FUA HARIPHITAK was born April 22, 1910 on his grandmother's small houseboat moored beside Wat (temple) Rajburana in Thon Buri, Thailand. His grandmother, Tuptim, was the descendant of a high ranking government official of Phetchaburi (or Phet Buri), a town 160 kilometers south of Bangkok, and his grandfather was head of one of the subdistricts in that area. When the latter was dying, he told his wife that she must leave the town where they were living since it was too dangerous for a widow to live there alone with her three daughters. Tuptim therefore bought a houseboat and became a river merchant, buying and selling products—such as the famous Phetchaburi sugar—up and down the country's waterways, from Lang Suan in the south to Phitsanulok far north of Bangkok. Tuptim eventually moored her boat at the large floating market at the mouth of the Rajburana Canal in Thon Buri, then a separate town across the river from Bangkok, and it was there that her oldest daughter, Kep, met her husband, Pleng. Pleng, a native of the district, had been educated at the Wat Rajburana School and was a favorite of its revered abbot, Phra Acharn (revered mastermonk) Phia. At the time of their marriage, Pleng was a court painter, serving under the great master, Phya Anusat Chitrakorn. He died as the result of a fall from a horse six months before his son FUA was born.

FUA (pronounced Feua) was given his name by Phra Acharn Phia. It is short for eua-feua, which means "helpful," and was inspired by the fact that Kep's two young sisters and their nurse, who lived in widely scattered parts of the country, happened to come to Thon Buri to visit, although none knew of the imminent birth of the baby.

Not long thereafter the family moved to a small street behind Wat Suthat Thepwararam in Bangkok. When King Rama VI instituted the custom of surnames FUA took the name of his father's brother, so it was as FUA THONGYU that he attended primary school at Wat Suthat (1918-1920) and the first years of middle school at Wat Rachabopit (1921-1923). His mother, meanwhile, married again into a good family of Rajburana, but died very shortly after this marriage when FUA was only seven. He and his grandmother, whom he fondly calls "my Granny," moved in for a time with a cousin of his mother's second husband, and FUA transferred to the middle school at nearby Wat Benchamabopitr, the Marble Temple (1924-1925). Uncomfortable with the constraints of living with a family to which they no longer belonged, FUA and his grandmother finally took up tiny quarters off Bamrungmuang Road, where Tuptim resumed trading and FUA finished high school at Wat Rachabopit.

On completion of high school in 1929 FUA entered Pawchang School for training as an art teacher. He had no problem the first two years, but by the third year he began to feel that the instruction was not suited to his needs. His own art style, as it began to develop, was quick and impressionistic, but the school required students to follow in detail the work of the teacher. In consequence his work suffered and he failed to pass his examinations except in the principles of teaching.

Meanwhile, for his own entertainment, FUA would sketch portraits of his friends. These drawings, a truer gauge of his talent than his schoolwork, came to the attention of both the principal and one of his masters, Khun (a lesser rank of Thai nobility) Phatiphakphimlikit. When FUA was unable to pass the examinations for his certificate, Phatiphakphimlikit offered to take him on as a special student. Two happy years followed during which FUA painted freely, showing his works to his master, who guided him, especially in the use of color.

During these years FUA was supported by his grandmother, who was happy to give him the chance to study. For awhile he earned some extra money working part time as a designer and painter in the craft workshop of architect Luang (second higher rank of Thai nobility) Narumitrekakarn.

In 1933 FUA and three or four of his fellow students became private pupils of Professor Corrado Feroci, an Italian artist who had come to Thailand some years earlier and who remained there until his death in 1962 at the age of 70. So great was Feroci's contribution to the development of the creative arts—and later to an appreciation of the traditional art of Thailand—that when he became a Thai citizen in 1944, he was given by the king the honorary Thai name of Silpa Bhirasri, meaning creator of beautiful or fine art, by which he is revered to this day.

Feroci gave his students solid training, such as would be given students in Italy who were preparing for entrance into the Academy of Fine Arts. The group learned the theories of composition and color, art history, art styles, and perhaps most important in a society where education is based on rote learning, art criticism. Slowly but surely FUA gained the analytical ability that was to serve as a foundation for his own future research into traditional Thai art.

In 1936 Feroci founded Praneet Silpakaam (School of Fine Arts) in Bangkok, the forerunner of present-day Silpakorn University. Feroci taught there, and FUA was among the first students attending classes. Because he was a painter he was assigned to study under Phra (third higher rank of Thai nobility) Soralaklikit, a fine painter but conservative in style, and his students were expected to follow suit. Years later Feroci wrote of FUA that, because of his temperament, "it was not easy for him to comply with the rules of the school. Although very respectful and not complaining, it was evident that he suffered in submitting himself to the discipline of the academy."

FUA once again rejected the constraints of formal training and returned to his status as a special student of Feroci. He experimented with many techniques of painting to find one which best suited his nature, and settled on impressionism, which he describes as expressing "what we see and, accordingly feel, without any intellectual speculation." Because of the destruction of World War II only three paintings from this period have survived, portraits of Feroci, Feroci's son and FUA’s grandmother with a cat. So effective was the latter that a fellow artist commented years later, "whenever I see an old lady holding a cat, I always think of that painting." Pipop Boosarakumwadi, who wrote his doctoral dissertation on FUA, commented that the artist expressed his love for Tuptim "with tender and lively flowing brush strokes." The portraits of Professor Feroci and his son became models for the use of chalk in portrait painting.

FUA also spent some time painting in the northern towns of Chieng Mai and Lampoon, sending his works back to Feroci for comment. Feroci was particularly struck with his "remarkable drawing—and as drawing is the grammar of every plastic art . . .I felt that one day this young man would become a real artist."

While still studying as a special student at Pawchang under Khun Phatiphakphimlikit and Feroci, FUA had heard of yet another good teacher, the architect Mom Chao (Prince) Ittithepsaan Kridakara, and during informal sessions at the architect's home FUA first met his future wife, Mom Ratchawongs (next to lowest princely rank) Thanomsakdi Kridakara, a young relative of Ittithepsaan. Thanomsakdi, the daughter of Phra Ong Chao (Prince) Charoonsak Kridakara, Thai ambassador to France, was born and began her schooling in Paris. The family returned to Thailand in 1932 where Thanomsakdi continued her studies at Bangkok's elite Mater Dei school. Artistically gifted she, too, came to Ittithepsaan to study architectural decoration.

When FUA was in his fifth year at Pawchang, the students participated in an art fair. Thanomsakdi asked him to review a design she had drawn for possible inclusion. FUA liked it and agreed to enlarge it as part of a panel he himself was painting. Working together on the enlargement, the couple became friends.

At first FUA was not concerned, since the disparity in their social rank and wealth was too great for him to consider serious involvement. But Thanomsakdi joined him again when he transferred to Praneet Silpakaam. She, too, became a student of Feroci, rendering herself very useful as a translator and clarifier of the artistic terms the Italian professor was trying to explain to his Thai students.

The young couple was thus thrown into daily contact, studying and painting together, and soon falling in love. Thanomsakdi's mother, Mom (wife of a prince) Cheum, was deeply troubled by this mismatch and tried to suppress it. Her efforts, however, only aggravated her daughter "until she could not stay with her mother" and came to live with FUA in his grandmother's tiny quarters. Eventually Mom Cheum set the pair up in a small house with a lovely garden, and two years later their son, Thamnu, was born. Mom Cheum raised the child as FUA and his wife continued their studies, supported on the income from his wife's property. In this manner they passed five happy and artistically productive years.

Unfortunately, Mom Cheum and M. R. Thanomsakdi were persuaded to invest in a business venture which did not prosper. Thanomsakdi transferred to FUA’s ownership her other properties which had not been used as collateral to protect them from attachment to pay debts. Later learning that the business was on the verge of bankruptcy, the couple sought legal counsel—thus unwittingly opening themselves to great pain and suffering. Unbeknownst to FUA, Thanomsakdi fell in love with their lawyer. Unable to tolerate the situation, she lost her health, becoming thin and sickly. The lawyer, although already married, returned her love, and—from desire to protect her, says FUA—he offered to take their case on the condition that FUA renounce both his wife and the titles to her property. This he did, for he could not bear to see her waste away.

Nor could he bear to go on with his work at Praneet Silpakaam. Feroci had suggested that he study abroad so that he could see the great works of art in the original. World War II had just started in Europe, however, ruling out Italy as a possible destination. FUA had also studied Indian art so Feroci encouraged him to go to Visva-Bharati University, Santiniketan, established in Bengal by the great poet and artist, Rabindranath Tagore. Thanomsakdi, whose faith in her former husband's artistic abilities rose above her emotional upheaval, provided him financial support for a five-year stay. In 1941 FUA set out with heavy heart on an arduous journey to Calcutta. "There's a time to come together and a time to part," he now says of his deep sorrow; "that is the way of life."

FUA was to spend only one year at Santiniketan before being interned by the British, along with other "enemy aliens," for the duration of the war. But that one year left a lasting mark on his life. More important than the techniques of wet fresco that he learned at the hands of the world's masters, was the intellectual and cultural stimuli he received. Every day new art forms—Indian dancing, drumming, literature, poetry, painting—assailed his senses. The fine arts library alone was a vast museum of masterpieces of Indian art from all ages.

FUA’s guru during this period was Nandalal Bose, the director of the Arts Department. Bose greeted FUA with some skepticism, since the young man arrived with no certificate—he had never completed the formal requirement at Praneet Silpakaam—but was armed only with a letter of recommendation from Feroci, as dean of the Faculty of Painting and Sculpture. After seeing FUA’s work, however, he accepted him as a pupil and invited him to hang his paintings in the department's exhibition.

Feroci had provided FUA with a strong academic background in the theory, history and analysis of art. Bose's method of teaching relied less on articulated theory than on transferring a deeper nonverbal understanding of what constitutes fine art. In conveying this knowledge, he appealed more to intuition than to intellect. His influence on the young Thai was tremendous, and looking back FUA says, "I stayed with him for only a moment—but it seemed like years."

Among other things, FUA came to think more deeply about the traditional art of his own country. He had already begun to familiarize himself with it during his painting expeditions in northern Thailand, since Feroci had asked him to copy traditional art motifs for the benefit of other students at school. But now FUA began to realize that he could apply both Bose's intuitive and Feroci's analytical approaches to the study of classical Thai painting.

For the time being, however, inspiration was to be the victim of misfortune. Rabindranath Tagore died while FUA was at Santiniketan, and on the day his ashes were brought back to the university FUA received a letter from home informing him of the death of his beloved grandmother. "It rained for the whole day," he says. Some time thereafter a cable told him that Thanomsakdi had suffered a nervous breakdown—from which she was never fully to recover. The war had reached Bangkok by then, and the bombing, coming on top of her emotional problems and further loss of property, finally rendered her unable to cope with reality. Mom Cheum took her daughter and grandson for safety to her family seat in Battambang (Phra Tha Bong), a province long in dispute between Thailand and Cambodia. It had been returned to Thailand after the Thai government agreed to cooperate with Japan and declared war on Great Britain in January 1942.

As a result of this Thai government action, FUA became an enemy alien in India. He was interned, along with the Japanese, first in the Purana Guila fortress in Delhi for a year, and then in Deoli, Rajasthan until the war ended.

The three years in Deoli were hard. Outside the camp thousands of people were dying of starvation. The prisoners, though better off, were occasionally reduced to eating dog meat and were prey to innumerable diseases. FUA himself suffered from anemia and malaria though he was fortunate to have funds which he had been unable to use for Santiniketan with which he could buy food and books. Despite the hardships, the Japanese prisoners organized an art exhibition and persuaded FUA to enter three small tempera paintings. He won both first and second prize. First place was awarded to his "Life in the Japanese Allied Prison Camp," a composition depicting Japanese women in their bright kimonos with their children. Second place, called "Flower Garden," showed dahlias bursting with color, and the internment camp on a distant hill.

The prizes carried with them cash awards which FUA used to buy more books on Hinduism and philosophy. After extensive reading among these he chose the teachings of Swami Sivananda Sarasvati as best suited to guide him in his spiritual search. His guru's way was practical rather than theoretical, so FUA was soon rising each day before dawn to practice yogic breathing and posture exercises—a habit he gave up only in the last few years when advanced age and illness prevented him from continuing. So great was his sense of spiritual well-being that on his return to Thailand FUA changed his surname to HARIPHITAK, meaning "protector of Vishnu," but he did not renounce Buddhism, simply seeing Vishnu in Buddha.

Once home again FUA became an instructor at the new Silpakorn University, and at the same time both continued his creative output and began his lifetime research into traditional Thai art. In 1949, when the First National Art Exhibition was organized by Prof. Silpa Bhirasri, as Feroci was by then known, FUA won first prize for "Petchaburi," a monochrome tempera executed on "scrap paper." The painting demonstrated, according to Pipop, the artist's ability to create "accurately and skillfully" a scene of wild fields and hills using only a few tones of green. Second prize was also awarded to FUA for "Diamond Luster, or Madam Chit Rianpracha," which Silpa praised for its technique and clarity of composition. Pipop cites Silpa's remark that "the prismatic characteristic of the color in this painting, together with the atmosphere, make us feel and enjoy the wonderful reflection of the light which touches the surface of the diamond. ", FUA went on to win first prize at the Second National Art Exhibition in 1950 and third prize at the Fifth.

Meanwhile his research into traditional art had taken him to the ancient temples of Sukhothai, Ayutthaya, Phetchaburi, Thon Buri and Bangkok. In order to understand fully the old styles of painting, he set about copying the finest murals he found. Despite the fact that his own personal style was highly coloristic and impressionistic—with attention to mood and atmosphere rather than detail—and despite his impatience with copying during his school years, FUA regarded the task of reproducing the old murals as a labor of love and intellectually stimulating. "You have to analyze everything," he explains. "You have to try to do the same in both color and drawing. You even have to understand the spirit of the old painter. Otherwise there's no use in copying it." Remarkably, FUA always reproduced the paintings freehand.

Prof. Silpa did not at first understand the value of this project, feeling that copying was unworthy of a creative artist. Nor had his own busy schedule as artist, teacher and dean of the College of Art allowed him time for deeper studies of Thai art. Finally one day he visited Ayutthaya where FUA was copying two or three major murals which were in a bad state of disrepair. Only then did he recognize that FUA’s value as a creative artist was equaled by his value as a preservationist and art historian. Silpa wrote in 1959 recalling that in those early days "nobody, or very few, thought FUA’s work worthwhile. Today everyone acknowledges the importance of the work done by this artist in recording paintings which have vanished in these last ten years." Some of these reproductions were exhibited in 1948 in London at the Royal Thai Legation, and in 1952 in Bangkok at the government Department of Fine Arts.

FUA’s teaching specialty by this time had become methods of research into traditional Thai art, a subject that is now a permanent offering at the university. His students learned how to copy old murals in order to gain a full understanding of the technique and spirit of the artists. By this painstaking method they also learned how to distinguish the work of the great masters from that of lesser artists and craftsmen. Of those who studied under FUA, some became researchers, others writers and art critics and a few are neoclassical painters with a style that combines the traditional with the contemporary.

In 1954 FUA received an Italian government scholarship to study at the Academia de Bella Arti in Rome, after which he toured the art centers of Europe. As a result of this exposure to European art, FUA’s personal style changed radically to a style resembling cubism. As he explained to Pipop, his new approach began by adding pure colors to the skin of a nude figure. "Later on, I wanted a strong smashing technique so I turned to the brightest spot of light and the darkest shadow. . . . I painted a human being not to look like a human but to look like a picture, an arrangment of lines and colors." One of the paintings he produced in Italy, "Composition, or Model" (1955), later took first prize at Bangkok's Eighth National Art Exhibition in 1957.

The major works FUA produced immediately after his return to Bangkok reflect a firm enthusiastic style, with emphasis still on portraying the mood of the moment. Pipop describes the "dark and gloomy atmosphere filled with snow" of "Polo Square" (1956); the "Salt Water Fish at Sri Chang" (1957) whose "various colors sparkle as if those three fish were just brought out from the sea," and the lively joyous brush strokes of "Sriracha Fish Village" (1957).

These years marked the pinnacle of his renown as a creative artist. In 1957, which was the 2500th year of the Buddhist Era, FUA was selected to do the drawings for a book published to commemorate the occasion, and that same year he was proclaimed one of the best artists of the decade. Finally, in 1959 he was honored with a special showing of his works at the Tenth National Art Exhibition. After that he took his place in the exhibitions, not as an exhibitor, but as a member of the panel of judges.

In 1956 FUA married Somthawin Wongsakul, a woman ten years his junior who had been a neighbor of FUA and his first wife and aware of the traumatic ending of that relationship. Remembering how upset Somthawin had been at his departure, FUA sought her out on his return from India in 1946. It took ten years of stately courtship before he won the confidence of her parents and saved up enough money to ask for her hand in marriage. Prof. Silpa was sponsor at the wedding.

FUA took one more study tour in 1960 when he accompanied Silpa to an International Art Association conference in Vienna. After the meeting he traveled on his own—living in garrets and existing on bread and milk—to art centers in Paris, London and India. Before leaving India he took a quick trip to the Himalayan ashram of Swami Sivananda Sarasvati to pay homage and receive the yogi's blessing.

Meanwhile FUA’s interest in ancient murals had never ceased. He was saddened on returning to old sites to discover that some of the murals he had copied had deteriorated irreparably since earlier visits. Realizing then that reproduction alone could not preserve Thailand's artistic heritage, FUA consulted with Silpa on how to save the paintings. Silpa, in turn, persuaded UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) to send Dr. Paul Coremans from the De l'Institut Royal du Patrimoine Artistique in Brussels to help analyze the cement in the walls and advise on chemicals that might be used to preserve the wall paintings. In addition Silpa spent weeks of his home leave consulting with Europe's foremost experts on mural preservation.

Thai murals normally have been executed in tempera rather than by wet fresco or encaustic techniques. Encaustic, using a medium based on wax and turpentine, was unknown in Thailand. Wet fresco, on the other hand, was known during the Ayutthaya period. It is suitable, however, only for painting large figures, since the pigments must be applied on the plaster coat while it is still wet; they cannot be redone after the plaster dries. As Thai painting emphasizes miniature figures executed with delicate lines and details, the wet fresco technique was necessarily rejected.

Tempera murals are executed on walls prepared with several coats of white chalk mixed with a paste traditionally obtained from roasted tamarind fruit. The pigments are distempered with gum or glue. "If the wall is well dry," wrote Silpa, "in due time the tempera surface becomes very hard and resists for hundreds of years, but if the wall is humid the painting is bound to disappear." In tropical Thailand humidity caused fine mold to grow on the surface of the pigments, "making them vulnerable to the slightest friction," and humidity seeped into the chalk coating causing it to bulge and crumble. Moreover, many of the old temple roofs leaked and the water streaked the surface of the murals.

FUA and Silpa mixed and tested the recommended solutions themselves. But when Silpa died in 1962 FUA felt the work was too great to carry on alone and turned the responsibility over to the government Department of Fine Arts. He worked with the department in repairing the fine murals in Wat Yai Suwannaram, Phetchaburi and Wat Prasad, Nonthaburi. Different solutions of chemicals were used for each, depending upon individual requirements. He also copied for safekeeping at the National Museum in Bangkok the murals in the museum's Buddhaisawan Chapel and in Wat Suwannaram in Thon Buri.

In 1969 FUA retired as head of the Painting Section of the Faculty of Painting, Sculpture and Graphic Arts of Silpakorn University, which position he had held since 1962, and devoted himself full-time to mural restoration. In 1976 he was appointed vice chairman for restoration and conservation of the murals at Wat Phra Keo (Temple of the Emerald Buddha). He worked on the paintings for three years, restoring about two hundred panels, before he resigned over differences with the Department of Fine Arts over policy. FUA felt the murals were so valuable that they should all be preserved, regardless of their condition; the department wanted to paint new murals on some walls. FUA felt he could not work under such constraints.

His resignation allowed him to devote himself entirely to the restoration of his pet project—and ultimately his masterpiece—the scripture library (Ho Phra Trai Pidok) at Wat Rakhang Khosittaram in Thon Buri. FUA had learned of the building in the 1950s when he discovered an exchange of letters written in the 1920s between two scholar princes, H.R.H. Prince Damrong Rajanupab, the "Father of Thai History," and H.R.H. Prince Naris, a renowned artist and the designer of the Marble Temple. The library, Prince Naris had written, dated from the reign of Rama I (1782-1809, founder of the present Chakri dynasty) and the building itself had belonged to the king before he ascended the throne. It was not only the repository of the Buddhist Canon (Tripitaka) that had been recopied after the fall of Ayutthaya, but it had been decorated by the finest craftsmen in the realm. Prince Naris praised everything, from the carved eaves and gold-leaf lacquered doors, to the scripture cases and painted murals. The murals in the central of the three chambers—depicting scenes from the Ramakien (Thai version of the Indian Ramayana)—were, he believed, the work of Phra Acharn Nak, the foremost painter of his time.

In 1957 FUA wrote the director of Silpakorn University advising him that the Phra Acharn Nak paintings should be removed to the National Museum. The project was approved by the Department of Fine Arts, but turned down by the deputy abbot of the wat, who had ultimate jurisdiction over the library, even though the latter was being used as a storeroom. When he became abbot, this same man decided to remove the precious walls entirely in order to repair the foundation of the building. FUA turned for help to Sulak Sivaraksa, bookstore owner and vigorous exponent of art preservation and history, and the Siam Society, and in July 1968 the abbot granted permission to the Siamese Association of Architects to allow its Art Conservation Committee to cooperate in the library's renovation.

To raise funds for the project, FUA wrote an article on the murals in 1969, expanding it into a book the following year. Revenues from the sale of the book were donated to the undertaking and in May 1970 the renovation contract was signed. Work began the following year and continued, under FUA’s supervision, until 1982.

As the 200th anniversary of the establishment of the Chakri dynasty and its capital city, Bangkok, approached, FUA felt overwhelming pressure to complete the work. He sold his own paintings to help defray the costs of restoration, and began to work around the clock—until finally he suffered a complete physical breakdown, involving paralysis of the right side of his face and his right arm. His friends rallied to his cause. They brought his condition to the attention of King Bhumibol, who graciously paid for his medical care. At the same time they wrote articles about the project for the local newspapers, and raised funds, in particular from Shell Companies of Thailand, for completion of the restoration. Under FUA’s continued supervision, the halls were completed in time for the bicentenary celebration. On August 14, 1982, at the time coincident with that of the "auspicious celebration of the Royal House of Chakri, and the Rattanakosin [Bangkok] Bicentennial Celebration, H.R.H. Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn proceeded, on behalf of His Majesty the King, to perform the religious offering celebrating the Ho Phra Trai Pidok Library."

For his work FUA has received important honors. In 1977 he was named honorary member of the Siam Society for his contribution to the conservation of Thai painting. The following year the Sathirakoses-Nagapradipa Foundation honored him for selflessly giving his time and energy to preserving the national heritage. Finally in 1980 he had the unprecedented distinction of receiving an Honorary Doctorate in Fine Arts from Silpakorn University, an honor granted directly by the king. The following year his friends and students organized a one-man exhibition of his paintings and drawings at the National Gallery of Art.

FUA now lives modestly with his wife on his university pension Their marriage has been a harmonious one but without children because FUA felt his life as an artist was too unsure. His son, Thamnu, by his first wife, has become a private painter. Although most of his life FUA was a physically active man—practicing daily yoga exercises and sparring with professional boxers—he has become much restricted by age and illness. He now hopes to pass his days writing some of the results of his lifetime of research into traditional Thai painting. "My life is art," wrote FUA in 1959. "I do it because I love it and of it I am a humble devotee. Neither material nor honorific award do I expect from my work, which I do with utmost sincerity, trying to capture the essence of the beauty of nature."

September 1983
Manila

REFERENCES:

Fua Hariphitak. "Preserving Thailand's Classical Artistic Tradition." Presentation to Group Discussion. Ramon Magsaysay Award Foundation, Manila. September 1, 1983. (Typewritten transcript )

Fua Hariphitak. Program. Bangkok: 10th National Art Exhibition. 1959.

Ho Phra Trai Pidok Library Wat Rakhang Khosittaram. Bangkok: Shell Companies in Thailand. 1982.

Koonlaya Watcharapongkitti. "Acharn Fua Touching Up the 'Gold of Rattanakosin City' for More than 10 Years," The Nation. Bangkok. December 20, 1980.

Pipop Boosarakumwadi. Life and Works of Fua Hariphitak. Unpublished thesis. Faculty of Decorative Art, Silpakorn University, Bangkok. 1982.

Piriya Krairiksh. "Sculpture of the Bangkok Period," Arts of Asia. Hong Kong. November-December 1982.

Silpa Bhirasri. Appreciation of Our Murals. Pamphlet. Bangkok: Fine Arts Department 1959.

______. "A Critic on Traditional Art and Modern Surroundings," Articles on the Fine Arts. Published in conjunction with the cremation rites of the author, Wat Debsirindra, Bangkok, January 17, 1963.

______ . Fua Hariphitak. Pamphlet. Bangkok: National Exhibition of Art. 1959.

______. Thai Buddhist Art (Architecture). Pamphlet. Bangkok: Fine Arts Department. 1959.

______. "Thai Painting," lecture delivered at opening of exhibition of reproductions of old Thai paintings at the Fine Arts University, Bangkok, March 1952.

______. Thai Wood Carvings. Pamphlet. Bangkok: Fine Arts Department. 1961; 1963.

Suthon Sukphisit. "King Rama I's House Under Renovation for Bicentennial," Bangkok Post. December 21, 1981.

Interview with Fua Hariphitak and interviews with and letters from persons acquainted with him and his work.