Movies & TV

I know this is like modern filmmaking phenomena but I wonder how much is related to Western culture, always living in the ruins and shadows of the East.

For example, Roman and Greek architecture and art is always portrayed as plain white marble structures (think Washington DC), even though they were actually very colorful. Similar thing happens with ancient Middle Eastern structures, portrayals and conceptions as collosal but plain, ruined structures (cf. Ozymandias, new Dune adaptions, the Ahsoka show now), even though there was once very rich culture around them.

In India, there are very old, now plain-looking temples, and new ones constructed as white slabs, but there are also very old yet ornate and rainbow/pastel-colored temples out there (eg. Ranganathaswamy Temple.

Idk I guess my thesis is that it is a continuous and living tradition, so the sublime is not thought of as this inhuman, unattainable looming object in the background used as a tool to indicate the power of men over nature and civilizations.

Like I see the Western motif in this way: a larger-than-life Great Man going around conquering lands, with scenes of him looking up at the colossal ancient wonders, showing he too is a collosus: Alexander, Napoleon, Paul Atreides, etc. Whereas in Hindu tradition, the tirtha-yatra or conquest by a cakravartin world-conqueror is more about touring the world and paying homage to each holy site and culture, looking up at these intricate temples and recognizing there is a deeper unseen world they are part of. Sometimes the final step in a cakravartin's world conquest is to give away his global empire. Hence the image of ancient Hindu kings parading, just throwing gold and gems into the stretets.

Sorry for the essay, if anyone has any more info on this topic, I'd love to follow up. It's very interesting to me to connect film and historical perceptions!