Importance of Line in Art

[Dr Subimalendu Bikas sinha]

Do you realize through your practice of art that LINE is the most powerful one among all the elements of art of painting such as line, tone, colour, perspective, etc. If so, let us discuss on its importance in the expression in the art of painting.

[Julia Herrera de Salas]

El arte es la máxima expresión del alma. Es el susurro que al oído la musa nos habla de qué manera podemos dar vida a una nueva creación artística.

Tu eres el arte

[Frank Shifreen]

Dear Dr. SBS
Why would you weight line above the others? Is that not like weighting sky above Earth ? Line encloses space, delineates space. Does the edge of a shape have to be called a line? The argument between orthodox relativity theory and quantum mechanics hinges on a line. The edges of of atomic and subatomic matter are found to be fields of probability. It is interesting that Seurat and pointillism made that exact point. Line was superseded by fields of color probability. there are many other artists who use color or shape instead of line. Whether they create line by omission is another story.
You ask an interesting question, Doctor-but I would like to hear or read your rationale for making that assertion
Frank Shifreen

[Frank Shifreen]

Muy bonito y dice poéticamente, la Sra. Sus obras son hermosas. Yo por desgracia soy un monstruo artístico que hace imperfecto obras que reflejan mi interior la agitación y el egoísmo equivocado.

Julia Herrera de Salas said:

El arte es la máxima expresión del alma. Es el susurro que al oído la musa nos habla de qué manera podemos dar vida a una nueva creación artística.

Tu eres el arte

[Sambuddha Duttagupta]

Hi Mr.Sinha & Mr.Frank,
I agree both of your arguments,but what my feeling is any shape is based on the line, whether it's visible or non visible. Look, if you draw a circle, that absolutely based on the line. You can not put color into that circle without giving shape i.e. line, whether it is thin or a thick may be with a flat brush or else, whether it is pointillism or whatever you say. We can't make horizon without a line, whatever color we will put,there is line, may be subdued. If we want to give a shape of a figure, there is an anatomy,there is structure & form, these whole things are lines, whether those are visible or non visible with colors. A white canvas is not an art object, or if you put a flat red throughout the canvas, that is not an art, you have to make some brushing or dots, those whole things are lines. I think line means not merely a black & white drawing, the colors putting up in any shapes are lines.

[Rebanta Goswami]

I feel that Frank Shifreen is very logical.
Innumerous dots only can make lines. Dot is the mother of all shapes and forms.
The concept of God in Vedic philosophy is "Anoranian (lesser than a dot even), Mahato mahian (greater than anything greatest we can think)". Being an Indian, Subimalendu can easily analyze the elements of art in the light of this abstract definition of God who represents no existence and all-covering existence at the same time. God is the point of creation in Indian philosophy, a dot of will-force that is truly intangible.
Any visual art in fact, never starts or ends. We try to catch a tiny glimpse of it, during its eternal journey through dots, lines, shapes, colors, space .......
but finally all art is very much abstract like the God.

[Frank Shifreen]

maybe Sam, fairly good logic and it agrees with Dr. Sinha, which was why he wrote it in the first place!I have to think about it. You are probably right and Dr Sinha is probably right, b-ut it just does not sit well with me there is something wrong about it, somehow and I am not sure what it is
Sambuddha Duttagupta said:

Hi Mr.Sinha & Mr.Frank,
I agree both of your arguments,but what my feeling is any shape is based on the line, whether it's visible or non visible. Look, if you draw a circle, that absolutely based on the line. You can not put color into that circle without giving shape i.e. line, whether it is thin or a thick may be with a flat brush or else, whether it is pointillism or whatever you say. We can't make horizon without a line, whatever color we will put,there is line, may be subdued. If we want to give a shape of a figure, there is an anatomy,there is structure & form, these whole things are lines, whether those are visible or non visible with colors. A white canvas is not an art object, or if you put a flat red throughout the canvas, that is not an art, you have to make some brushing or dots, those whole things are lines. I think line means not merely a black & white drawing, the colors putting up in any shapes are lines.

[Frank Shifreen]

Rebanta I appreciate the support and and it is a very interesting spiritual discussion that agrees with everything we know about science. the Universe started with a singularity, smaller than a proton. Judaism also agrees with God being
infinitely large and infinitely small. Also science agrees with the concept of the equality of energy and matter being different sides of the same thing. If energy is spirit, and why not? than the energy that pervades the Universe is alive. The American Indian spirituality premise is that everything is alive, can speak and be spoken to.
Sorry- that was a digression
I believe that Sam and Dr.Sinha see line as central because it is the art equivalent of to language or logos. The line demarcates, cleaves space. The line is then equivalent to language. Abstracting simplifying illuminating and yet also amputating

Rebanta Goswami said:

I feel that Frank Shifreen is very logical.
Innumerous dots only can make lines. Dot is the mother of all shapes and forms.
The concept of God in Vedic philosophy is "Anoranian (lesser than a dot even), Mahato mahian (greater than anything greatest we can think)". Being an Indian, Subimalendu can easily analyze the elements of art in the light of this abstract definition of God who represents no existence and all-covering existence at the same time. God is the point of creation in Indian philosophy, a dot of will-force that is truly intangible.
Any visual art in fact, never starts or ends. We try to catch a tiny glimpse of it, during its eternal journey through dots, lines, shapes, colors, space .......
but finally all art is very much abstract like the God.

[Dr Subimalendu Bikas sinha]

Thanks every body for participating in this discussion.

Line is the first step of language Line towards expression and self-expression as well. Out of the unformed when form is come out it takes to lines. So far art is concerned we know from the example of Jamini Roy, a master artist who put the line through a long procedure of experiments taking dots, tones, colour on the strive and the culminating point was line drawing. Any and every form of art, be that sculpture, architecture, poetry or music all have to depend on lines, lines of colour, lines of modes, lines of tones and above all lines of line. But these all important lines get lost when art form reaches its absolute that is the "Brahman"...."Rasavaisaha". He is "Rasaswarupa". When art goes beyond itself through a process of sublimity it loses itself in this "Brahman", who is "Rasaswarupa". In this unilinear path also can become multilinear in a sense which Thakur Ramakrishna aadvocated "Jato math tato path". His teaching to the world is a movement from the formed to the unformed in multilinear. One single line is not good enough to reach the goal. You have many more lines and that is the essence of the Indian philosophy. We have Upanishads the number is quite big. But we have four Vedas and in the Vedas we find one approach to a multilinear; this is called pantheism. From this Vedic stance we come to the monistic position of the Upanisad; 'Aeko debaha'. From our vedic age up to the Upanishads art flourished and the wisdom of India lands up in the fifth Veda i.e. Bharat's Natyasastra which declared a philosophy which is unilinear in its approach and declares that art was the supreme and its unilinear approach to the realization of human goal is universal.

This is abstract and abstruse; my friends may not understand this metaphysics. So I now come down to this vocabulary. We know a moment and a point are the smallest unit of time and space. But it is a mathematical question where a point has no dimension i.e. length and breadth and hence a number of points make a single point without extension. It is argumental but not visible matter or the point we see. Rabonta mentioned this abstract point as God with some analysis "who represents no existence and all-covering existence at the same time". Perhaps he wants to mean "Brahman" but mentioned as "God". In Indian concept "Brahman" and God are not the same. God is the supreme of a particular quality or ideal or a faculty like wealth, knowledge, energy, death, etc. But "Brahman" is not a particular idea like that, all are within Him, He is all pervading entity as explained earlier. So “Brahman” or Absolute (in western concept) is limitless (Anadi, Ananta), beyond description (Barnanatita), beyond the limit of any quality (Nirguna), etc. But in this way we are going to a distance from our present context. On the other hand a source can not be said as art. Art is uniquely individual; it is an individual expression of artist’s intuition with his suggestiveness. We should mind that “Brahman” or Absolute, the supreme being created universe and man creates art. Art is not the work of God, its real bed of creation is the intuition of artist, as per Rabindranath Tagore “Kabi taba manobhumi”, means the realm of artist’s mind.

The discussion I have started is simply a technical aspect of our practice of art. What I realize the evolution of art is going through a process of simplification though we have seen different schooling, phases, different outlook, aims and objectives time to time. Line is also a way of simplification. Among the mediums of art practice tone, colour, mass, volume are the natural elements. But line is not natural, it is created. If we see line in the nature it is an illusion; practically there is no line. In our vision it is a simplified views of space, volume or any thing natural objectivity. If we gradually increase the contrast of a photograph, its tone, colour , etc.become simplified and starts vanishing gradually and ultimately it will turn to a linear configuration without any tone or colour. It is an illusion within all practical existence. So line is the most simplified and only created one among our tools to do a painting. Also the line of direction is an important factor in the case of sculpture, the art of mass, the art of space (real space), the art pf volume. So we conclude there is a silver lines to every patch of dark ignorance.