does art describe or interpret the world?

8/10/2019 Does art describe or interpret the world?

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/does-art-describe-or-interpret-the-world 1/6

Does art describe the world or interpret it?

Maria Miruna Rădan

A shared belief of contemporary art critics and anthropologists seems to be

that the modern western world has ‘separated art from the social’ (Overing 1!"#!$%

and has turned to the idea of the art ob&ect itself as having inherent value ('ombrich1#%) *his is why anthropologists have argued that aesthetics should not be regarded

as a cross+cultural category) ,n maintaining this claim both Overing and 'ombrich

point to the fact that many forms of tribal art are not intended for aesthetical

appreciation) *here will- thus- be no notion of ‘art’ as such) ,f the notion of

‘aesthetics’ is debatable . as it is liable to be ‘modernist’ or /urocentric- the very

concept of art is even more narrow) 0or what is classified as art- if not a set of various

epressions filtered through a grid of ‘aesthetically appealing’12 3e can find our way

out of this pu44le if we start by accepting that aesthetics is a common criterion of

&udging our sensory eperience . we use it unconsciously all the time) 3hat is even

more important from an anthropological point of view is that aesthetic responses are

socially conditioned) A good case for this is 'ell’s comparison between the early

5hristians or the 6uritans who . as a sign of non+attachment to earthly things . adored

icons which were simple and lac7ing in ornamentations- with the ‘romantic hedonists

such as the 1!$s hippies who customi4ed their 8ol7swagens with flowers and stars’

('ell1" #%)

*urning to so+called ‘primitive art’- we find it is indeed most often discussed

as a ‘practical instrument for the important business of daily living’ (Arnheim 19:"

1#% rather than as a source of aesthetic pleasure for its public) 3hat criteria should

then be then ta7en in order to include in the same category 3estern ‘art’- with that of

other people who do not actually have a concept of ‘art’2 'ell replaces ‘art ob&ect’ by

1 Moreover- if we loo7 at other human creations . as music- theatre- dancing- cinematography the label

‘art’ surely could not be applied to all of their varieties) Moreover- the ‘rights’ over labeling them assuch would probably be claimed by a minority of ‘speciali4ed’ and ‘trained’ critics- not byanthropologists)

1



the notion of ‘inde’- broadly defined by its connection to agency) ,n his view-

artifacts are the ob&ectivation of agency) ;is emphasis is on doing - rather than

meaning or communication#) ;owever- in this way- the anthropology of art can turn to

any ob&ect or action and classify it as a ‘wor7 of art’- broadening its domain

ecessively)

*hese ‘ob&ectifications of agency’ or representations could be perhaps better

approached if we imagine them represented as points in a space determined by two

aes" one would be instrumentality while the other would be aesthetics. <y

instrumentality and aesthetics , mean here ‘beauty’ and ‘utility’ as universal criteria

that can be applied to any ob&ect and that are li7ely to be found in any time or culture =)

*hus at one etreme we could have ob&ects appreciated as ‘useless’ and ‘ugly’ (here

we could place what is generally discarded as litter% while at the other end we can

have ‘beautiful’ and ‘useful’ ob&ects (as a >uer would see his spear or a modern

business man his brand+new hi+tech etra+slim cell phone%)

*here is a tendency to associate non+western ‘art’ with instrumental rather than

aesthetic purposes- especially when it comes to decorations or ornamentations- seen as

non+representational (but nonetheless epressive%) 0ollowing this- the more that things

men manufacture ? produce have no straight+forward use- the more they belong to the

realm of ‘art’" someone unfamiliar with that particular culture would not be able to

tell precisely what is its purpose &ust by observing how people employ it (this is the

difference one would ma7e between a hammer and an African nail fetish figure%)

;owever- it is important to understand that the meaning of art ob&ects is conferred- not

inherent ('ell 1"% and it must be searched for in the social contet)

An interesting eample is given by the 6iro painted designs ( yonata% discussed by

'ow (1%) *he designs are non+representational . meaning that they are not aimed

at representing elements of the outside world that have special significations for the

6iro:) 6ainting yonata is a meaningful action as it is related to seeing and visual

eperience in general . things ‘central to what we might call the social organi4ation of

the 6iro’ ('ow 1$"#=%) 5lose (‘in sight’% contact with 7in is a central feature of

6iro sociality and nishinkanu- the ‘memory’ or driving force of 7in ties depends on

# @ee *homas in his foreward to 'ell’s Art and Agency.= Of course- things are not that clear+cut with ‘beauty’ as they are with ‘utility’) @ome ob&ects may beneutral when it comes to evaluating their ‘beauty’ (i)e) people do not normally thin7 of them in terms of

being appealing ? li7able ? aesthetic%): /ven though they do originate in shapes or patterns identified in nature- 'ow shows that it is not theob&ective counterpart of the design which matters for the 6iro- but its social usage)

#



visual contact and ‘visual aspect of a person’s co+presence in ongoing everyday life’

(ibid) #=%)

'ell differentiates representational art from decorative art and Arnheim spea7s

as well of ornaments as being ‘part of the world in which we live’ while ‘the wor7 of

art is a representation and interpretation of it’ (Arnheim 19:"1=%) Ornaments and

patterns are seen as a way of assigning or epressing the value of the ob&ect or person

to which they are attached) ‘<eautification’- as Overing argues ‘plays a part- first and

foremost- in a process of everyday empowerment that enables both a person and an

object to act productively’ (Overing 1!"#!=%) Also- many cultures use models and

tattooing in order to confer protection on the bearer on the design (see the MarBuesan

case discussed by 'ell%) ,ndeed- the agency of artistic creations is more salient in

those cultures- and of a different nature than in the modern western culture (where

what has been labeled as ‘art’ is more narrow- compels admiration ? shared adornment

by a small minority i)e) ‘art public’- while it confers fame- prestige- status on the

manufacturer i)e) ‘artist’%) *his does not mean that other cultures do not grant prestige

and esteem to their artists . 'ow’s study of the yonata, the painting with design

among the 6iro in 3estern 6eru shows that s7illed painters are highly valued and

appreciated) ;owever- a s7illed woman painter would not be praised as a painter- but

as a woman- since mastering the techniBue of yonata is seen as an essential part of the

female’s 7nowledge and identity and not as a way of differentiating her status from

other women)

,n non+western cultures- decorative art applied to one’s body becomes part of

one’s identity and personhood) 'ell’s concept of etended personhood is very

suggestive in this case (even though it also applies to instances where the ‘art’ ob&ect

is not attached to one’s body%) <y no means is this particular to ‘other’ cultures) 3e

can find a large number of eamples of etended personhood in western

contemporary society" starting from clothing style- accessories- handbags to

virtual etensions li7e blogs- or personal pages li7e myspace or faceboo7)

, find the handbag can be of great interest for ‘anthropology at home’" all these people wa7ing aroundwith all sorts of containers attached to them (big- small- sBuare- round- plastic- leather- simple-ornamented- strapped to their bodies or &ust held% would surely loo7 etremely intriguing to someonecompletely foreign of our culture) 0urthermore- an inventory of all the things people carry with themon a daily basis would certainly say a lot about the type of etended personhood prominent in our

culture) ;owever- this endeavor might prove very difficult- as the handbag is always private and personal, as one’s identity and self is perceived of being in our society and one can’t probe so easy andwithout previous consent)

=



As Arnheim (19:% points out- artistic creation can very well be seen as an

epression of the search for order and ‘order in nature can be discovered only when

the capacity for grasping order is developed in the mind’ (19:"1:$%) 0ollowing this-

if we loo7 at different cultures we are bound to find different sorts of order- so it is

easy to understand how ‘artistic creations’- as representations ? epressions of the

world would differ) A good eample for this comes from >elson’s eamination of

5hinese paintings which shows how the images reflect the importance of sound in

grasping the nature ? essence ? order of the world that is so prevalent in the <uddhist

as well as the 5onfucian thought framewor7)

*he same type of findings are given by tracing the evolution of ‘art ! style’

through time) *he art of the Middle Ages was mostly focused on representing biblical

scenes thus reflecting a world dominated by religious values- the Renaissance-

governed by the development of natural sciences shifted art representations towards

the material ? earthly realities while at the same time introducing the eact- calculated

and rigorous techniBue of perspective ('ombrich 1!$"#%) *his continued with the

/nlightenment period and was subseBuently opposed by the Romanic rediscovery of

emotions- sensibility and so on . with art being dominated by ,mpresionists-

/presionists- 5ubists or @urrealists) *hese currents were mar7ed both by a change of

focus and by a change of techniBue) ,n painting- it is entirely possible to give

intelligibility to any ob&ect &ust by s7etching its essential traits) *his is obvious from

loo7ing at the different ways in which people have represented elements of the outside

world across time and in different cultural spaces and at the same time scientifically

proven by research and eperiments on the psychology of perception- which show

that only a limited number of features are central for the recognition of an ob&ect

(Arnheim 19:"11%) ‘Realism’ was therefore neither necessary- nor indispensable-

but &ust another way of interpretation) ,n time- the representations of reality became

less straight+forward- more emphasis was laid on suggestion and symbolism and on

the elusive sources of meaning in a world that was no longer integrated by a dominant

belief system) 5onseBuently- it would be interesting and indicative to trace through

time the relation of visual representation with power structures and authority in

western society) 3hat at first used to be a techniBue of mar7ing the status and prestige

! ,n a thorough analysis a distinction should be made between ‘fol7 art’ and ‘elite’s art’) All the painters

included in art history treaties are selected according to criteria set by an intellectual minority and arenot representative for a people’s ‘representational style’ or ‘aesthetic taste’) *he layman- most often-will have a completely different ‘artistic’ sensitivity)

:



of the ruler (the painters used to be affiliated to royal courts% or to ma7ing somehow

visible the religious realm- has gradually shifted) ,n a modern democratic- pluralistic

society everybody has the right and means to ‘distribute’ their ‘personhood’- not only

the political leaders9) ,t is not very surprising that fears of ‘volt sorcery’ emerge in a

culture where the use of images is widespread and endowed with so much power)

,n all these instances art was both describing and interpreting the world) *he

overt purpose was to describe it but no description is completely neutral- as it is bound

to be selective and by being confined in a certain ideological framewor7 it is at the

same time- bound to be interpretative) ,deology or the type of ‘mind set’ shared by a

group (<ourdieu’s notion of habitus might be applied as well% will always determine

the ‘style’ of a culture’s art)

References

Arnheim- R) 19:) Art and Visual Perception (5h) =%) Condon" 0aber and 0aber

9 ;owever- a sort of hierarchy is still preserved through Buantity and Buality" the representations of political figures are far more numerous and ‘visible’ than those of the ‘commoners’) ,n the same way-the economic power of a company will be reflected in the si4e of its advertising ads) 5urrently in the DE there is a law under debate that might seriously restrict ta7ing pictures in public

areas) ‘6roducing a li7eness means nothing but bringing out the relevant traits’ and ‘all reproduction isvisual interpretation’ (Arnheim p) 1:%



,ngold- *) (ed)% 1!) Aesthetics is a cross+cultural category) ,n Key Debates in

Anthropology. Condon" Routledge

'ell- A) 1) Art and Agency: an anthropological theory. Oofrd" 5laredon 6ress

'ombrich- /) 1#) The mage and the !ye. Oford" 6haidon

'ombrich- /) 1!$) Art and llusion. Condon" 6haidon 6ress

'ow- 6) 1) 6iro designs" painting as meaningful action in an Ama4onian lived

world) "ournal o# the $oyal Anthropological nstitute. ##+:!

>elson- @) 1) 6icturing listening" the sight of sound in 5hinese painting) Archives

o# Asian art %&

Overing- F) 1!) Aesthetics is a cross+cultural category) (Against the Motion%) ,n

,ngold- *) (ed)% Key Debates in Anthropology. Condon" Routledge

!

does art describe or interpret the world?

Documents