Animation Technique and Depiction of Death in Sculptural Art: Ramayana Story in Shri Ramaswamy Temple in Erstwhile Travancore, Kerala

Preeta Nayar1

1. Kerala Council for Historical Research, Vyloppilly Samskrity Bhavan, Nalanda, Thiruvananthapuram 695 003, Kerala, India (Email: [email protected])

Received: 10 August 2016; Revised: 19 September 2016; Accepted: 05 October 2016 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 4 (2016): 18-25

Abstract: Artists have, on rare occasions, employed animation techniques in sculptural art to represent movement in time. Ramayana story narrated in wood in Shri Ramaswamy temple has used this technique while presenting the death of Tataka, Subahu, Maricha and Jatayu. Sculptors created twin images of the busts and heads of these characters and conjugated them on their main bodies to represent the sequence of their death. This technique helps sculptors to use minimum space with maximum effect and infuse life in to still images.

Keywords: Animation Technique, Ramayana Story, Wood, Shri Ramaswamy Temple, Padmanabhapuram, Death, Movement in Time

Introduction Animation creates an illusion of movement. It infuses life in to images and makes the lifeless vibrant. Andrew Leori-Gourhen, the famous French archaeologist and anthropologist, defines animation as the visual translation of an action by a figure in a meaningful attitude, a pose or a privileged moment (Leori-Gourhen 1992: 353; Luis & Fernandez 2009: 1305). Though very rarely, sculptors employ animation techniques in sculptural art to convey the motion in time. This technique has been employed while narrating certain anecdotes of death in the depiction of Ramayana story in wood in Shri Ramaswamy temple located at Padmanabhapuram in the erstwhile Travancore in Kerala (now in Kanyakumari district, Tamil Nadu).

This temple was constructed in AD 1744 by Marthanda Varma, the Maharaja of Travancore. It has srikovil1, namaskaramandapam2, nalambalam3, vilakkumatam4, balikkal mandapam5 and tiled super structure built in typical Kerala style (Nayar 2000: 21). The sculptural panels depicting Ramayana story are part of the wall decoration of vilakkumatam. The entire story is narrated in 46 wooden panels, each with an average area of 220 X 25 cm. They are placed in circumambulatory direction as brackets on full Nayar 2016: 18-25 length of the four walls of vilakkumatam. The depiction starts with the event of Dasharatha conducting Putrayeshti Yaga and ends with the episode of Shrirama pattabhisheka (Nayar 2004: 26).

Ramayana story impacts us with many incidents that underscore the victory of the good over the bad and the justice over the injustice. Hence, it is recurrent with fights and killings. Depiction of death is, thus, an inevitable part of the narration. Ramayana panels of Shri Ramaswamy temple have represented death in seven anecdotes which depicted the story of Tataka, Subahu, Maricha, Jatayu, Vali, Simhika and Ravana.

Anecdotes and Depictions Anecdotes described here are summarized from the version of Adhyatma Ramayana translated from Sanskrit to English by RBLB Nath (1979).

Tataka Dasharatha, upon the request of the rishi Viswamitra, sent Rama and Lakshmana along with the rishi to his Sidhashrama to kill the Daityas who continuously obstructed his sacrifice. On their way, they entered Karusham forest where the demoness Tataka lived. Viswamitra told Rama that the demoness who could assume diverse forms used to trouble all those who crossed the forest. He requested that Rama must kill her. Rama took up his bow and stringed it to keep himself ready for the action. Stringing sound echoed in the forest. Hearing the sound, Tataka, wild with anger, dashed running to attack Rama. Rama shot arrows at her and she fell down dead, vomiting blood.

The depiction of killing Tataka presents first Rama shooting an arrow at Tataka. Tataka is shown with upright short hair somewhat kept in place with a head band. One arrow is shown struck in her mouth and the other on her breast. She holds the branch of a tree for support with her left hand, the right hand is lifted up in pain. The sculptor depicts another bust of her body arching backward with her hairs hanging down and conjugates it to the hip of the straight figure earlier presented (Figs. 1 & 2).

Figure 1: Tatakavadha, Shri Ramaswamy temple, Padmanabhapuram

19 ISSN 2347 – 5463 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 4: 2016

Figure 2: Tatakavadha, Shri Ramaswamy temple, Padmanabhapuram

Subahu Reaching Sidhashrama, Viswamitra started the sacrifice. Subahu appeared at noon and tried to disturb the sacrifice throwing blood and bones. Rama shot an arrow of fire at Subahu, which killed him.

The panel shows Rama and Subahu standing face to face and fighting each other with bow and arrow. Subahu is depicted with upright body and shown with two pierced arrows on his front, one on his stomach and the other on his loin. The second figure presents only his bust conjugated to the buttock portion of the earlier straight figure. This portion is presented as falling on his back to indicate his defeat in the fight and the subsequent death. Subahu is shown in the second figure with wide opened mouth, still clutching his bow with the left hand and the right supporting the back of his head (Figs. 3 & 4).

Figure 3: Subahuvadha, Shri Ramaswamy temple, Padmanabhapuram

20 Nayar 2016: 18-25

Figure 4: Subahuvadha, Shri Ramaswamy temple, Padmanabhapuram

Maricha Shurpanakha appealed to her brother Ravana to avenge Lakshmana for disfiguring her body. Ravana comforted her and assured that he would take revenge upon Lakshmana. Ravana requested Maricha to take Rama and Lakshmana away from their ashrama in Dandaka forest where they lived in exile with Sita. Maricha assumed the form of a golden deer and appeared near the ashrama to attract Sita. Fond of the animal, she requested Rama to get the deer for her. Entrusting her safety with Lakshmana, Rama chased the deer into the forest. Understanding its illusive nature, Rama killed the animal, shooting arrows.

This anecdote is presented in the wooden panel showing Lakshmana standing with bow and arrow guarding Sita, while Rama shooting arrows at the deer. An arrow is shown piercing the body of the animal with its blade coming out the other side through the flesh and another arrow entering the body near the neck. The sculptor has depicted two necks and two heads on the body of the animal, the first neck and head as in a live deer which looks towards Rama, and the second neck and head slanting apart back, as the animal is about to fall down dead (Figs. 5 & 6).

Figure 5: Marichavadha, Shri Ramaswamy temple, Padmanabhapuram

21 ISSN 2347 – 5463 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 4: 2016

Figure 6: Marichavadha, Shri Ramaswamy temple, Padmanabhapuram

Jatayu While Ravana was taking Sita to Lanka in his Pushpakavimana, Sita cried aloud calling the names of Rama and Lakshmana. On hearing Sita crying in agony, Jatayu, the king of birds, flew up from the mountain side and attacked Ravana in the air. He tried to damage Ravana’s vimana with his sharp beak. He pierced the bodies of Ravana’s horses with the nails on his legs. Ravana got angry and cut off the wings of Jatayu with a dagger. Jatayu, almost half dead, fell down on the ground.

The panel shows Ravana shooting an arrow at Jatayu standing in Pushpakavimana. Jatayu is depicted in hybrid form with bird’s head, small wings and human body. He is presented holding the hands of Ravana to prevent him from shooting the arrow and pushing Ravana with his right leg. Jatayu is first depicted with his body standing upright and attacking Ravana with his beaks open. His another bust conjugated to the hip of the main body is shown as falling back with two arrows on it. One arrow pierces the neck and the other, back of Jatayu. The second bust presented shows, unlike the first one, the beaks closed (Figs. 7 & 8).

Figure 7: Jatayuvadha, Shri Ramaswamy temple, Padmanabhapuram

22 Nayar 2016: 18-25

Figure 8: Jatayuvadha, Shri Ramaswamy temple, Padmanabhapuram

Others The sculptor, however, did not adopt the above styles while narrating the death of Vali, Simhika and Ravana. They are presented as figures fallen down (Simhika) or keeping their heads on the laps of their wives (Vali and Ravana) and hence, their depictions are not the matter of reference here.

Discussion Expression of movement in time is `the expression of life’. Infusing the work with expression of life has always posed challenges to artists. They, though rarely, try to overcome them by presenting the images in a series of frozen moments and then connecting the preceding and following actions together depicted in these images. Presentation of images with implied meanings of movement in time has been observed as isolated examples since the Upper Palaeolithic period (Luis & Fernandez 2009: 1306; Azema 2008: 118; Azema & Rivere 2012: 318). Man of this period created images of animals in motion by superimposing multiple legs, a keen and realistic expression of his observations at a fast running animal. So animation techniques, though without the backing of any theoretical thinking, had been practiced by artists on rare occasions to convey the movement in time. This technique is very rarely observed in sculptural art. As for Kerala, the present author has found adoption of this technique in sculptural depiction only in Shri Ramaswamy temple at Padmanabhapuram.

Artists normally employ three types of animation techniques: Symmetrical (extension or flexiation of the legs of the portrayed subject), Segmentary (movement of a body segment, say, head or neck and head together in different directions) and Coordinated

23 ISSN 2347 – 5463 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 4: 2016

(portrayal of more than one segment together – legs, head, body, tail etc.) (Leori- Gourhen 1992: 265; Luis & Fernandez 2009: 1305). While narrating the Ramayana story in Shri Ramaswamy temple, the sculptor employed the Segmentary animation technique in depicting the death of Tataka, Subahu, Maricha and Jatayu. A perfect implication of movement in time emerges out from these depictions when the twin straight and backward arched busts of Tataka, Subahu and Jatayu, and the twin neck- head portion of Maricha are conjugated.

The death of a mundane or a demonic character is generally represented in sculptural art as a dead body lying on the ground, next to its own live image, pierced with arrow or slain with sword. The dead body in such instances physically resembles the live image. On rare occasions, the death of a demon or demoness, who comes in disguise of a hermit or a lass to attack or kill and in turn killed, is presented in a different style. The dead demon or demoness is portrayed with goggled eyes, opened mouth and projected canines next to the figure of the hermit or the lass. Conceptually, in sculptural art, a character like Putana who comes in disguise assumes the original form (goggled eyes, projected canines etc.) when dead (Nayar 2000: 124). In the present narration of Ramayana, this style of depiction has not been adopted. It is true that the present narration shows these characters only in the process of dying and not after their death.

Animation technique helps the still images to possess a lively appearance, and the preceding and the following images together provide movement in time. It enables the sculptor to narrate the story in limited spaces, especially if the narration is in small sequential panels. Moreover, it is the explicit display of the talent of a sculptor who makes an anecdote alive when he employs this technique using a series of frozen images.

Explanatory Notes 1Shrikovil is the principal shrine, the sanctum sanctorum.

2Namaskaramandapam is a detached pillared hall with pyramidal roof located in front of the shrine.

3Nalambalam is the cloister around the ambulatory.

4Vilakkumatam is the rectangular structure surrounding the nalambalam. It has columns in iron or brass with a galaxy of lamps fixed on them in definite pattern.

5Balikkalmandapam is the pillared hall raised above the principal balipitha in front of the main entrance of the temple.

References Azema, M. 2008. Representation of movement in the Upper Palaeolithic: An ethological approach to the interpretation of parietal art in

24 Nayar 2016: 18-25

Anthropozoologica 43 (1), Publications Scientifiques du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris. pp 117-154. Azema, M. and F. Rivere. 2012. Animation in Palaeolithic Art: A Pre-echo of Cinema. Antiquity 86 (332): 316-324. Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1992. L’art parietal: Language da la Prehistoire. Jerome Million, Grenoble. Luis, L. and A.P.B. Fernandez. 2009. On endless motion: Depiction of movement in the Upper Palaeolothic Coa Valley rock art (Portugal) in Congresso Internacional da IFRAO 2009, IFRAO, Piaui: Brasil. Pp. 1304-1318. Nath, R.B.L.B. trans. 1979. The Adhyatma Ramayana. Bharatiya Publishing House, Varanasi. Nayar, P. 2000. Vaishnava Iconography of Kerala. Unpublished PhD Thesis, M S University of Baroda, Vadodara. Nayar, P. 2004. Ramayana Theme in Sculptural Art of Kerala. Unpublished Project Report, Department of Culture, Government of India.

25