Wood with paint and gilt. Burrell Collection, Glasgow
A year after my Berlin fiasco with British
Airways, I spent my measly refund (thanks, BA!) on a flight to Glasgow to see the Burrell Collection, a huge stash of art amassed by Scottish millionaire
William Burrell in the early 20th century.
After a major
refurbishment, the museum re-opened in 2022. The renovated spaces are lovely (and warm –
important in Scotland!) but it was the new display labels that set off a
Twitter-storm. In fact, that
was the main reason for my visit because I couldn’t believe what I had
heard.
Attention centred on the labelling of two figurines of
the Chinese deity Guan-yin. This deity, widely worshipped in East Asia as a
goddess, evolved out of the Indian male bodhisattva[1]
Avalokitesvara after Buddhism spread from India into China. This gender
evolution is one of the great mysteries of East Asian Buddhism and worthy
of close study. But the Burrell went with:
Figs 3-5 Figure of Guan-yin and accompanying labels. Burrell Collection, Glasgow
This was the most notable, but not the only, example of “new” labelling. Elsewhere,
a Tang Dynasty dancer figurine was labelled: “Do you like to dance? This girl
does. She’s moving her body and clothes to show off her dancing skills.” And other
examples in a similar vein.
All British museums are under pressure to be more “inclusive”
if they want to retain public funding, so the Burrell’s labels may be driven by
this. Or it may be an attempt to go viral to boost visitor numbers. The museum
has defended its approach (see this link) and was even named as the UK Art
Fund’s 2023 Museum of the Year. It pushed me to research Guan-yin’s evolution in
greater detail, which turned out to be quite complicated (surprise!) so this post is a bit long.
The name “Guan-shi-yin”, later shortened to “Guan-yin”, first
appeared in Chinese translations of Buddhist scriptures in the 3rd
century CE. In one of the main scriptures, the Lotus Sutra, the Buddha praises the
compassionate nature of a bodhisattva named Avalokitesvara. When this was
translated from Sanskrit, the name Avalokitesvara (“lord who sees from high”) became
“Guan-shi-yin” (“one who perceives/senses the entire world”), reflecting his mission
to hear and assist all persons in need.
The original sutra does not specify Avalokitesvara’s gender.
The “svara” component of his name typically refers to a male aristocrat or lord.
But the sutra lists 33 different forms which he has assumed in order to carry
out his tasks, of which 7 are female, so it seems a female persona was not
ruled out.
Indian religious art invariably depicts Avalokitesvara as
male, as in Fig 6 below where he sports a luxuriant moustache, a bare chest and
an impressive set of abs.
Early Buddhist imagery in China focused on the Buddha himself. This changed in the 5th- 6th centuries when the religion prospered under a series of devoutly Buddhist rulers. Guan-yin began to appear in sculpture as a slender figure dressed in elaborate robes and jewels (Figs 8 and 9). The clothes and jewellery probably came from Indian religious imagery, as well as from the Lotus Sutra which says that Avalokitesvara once received a magnificent necklace as a reward. But sculptors seemed to prefer a slimmer physique, unlike the Indian model. A modern viewer might already perceive these figures as female, though one cannot assume the same of 6th C viewers.
Fig 9 (R) Guan-yin. Northern Zhou or early Sui Dynasty (approx 580 CE). Limestone. Source: Museum of Fine Art, Boston
By the 8th-9th C, Guan-yin’s role as a
saviour deity had won him a major following in China, especially at the Mogao
cave temples in Dunhuang. Devotees commissioned paintings of him in various sitting
and standing poses: someone even requested a double portrait (Fig 10 below).
Depictions from this period give him a softer, more fluid
appearance: apparently, the 8th C painter Han Gan sometimes used local
courtesans as models for his bodhisattvas. Nonetheless, the deity often had a pencil
moustache and sometimes a tiny beard (as in Fig 10) as a reminder of his gender.
In some paintings, this looks odd against the languid posture, full lips, plush
robes and jewellery. Were artists already pushing the gender boundaries?
In the 10th century, the gender issue became more
apparent with two new depictions of Guan-yin. One was the Water-Moon Guan-yin, showing him seated in a relaxed pose by a bamboo-fringed pond against a full moon.
He still has masculine features: in the earliest known version from
943 CE (Fig 11), he has a vestigial moustache and beard, while in Fig 12 he is
clean-shaven but has broad shoulders and muscular arms.
When this image was popularised in sculpture a century
later, the deity still looked androgynous – see for example the Burrell’s own
12th C piece (Fig 1). A variation known as Guan-yin of the Southern
Seas often showed the deity looking positively Amazonian (Fig 13).
The other new image to emerge was the White-robed Guan-yin, which
historian Yu Chun-Fang suggests was the first overtly feminine depiction. An early example is at the
Yanxia cave temple near Hangzhou (Fig 14) from the 10th or 11th
C. This sculpture has much in common with modern Guan-yin images: the flowing
hooded robe, the soft posture, demure downward-looking face and the
prayer-beads held in one hand.
But then the evidential trail starts to run cold. The decline of the Mogao cave temples meant fewer religious paintings to show us developments in the depiction of Guan-yin. With the rise of Confucianism under the new Song Dynasty, painters preferred subjects like landscapes and nature. Images of Guan-yin from that period are more often found in sculpture, where the Water-Moon or Southern Seas versions were popular.
Artists never lost interest in the White-robed Guan-yin though:
in this rare 13th C painting (Fig 15), the artist has fused two
forms: he has painted the bamboo and full moon from the Water-Moon but the
deity is White-robed with a feminine appearance.
And in this early 14th C painting (Fig 16), the
full moon has become a halo but the deity wears a billowing hooded white robe. I
think these images show how the foundations of modern Chinese Guan-yin imagery were
laid.
By the 13-14th centuries, images of Guan-yin with
masculine features had become rare in China. Instead, worship centred on the
belief that the deity could help women to bear children. This “child-giving”
ability was highlighted in a locally-penned Chinese sutra which (in modern
terms) went viral. Unsurprisingly, when artists wanted a template to portray a
Child-giving Guan-yin, they chose the feminine persona of the White-robed
Guan-yin. Yu Chun-Fang argues that this was the deciding factor in Guan-yin’s
gender transformation in China, which I think is plausible.
To emphasise her raison d'etre, the Child-giving Guan-yin was portrayed carrying a child, looking unmistakeably female. This appeared as early as the late Song/Yuan period as in Fig 17 below, and remained popular for centuries thereafter.
Fig 18 (R) Guan-yin with infant. Late 17th C. Dehua porcelain. Source: Royal Collections Trust, UK
The feminine Guan-yin received further impetus when Christian missionaries arrived in China in the 16th century. Some of them (it is alleged) used the visual similarity between the Child-giving Guan-yin and the Virgin Mary to attract converts. The Virgin and Child certainly became one of the most popular Christian images in the region. A major producer of these was the Dehua kilns in Fujian who were famous for their white porcelain Guan-yins; only a small tweak in iconography was needed for their Christian clientele.
As an interesting side-note, the Guan-yin/Virgin link gained
significance in Japan in the 17th-18th C when
Christianity was banned. Christians could, however, acquire a “Guan-yin” figure
(known in Japan as Kannon) and secretly worship it as the Virgin Mary. This
gave rise to the Maria Kannon (Fig 19), often made at Dehua in China and
smuggled into Japan. The similarities with Fig 18 above are obvious, though
Maria Kannons usually had a concealed Christian icon (e.g a tiny crucifix).
In both Japan and Korea, where the child-giving aspect was not so wide-spread, images of Guan-yin with male features persisted well into
the 19th C, as in the two examples below where he has a moustache
and beard. A 17th C moustachioed figure of Gwaneum (as he is known) is
listed as a national treasure of Korea and worshipped at the Beopjusa Temple to
this day. In China and the major centres of Chinese migration (Singapore,
Taiwan and Hong Kong) however, it would be nigh impossible to find a non-female
Guan-yin now.
This post is a ruthlessly summarised account of one issue
(gender transformation) within a complicated topic where a lot of key historical facts are missing. To sum up: Avalokitesvara as Guan-yin was portrayed in China as male until at least the 10th
C, when depictions began to diverge. The popularity of the Child-giving Guan-yin
weighed in favour of a female image, and the Guan-yin/Virgin connection supported
this preference. I haven’t had space to discuss other avatars of
Guan-yin, like the Thousand-armed Guan-yin or the intriguingly named
Fish-basket Guan-yin.
Researching this subject, I’ve been struck by how fluid
religious beliefs can be over time. In this troubled era, Guan-yin’s role as a
non-judgemental saviour of humanity rather suggests that his/her gender is irrelevant.
So although I'm still dubious about the Burrell’s labels, the Burrell Guan-yin’s advice (after many years in Glasgow) would probably be to get over it
and be grateful that such an impressive collection is accessible for free.
Definitely worth a visit if you are in Scotland.
References:
Guanyin: the Chinese transformation of Avalokitesvara (2001), Yu Chun-Fang
"The Construction and dissemination of a new visual idiom - the White-robed Guanyin and the Upper Tianzhu monastery in Hangzhou" (2014). Bernadette Broeskamp
Chinese sculpture - a great tradition (2007), Ann Paludan
[1] In
Buddhism: an enlightened being who chooses to serve the mortal world instead of
ascending to Nirvana. Often depicted in art as attendants of the Buddha.
