cooling mudpacks: the aesthetic quality of therapy 161
My interest in the connection between the process and resolution of healing
was also inspired by my realization that the term “cure” has no direct transla-
tion in the Malayalam language. “Cure” refers to the eradication of a problem
or a return to a state of health—often defi ned simply as a lack of illness—that
existed prior to the development of a pathology. People in Kerala, however,
talk of bringing “change” (māruka/māttam), fi nding “improvement” (bhēdam)
or even reaching a state of “prosperity” (abhivriddhi) to invoke a few Malayalam
expressions for what is accomplished through healing. Some of these expres-
sions are more modest and incremental while others are more exalted than the
ideal of curing.
“Pleasant” is used here to describe a variety of experiences in undergoing
treatment that are at times pleasant and at least non-abrasive. Th e everyday
meanings of this word are inadequate to cover the range of issues discussed
here, but rather than invent a term to describe these aesthetic features, I will
defi ne the various meanings I am attributing to the word “pleasant.” Often
“pleasant” appropriately describes a person’s positive sensorial reaction to a
method of treatment. For example, “cooling” (tanuppu, kulirmma) is a com-
monly heard local idiom for expressing the positively-valued aesthetic experi-
ence some people reported in undergoing therapy in Kerala.
“Pleasant” can, however, be too positive a term to describe therapies that
are simply less abrasive to undergo. Ayurveda, for example, can be uncomfort-
able, irritating or demanding, requiring one to undergo an austere vegetar-
ian diet, digest a large quantity of ghee (clarifi ed butter) or take medicine to
induce vomiting. But there remains a diff erence between the adverse aspects
of ayurvedic and allopathic treatments. While ayurvedic treatment could be
characterized as at times uncomfortable or demanding, according to patients’
reports of their experiences in therapy, allopathic therapies can at times be
painful, disconcerting or, occasionally, traumatic. Another way to characterize
the diff erence is that both ayurvedic and allopathic treatments involve thera-
pies that are unpleasant to undergo, but only ayurveda features treatments that
patients describe as creating pleasant aesthetic eff ects. Th ese are not necessarily
essential, eternal characteristics of these therapies. As will be discussed later,
there is evidence that in the past ayurveda used more invasive, violent therapies
and allopathy was more focused than it is now on care and giving relief.
Th ere are also occasions where “pleasant” is too mundane to describe the
transformative experience, the bringing-to-a-higher-level, some people say
they experience in healing. Th e demanding nature of ayurveda is sometimes
described as part of the process of cultivating self-discipline, or a development
of the self that some say occurs in therapy. Th is is similar to a spiritual benefi t
reported by patrons of religious healing in Kerala. Healing in these cases is