does. I guess we can infer from this that certain practices (in culture or religion) that seem normal to some may be completely bizarre to others. It should make all tolerant of other cultures and practices but unfortunately, it has the opposite effect.
>>Well, cow’s udders are its breasts. And I haven’t really heard of a human latching on them to get milk. No matter how much you like dairy products, I would definitely find it weird if someone did that.
Cow or cow’s udders are never looked at in a sexual way. Cow is worshipped for serving humanity. I am not sure if you are from India, in rural India, a cow’s udders are not considered sexual at all.
Sush, Last time I checked I was from India. I never looked at udders in a sexual way…brrrr. Just found the human sucking on them a bit weird. There are lot of things that go on in rural or for that matter, urban India but that doesn’t make it always right.
I had seen a painting in India that depicted lord vishnu lying down inside/under a snake pit or something and the milk from a cow trickling/pouring into his mouth.
I forgot the story behind it.
I’ll post it if I find it on the net.
Sush, Although it is not the same, let me know when you find it. I’ll be glad to post it to this post as an addendum.
” I had seen a painting in India that depicted lord vishnu lying down inside/under a snake pit or something and the milk from a cow trickling/pouring into his mouth. ”
It’s about the Lord descending to fulfil the boon given to Vakulamba, Yashoda in her previous birth, after fulfilling His promise, He stayed on the as the Lord of
Seven Hills, Lord Shri Venkateshwara, The Great Balaji.
jai Govinda jai Jagannatha.
>>It’s about the Lord descending to fulfil the boon given to Vakulamba, Yashoda in her previous birth, after fulfilling His promise, He stayed on the as the Lord of
Seven Hills, Lord Shri Venkateshwara, The Great Balaji.
Thanks for sharing the story/info.
Regd. the painting and comments, cow’s milk is respected and called amrutha and all that..
definitely there is nothing sexy about the udders.
Sush, my friend Amrutha is offended at being called cow’s milk. Apologize now or you’ll be forced to emulate Lord Krishna’s child-like actions in the painting.
[...] this week I posted an image of Lord Krishna sucking on a cow’s teat citing that I found the image weird (not offensive, mind you). The post generated lot of comments [...]
>>my friend Amrutha is offended at being called cow’s milk
LOL.. funny..
nice name..
She should be happy that Amrutha has got such a nice meaning (nectar in sanskrit) and ofcourse cow’s milk is considered amrutha..:-))
I didn’t find it weird at all.
Animals do lick their young ones to express affection. It is termed ‘vaatsalya-bhava’
The most famous depiction of this ‘vaatsalya-bhava’ is seen after Narsimha-Dev ripped apart Hiranya-Kasipu to rescue Prahlad… he took Prahlad in his lap, and gave him a good maternal-licking.
Thats what a lion would do after rescuing its cub from danger, give it a reassuring lick. Not weird at all.
In fact what I find weird is people in Western countries letting their dogs lick all over their FACE !!!
No matter how much one loves his dog, in India it’d still be considered Ewwwww !
Just different cultural perspectives, I guess.
Hemant, to each his own and I was referring to the other end when I called the picture weird. But strange you would offer a mythological comparison instead of a real-life one. Hopefully we can agree that humans and animals are a different species and hence their interaction is a wee bit different.
BTW I find letting dogs lick all over your face a bit ewww! too considering I’m an ardent dog lover. That didn’t stop me from laughing my ass out when our dog ‘frenched’ my brother who was peacefully sleeping.
Could it be simply a “survival of fittest” – in extreme conditions people tend to opt for means or ways to get through.
Just my opinion – what looks weird now, might not look weird few years down the lane.
Anonymous, sure! Except what extreme conditions was Krishna under and it has already been more than 2000 years since the age the painting depicts.
Anyway, this has been much ado about nothing.
[...] this week I posted an image of Lord Krishna sucking on a cow’s teat citing that I found the image weird (not offensive, mind you). The post generated lot of comments [...]