Rishab Aiyer Ghosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
krishna etc described as blue (or shiva with the blue throat) is poetic
licence in indian literature. to literally depict them graphically as blue,
rather than very dark-skinned, is an instance of latent indian racism - we
don't want to remember that some of our mythical great people were
dark-skinned, just like several people we discriminate against today, so we
pretend they were really BLUE-skinned! luckily, there are no blue-skinned
people around, so we can safely glorify "fair-skinned beauty" in real life.
licence in indian literature. to literally depict them graphically as blue,
rather than very dark-skinned, is an instance of latent indian racism - we
don't want to remember that some of our mythical great people were
dark-skinned, just like several people we discriminate against today, so we
pretend they were really BLUE-skinned! luckily, there are no blue-skinned
people around, so we can safely glorify "fair-skinned beauty" in real life.
---
While I understand the sentiment behind what you are saying, and even agree with it, I am not sure your interpretation is entirely correct. These "dark-skinned" people in mythology are supposed to be the colour of the "rain-bearing could" which would be a dark grey-blue. The ACK illustrations then are not
too far off the mark. Shiva is an exception to the "rain-bearing cloud" business though...he is supposedly smeared with ash, and hence dark-coloured.
Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!
