by The complete text of Master Jalil Ziapour’s lecture at the Art University Complex (at the invitation of the Seminar Center for the Wisdom of Islamic Art); 3 November 1986
Master Jalil Ziapour; the father of modern painting in Iran
This lecture was organized based on questions posed by the Seminar Center for the Wisdom of Islamic Art regarding issues of art history.
First Question: What is a worthy definition that you personally have for “art history”? And do you seek out, critique, and examine art in the “passage of history,” or do you present the “history of artists” and the artistic trajectory based on time? Or, to put it another way, in artistic transformation, do you give primacy to the “soul of the people of art”? Or to the dictates of the environment, resources, and the like, which might serve to encourage and assist the artist?
Answer: The course of art through the passage of eras is the history of art, and the compelling justification of any subject in its necessary form, to the degree of being deceptively simple, is art. But what I must state briefly is this: societies, according to the dictates of their intellectual conditions, have been situated in groupings. Each group is recognized at its own respective level, and their works are representative of their own category (among these, there always exists a conspicuously dominant group as well). In any case, every group within this totality, from prehistory to the present day, has continued its own specific intellectual life. It is within such an amalgam that we must pay attention to art and its artists. Which, of course, we shall not engage in right now; rather, we turn to the search for art in the passage of history, or the history of artists. We know that the history of artists finds its identity within the passage of the history of society. Therefore, art must be examined from two directions: both from the perspective of the passage of the history of society, and in terms of the reciprocal influence of the environment on the artist, and the artist on the environment.
Regarding the transformation of art and encouragement. We know that the works and factors of the environment provide the artist with the raw material of artistic creation, and the artist takes the specific inferences and concepts of the environment’s raw material and combines them within a suitable form that he himself must provide. We know that until a change occurs in the raw material, it does not inspire a fresh inference and a fresh composition. But the artist, because he is swiftly affected and swiftly senses and infers the factors that are in the process of birth. Therefore, he is constantly engaged in the work of creation (whether potentially or actually), in a state of construction and composition. (Although the artist’s inspirations are dependent on nourishment from environmental factors, and these factors contain within themselves the means of potential art, and despite the fact that one has no identity without the existence of the other—that is, the artist without the environment and the environment without the artist)—despite all this, it is the artist who actually transforms art.
But a point regarding artistic creation. Creating itself requires training and the knowledge of how to create. The creation of the artist (which is a secondary creation) is a synthesis drawn from the result of necessary and appropriate inferences with the aid of objective and subjective manifestations. Regarding encouragement. This factor is more effective for artists in need of encouragement than for self-reliant artists. An artist who is always striving to attain the requisite worldview and to feel his own position and responsibility does not spend his time waiting for encouragement. The world is full of renowned, steadfast individuals who have never lived in expectation of the encouragement of this person or that (and the environment), and who have not stepped back in the face of any difficulty. With this description, encouragement advances many endeavors, and even those who do not set their hearts on encouragement accept it sincerely.
Second Question: In the history of Iranian art, what issues should be sought out? Issues that can realize taste, artistic understanding, the blossoming of artistic nature, artistic education, and the broadening of the horizon of artistic understanding for their audience, so that through this means the tomorrows of art may be better built?
Answer: Of course, on the path to the blossoming of artistic taste, understanding, and vision, the traditional burden must be recognized. For this task, too, one must not solely pursue specific issues. Because merely certain issues will not provide a resolution for the answers and expectations. Furthermore, paying attention only to limited issues will not constitute a comprehensive examination for identifying traditional art. Social issues are blended and integrated with all the issues of society. Everything is connected. Issues that appear separate from one another are all interconnected in their depths. Just like a flower bush or a tree, where the flowers and leaves depend on the branches, and these on the trunk, and the trunk on the roots, and the roots on the earth, and the earth on other and yet other factors… depending on what those factors might be? Whether they wither it or make it fruitful.
The roots of artistic capital are the underlying resources accumulated over the course of history, and from the transient surface elements that have also been accepted, additions have been made to it each time, making the accumulation fruitful. Of course, when the whirlwind of a thought, on account of a new need, has not assailed these artistic accumulations, they continue their life under the name of traditional art (with changes, however calm and gradual). And whenever, based on the principle of the law of change and leap, “tradition,” in following requirements, is compelled in such a way that it must submit to transformation, willy-nilly it sets its slow and heavy steps in motion beside or within the motivations; or the familiar and accustomed regression drags itself along haphazardly in the wake of the compulsory leap. Because tradition benefits from an inner core to which the passage of time has granted durability and stability, naturally it also contains within itself the capital of the public’s taste over the passage of time. It is from this source that the artists and people of every era draw their artistic taste and understanding, and for the blossoming of their taste and the breadth of their artistic vision, they excavate traditional accumulations (purely for the sake of inspiration) so that they may seek a suitable path and form for expressing their fresh inferences. Let us not forget that every new artistic endeavor is undertaken on the basis of a need. A need that rears its head from the deficiencies tied to this very tradition. But a relationship exists between every modernism and traditionalism on the basis of a precedent of intimacy, and this emotional relationship necessarily permeates every new work; and we know that nothing comes into being from a complete standstill.
Third and Fourth Questions: What are the specific characteristics of the people of Iran in relation to art, from the perspective of their nature, taste, innate disposition, instinct, and their way of life? How are the human aspects of our art, the intellectual and emotional aspects of our art, the popular nature of our art, and the perfection-seeking and mystical-seeking aspects of our art deducible throughout history?
Answer: Our artworks possess two completely distinct periods (in terms of emotion and working characteristics). Exactly like two contrasting, consecutive leaves of a manuscript. The first leaf pertains to before Islam and the second pertains to the Islamic period. The emotional relationship in the writings of these two connected leaves, from an artistic standpoint, has remained hidden and unspoken in the first, though it was simmering beneath the surface, and has reared its head and taken life in the second. From the distant past until Islam, the art of our land was active across a few limited subjects and acquired certain characteristics: 1. Personality-making, the display of grandeur, and immortality upon the breasts of mountains. 2. Scenes of hunting, battle, and feasting. 3. A few instances of portraiture of two religious figures (Mithra and Anahita) for the sake of seeking auspiciousness and bearing witness to royal and divine oaths and covenants.
From the existing stone and metal works of the Median, Achaemenid, Parthian, and Sassanid periods (which have a basis in naturalism and traditional form), we perceive a tendency towards delicate craftsmanship, an effort to create decorative compositions, and a display of aristocratic tastes, and we see that they benefit from grandeur of execution, technical skill, and artistic grace, and they possess a significance, and certainly a portion of them are considered among the artistic masterpieces on earth. Most researchers are of the same opinion regarding the talent, the artisanal patience, and the artistic taste of the artists of that era, and they have stated that: “The permeating elements of Iranian culture and art abroad are many.” Our engraved vessels and textiles used to travel as export goods to the most distant points. But it appears as such that our artistic skills were entirely hired and held captive in the task of staging scenes for the divinities and displaying the grandeur of their extraordinarily aristocratic lives, and depicting scenes of their battles, feasts, and hunting. We sense a kind of heavy imposition in the matter of artists being forced to submit to commissioned works. (Thousands of discovered clay tablets from Persepolis bear witness to the wages of artists and workers and how they were exploited). This pressure continues to be evident from the works up until the Sassanid period.
From that distant and long-ago time onward, when the commoners held this inculcated notion that kings were gods on earth, and the practitioners also gave wing to such inculcations, many human considerations of our people were cast to the ground. If there were no writings to inform us of the intellectual state and the popular life, we would have to guess the life of the masses from beyond the immense awe of the stone reliefs. Because in these striking works of a broad and lengthy era, we do not see a single scene of the life of the masses. (The masses, in the face of these high-ranking figures and divinities, had no standing). Not that our people were devoid of human virtues or lacked the value to be counted. It is that they showed no attention to the masses. Otherwise, issues were raised in those times that are the sign of public education, the elevation of thought, attending to the soul, morals, popular conduct, and attention to human value.
Pay attention: “The sage asked the Spirit of Wisdom: How can one desire the comfort of the body without bringing harm to the soul, and desire the salvation of the soul without bringing harm to the body? It replied: Deem equal him who is smaller than you, and deem greater him who is equal to you. Be truthful in speech. Do not slander. Do not incline to greed. Do not be envious. Be moderate, and be devoted in prayer, supplication, and education.”
“The sage asked the Spirit of Wisdom: Which refuge is more steadfast? It replied: The refuge of God is more steadfast, and again it replied: A human who partakes more of wisdom, his portion of paradise is greater. In strength, he is worthier who can quell his anger, and he is more resolute in whom there is never any deceit. The speech of someone is better who speaks more truthfully.”
“Again the sage asked the Spirit of Wisdom: Is wisdom better, or art, or goodness? It said: Wisdom with which there is no goodness is not wisdom, and art with which there is no wisdom is not art.”
These few examples are from the book “Menog-i Khrad” [Spirit of Wisdom] (a book of moral counsel) of our pre-Islamic era. In this book, everything of religious morality, perfection-seeking, and emotions and humanity (which conveys the intellectual richness of our people) is provided. But none of these characteristics have any reflection in the visual arts before Islam. This is one side of the issue and one face of the page. But on the other leaf: after the Islamic movement, beliefs, along with the idea of equality and brotherhood, gravitated towards a unity of vision and perfection-seeking (which was the desire of the masses), and found a way to erupt from simmering beneath the surface to the outside, and alongside the artworks, we see the manifestation of this eruption in the motifs of early Islam. Just as the connectedness of the short and long arms of arabesque motifs in the stuccoes and inscriptions of the early centuries, and their intertwined knots in the paintings and margins of books, as well as the interconnected letters of Quranic verses in Thuluth and Kufic scripts, are a symbol of this eruption and rearing up in a state of solidarity and connectedness of inner selves, and the liberation of artistic skills from monopoly, and attending to popular art. (That is, attending to the comprehensive life of the masses).
Those verdant pine trees of the Achaemenid era that are carved in Persepolis, and the motif of that tree of life in Taq-e Bostan from the Sassanid era whose branches possess arabesque movements, seem to have been merely a symbol of eternal life for the divinities and kings of kings. But in this era, that specific symbol of verdure and life became pandemic in the motifs in the form of arabesque branches and interconnected flowers and leaves, alongside the symbol of the newly risen life of the masses. It is as if they were emphasizing the life of the masses through the repetition of motifs. From this point onward, the artists’ chosen subjects gradually shifted from limited topics pertaining to the elite, to abundant and comprehensive subjects pertaining to the masses. Attention to various landscapes and aspects of nature and creations (such as geometric compositions and delineations) and simplified motifs of flowers and leaves. The motif of birds, beasts of prey and grazing animals, and the visual realization of popular tales, scenes of lessons, sciences, and debates. Activities related to the affairs of life (home, family, and construction), the shape of edifices (inner and outer quarters, iwan, portico, pavilion, and garden), tribal and nomadic life. Herding and housekeeping, cooking and other affairs, attending to the depiction of religious themes such as composing Quranic verses in abundance and presenting various tastes out of faith upon the entirety of the body of mosques, minarets, and porticos, finding a way to the manner of employing the brush and color in displaying the spirituality of the themes. The depiction of numerous ascensions in various books. The scene of the declaration of the succession of Ali ibn Abi Talib, and the scene of the presence of the First Imam and the Ansar in the presence of the Noble Messenger. The scene of Satan, Adam, and Eve, and many other subjects, all of which indicate the comprehensive hustle and bustle of the life of the masses and granted flourishing to the expression of popular life.
By taking into consideration these two ways of life (one aristocratic and the other popular), one in pre-Islamic times and the other after Islam—the former’s defining characteristic being the identity-bearing of the aristocracy as opposed to the identity-lessness of the masses, and the latter’s defining characteristic being the acquiring of identity by the masses and the liberation of the artist from monopoly—through this path, the historical essence of two faces of our people’s life becomes manifest, and ultimately our “human, emotional, intellectual, perfection-seeking, mystical, and religious” faces blossom in the artworks of the Islamic period and thus become deducible.
Fifth Question: When the “art history of Iran” is examined alongside the “art history of other nations,” what is the criterion that you consider worthy for evaluation? (A criterion whose foundation is laid upon fairness, and not the preference of the audience nor the preference of the times and the like; in this case, what can the source of these criteria and their accepted principles be? And which is better for them to be?)
Answer: So long as the evaluation depends on art history and the working trend of art, no problem arises and one can examine and evaluate. But once we wish to delve deeply into artistic whys and wherefores, we must possess a criterion richer in awareness and knowledge regarding the intellectual fields of any society we wish to examine. Because with superficiality, one cannot engage in a comprehensive analysis of the art of societies (and of course, it will be problematic). It is acceptable that in examinations, if we want to reach the depth of the subject, we should first examine ourselves to see whether we have the necessary substance for an in-depth excavation of the art of the society in question (from every aspect) or not? Obtaining a criterion for examining the art of nations is usually possible through superficial attention to working principles and the degree of expressiveness and eloquence of the subject. This also applies to the case of Iran. Foreign art lovers have been able to identify our artists to this extent, and to justify the periods and the working trends (sometimes well and sometimes poorly); at any rate, we are grateful. We, in return, have done nothing for them (except that we have become captivated by and imitators of their working method, and have forgotten our own valuable resources).
In any case, I will now provide a criterion for acquaintance to the extent of comparing the working trend. Because the extensive analysis of the arts has no place here. For comparison, we will consider the art of Western nations (with whose art our masters have a close familiarity). The foundation of Western art’s work, for a long time, was laid upon the use of nature and naturalism, and attaining natural dimensions and proportions, natural chiaroscuro, and the distance and proximity of objects. Up until the time when the necessity for a serious deformation of nature’s shapes had not been felt, naturalism continued to be the model. But due to the effects of wartime factors (the First and Second International Wars and afterwards), the dominant intellectual cohesion, of which Christianity was the pillar, fell apart and gradually gravitated toward dissatisfaction and specific orientations, and inevitably became the cause of the emergence of schools that indicated inner cries and the societies’ dissatisfactions with the nature of life and its side effects. Artists in this context attained specific forms from a technical standpoint that contained very heavy subjective inculcations, and they presented them in the form of schools (each school presenting a face of life). (Of course, their analysis from a popular perspective and their doctrinal thought belong to another discussion and another place).
What must now be taken into consideration is that the Westerners’ attainment of such expressive and heavy inculcations in art, in addition to the relentless efforts of its artists, must be considered indebted to the highly inculcative works of the artists of the Orient (China – Iran), works that were highly opportune for the inspiration of the esteemed masters of the West (who were the vanguards and leaders of young artists). But the artists of Iran, over ten centuries (from the Islamic period onwards), engaged in an art that the artists of the West attained roughly after these ten centuries. The beginning of the great Islamic movement coincided with around 600 AD, whereas Western artists only attained their first artistic revolution after another six hundred years, and again left another four centuries behind them until they reached their second artistic revolution and were able to found their valuable schools.
The works of the artists of our Islamic period presented limited individualism. The individual was not emphasized in the arts of this period of ours, and fundamentally, it required that our people, after a thousand and some years of being weakened and not being counted, should now, in the hope of reaching their supreme and popular goal (equality and brotherhood), have like-mindedness and mutual assistance. It is for this very reason that the various works of this period, collectively, have been based on assisting one another, feeding off one another, and inculcative strengthening with a comprehensiveness of a very strong social subjectivity (of course, not the sort of subjectivity that Mr. “Alexandre Papadopoulo” has claimed, introducing our Islamic period artists as visualizers of the essence of God through the conceptualization of the Platonic mental curve, which itself is a matter for debate).
In the motifs of carpets, fabrics, kilims, and jajims, intertwined flowers and leaves, which are systematically traced with the help of branches and slender connections, a conscious ebullience and intimacy are seen. For us, the connection of all these small and large, orderly, and arrayed motifs inculcates a system of the gathering together of thoughts, and conveys intellectual cohesion and unity. The motifs of our carpets also breathed life onto tiles, and upon mosques and minarets deeply posited the magnificence of faith. Illumination, which is the refined version of these motifs, presented another quality of intellectual solidarity and connectedness in the form of delicate and decisive bordering in books and inscriptions, fabrics and images. In the scene-making of this period, attention was paid to the general assembly and awe of the figures and giving them centrality (based on a tradition of several thousand years).
In the work of our artists, design-laying played a fundamental role. From the distant past, they grasped the importance of design and recognized the expressive power and responsibility-bearing of design. (The earthenware jugs and bowls of our prehistory have presented very fascinating symbols of design). Even now, institutions and organizations use these extremely simplified symbols of animal shapes like the gazelle, deer, and mountain goat from the prehistoric era for their logos. During the Islamic period as well, the children of those same fathers utilized this branch of art (design) to the necessary extent, and with the help of this branch bestowed life and expressiveness upon their creations, conveying their intention in a deceptively simple manner (setting aside the fact that in recent centuries, due to unfamiliarity with the characteristics of art, designing took on a commercial and clichéd form).
Our artists considered attending to the distance and proximity of objects and things to be naturalism (and they did not want this). To create the required distance and proximity, they used sharp and bright colored backgrounds, and by this means, inculcated a relative distance and proximity. They also did not pay attention to giving volume (which was naturalism), and without attending to natural chiaroscuro, they paid attention to placing colored surfaces next to one another and weighing their paleness and vividness. Our artists, after possessing all that artistic capital and with all that intellectual elevation, had realized that the mere imitation of nature rendered their intentions inadequate and devoid of subjectivity in necessary areas (if they built a house, they would show the outer and inner quarters, the back and front of the house together on a single plane. Walls were not an obstacle to viewing the courtyard and the inside of the house).
The artists of our Islamic period, in fact, followed “how one must speak and how one must show and build,” and preferred the reality of expressive feeling and inference over an inexpressive and stuttering reality. Because the goal was attention to the intention, not the imitation of nature (and the works of the early centuries and afterwards each bear witness to and indicate this description). In the works of this period of our artists, objectivity transformed into an integrated inculcative subjectivity, and color, design, and composition yielded an inculcative quality. Backgrounds of turquoise colors guided thought to the zenith and ascension. The heavy lapis lazuli and navy blue of carpets and tiles justified an existence-like pulsation from the depth of life and vitality. The ruby and vermilion backgrounds of carpets conveyed the ebullience of intellectual life, and all the other colorful symbol-types, each in its own way, took strength upon this ebullience. The most important thing that our artists presented from their experience of several and many centuries in the Islamic period is the necessary unity and harmony (without “we” and “I”) at the highest level of artistry. A magnificent and weighty color upon any carpet derives its magnificence from the underlying colors that have settled into its soul (each in some shape), and as a whole they are magnificent. This integration and universal magnificence, like a vast, all-encompassing symphony, strikes the soul and capacity of humanity, elevates the pulsation of life, and more majestically grants zenith and ascension to the superior thought of the artists of the Islamic period within the melody of equality. This is that superior criterion of the Iranian art of our Islamic period (from amidst all the contradictions), which must be considered for evaluation and adopted as the standard of practice.
