THE AIMS AND METHODS OF INDIAN ART. 27

the typical characters of heads and degrade them into-
portraits which stand for nothing." *

Common criticisms of Indian art are based on
supposed or real limitations of technical attainment in
representation, especially of the figure. In part, it may be-
answered that so little is known in the "West of the real
achievement of Indian art, that this idea may be allowed toĢ
die a natural death in the course of time; and in part, that
technical attainment is only a means, not an end. There is
an order of importance in the things art means to us....
is it not something thus, first, What has the artist to say ?
and second only, Is his drawing scientifically accurate ?
Bad drawing is certainly not in itself desirable, nor good
drawing a misfortune ; but, strange as it may seem, it has
always happened in the history of art, that by the time-
perfection of technique has been attained, inspiration has
declined. It was so in Greece, and in Europe after the-
Renaissance. It almost seems as if concentration upon
technique hindered the free working of the imagination a
little ; if so, however much we desire both, do not let us
make any mistake as to which is first.

Also, accuracy is not always even desirable. It has-
been shown by photography that the galloping horse
has never been accurately drawn in art; let us hope it
never will be. For art has to make use of abstractions
and memory pictures, not of photographs ; it is a synthesis,
not an analysis. And so the whole question of accuracy
is relative ; and the last word was said by Leonardo da
Yinci: " That drawing is best which by its action best
expresses the passion that animates the figure." This is

* Quotatiorfs from " Memorials of Edward Burne-Jones," by
Lady Burne-Jones, 1904.