words, words, words: folk art terminology—why it (still) matters

Words, Words, Words: Folk Art Terminology—Why It (Still) MattersAuthor(s): Joan M. BenedettiSource: Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of North America, Vol. 19,No. 1 (Spring 2000), pp. 14-21Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Art Libraries Society of NorthAmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27949051 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 05:50

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The University of Chicago Press and Art Libraries Society of North America are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of NorthAmerica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.21 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 05:50:27 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=arlisna

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=arlisna

http://www.jstor.org/stable/27949051?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


PLUS CA CHANGE....F E A U R E

Words, Words, Words: Folk Art Terminology?Why It (Still) Matters

by Joan M. Benedetti, Los Angeles County Museum of Art

In 1994, after working for eighteen years as the Museum Li brarian at the Craft and Folk Art Museum in Los Angeles, I was asked to assist an editor of the Art and Architecture The saurus in clarifying an important area of art vocabulary. We had each been struggling independently to articulate and re solve practical problems that writers and researchers experi ence daily in describing art works by?and books, catalogs, and audiovisual materials about?a wide range of artists often described as folk artists. As I indicated in a previous Art Doc umentation article,1 a passionate debate on this topic had raged openly between scholars and collectors since at least 1977.2 Sev enteen years later, it seemed time to look for a consensus about folk art and its meaning. As librarians and indexers know, establishing useful vocab

ulary is not just a matter of accurate naming. The words cho sen should retrieve the most precise information in library cat

alogs and on the Internet: not too much information, only what is most relevant.

Folk Art and the AAT

Making changes in the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT) is not a simple matter, nor should it be. AAT editors work very hard to make sure that all terms accepted for inclusion are terms whose form and meanings have a certain level of scholarly ac

ceptance. They must have what is called literary warrant. This means that they can be found in publications likely to be used

by scholars working in the associated disciplines. The AAT is a scholar's tool and I was told by the AAT editor that widespread popular understanding of terms such as folk art does not fig ure into consideration of literary warrant.

But the AAT is also a writer's, researcher's, and librarian's

tool which, when fully implemented and more widely utilized

by book catalogers such as myself, will make it easier to search for information about artists like Sanford Darling, Calvin and

Ruby Black, Tressa Prisbrey, and Trapper John Ehn even if one

does not know their names and even if one is not sure whether to refer to them as self-taught artists or outsider artists or folk artists. Without the AAT, one can search for folk art in an index or a

library catalog and pull up hundreds if not thousands of en

tries on every type of object that is not, in someone's opinion, fine art. Or one will find terms that are wrong or objectionable, such as primitive art or naive art. The AAT states unequivocal ly that primitive art is an outdated designation.

One can also spend hours searching and never find a result because the subject cataloger at the Library of Congress or the local

library cataloger, overworked and underpaid, simply gave up and put aside the item one is seeking in a problem pile for lack of terminology that is both LC-authorized and appropriate. Work on terminology is never easy, especially when the terms

under consideration are both fluid and controversial. Because the controversy concerning folk art has been overheated for

many years, it was only in 1995 that the AAT added scope notes

(the notes in the AAT that give the usage parameters of a term) for folk art, outsider art, and self-taught artists. In that year, a consensus was reached at the AAT, coordinated by Suzanne

Warren, with input from the scholar Alan Jabbour, until re

cently Director of the American Folklife Center in Washington, me (an art librarian), and other writers on the topic whose works had been read, cited, and compared. Three terms were defined:

Folk art: Use for the genre of art produced in culturally cohesive com munities or contexts, and guided by traditional rules or proce dures for creation in accordance with mutually understood tra

ditions, and in some cultures allowing greater or lesser latitude for personal expression; genre defined and term used since the

early 20th century. For the art genre not produced according to traditional rules and procedures of creation of a culturally co hesive community or context, but created outside of and un

mediated by standards, traditions, and practices of the culture of the established art world, use "outsider art."

Outsider art: Use for the genre of art produced outside of the culture of the art

world, as embodied by the international art market and estab lished art institutions, and unmediated by the standards, traditions, and practices of that culture; often intensely expressive of the per sonal vision or aesthetic of the artist. For the genre of art that is the product of the traditional rules and procedures of creation of a

culturally cohesive community or context, use "folk art."

Self-taught artists: Artists with no formal training who create in order to express an often intense and very personal vision or aesthetic, and whose work is usually unmediated by the standards, traditions, and

practices of the culture of the art world, as embodied by the in ternational art markets and established art institutions.

14 Art Documentation ? Volume 19, Number 1 ? 2000



James "Jack" Poppitz, American Don't! 1997(?).Scrap lumber, paint. 20x36" Collection of Robert and Joan Benedetti.

One might infer from the above that outsider art is made by self-taught artists. In fact, in the full AAT records for these two

terms, outsider art is listed as an RT (Related Term) under self taught artists and self-taught artists is listed as an RT under out sider art. You might also wonder about a term not found in the AAT: self-taught art. If outsider art is done by self-taught artists, is outsider art the same as self-taught art?

The AAT is grammatically correct in excluding the term self

taught art. It is, of course, the artist who is self-taught, not the art. But this leaves us with a name for the artist but not her art. This is the principal reason (plus a lot of literary warrant) that the AAT legitimized outsider art. I did not agree with this decision. In my opinion, the term outsider art, even if value neutral (which it is not), is not general enough to include all the types of art produced by self-taught artists. . Technology can be a problem here as well. Even if one's in

stitution allows its cataloger to use AAT as well as LC terms, one's OP AC software may not find self-taught artists if self-taught art is input and vice-versa.

One will still find all the above terms in use by writers. How

ever, within the last two years there has been a noticeable in crease in the frequency with which one sees self-taught in print and a slight decrease in the use of outsider art. In a recent call for papers for a conference on self-taught artists, to be held at the John Michael Kohler Art Center in May 2000, no other term

except self-taught artists was used, or even referred to, in the entire four-page announcement. Hardly anyone uses naive or

primitive anymore, but folk art is still in popular usage to de scribe both self-taught and culturally traditional art. Why are these terms controversial? Do they mean the same thing?

The (Folk) Art Game from the Margins

First, let's look at the term folk art. Folk art has been used to de scribe almost anything handmade, almost anything made by peo ple who have never been to art school, almost anything old-timey or traditional or that looks old-timey or traditional to the indi vidual viewer. It is, therefore, controversial for this very reason: its meaning becomes diluted as it is used equally to describe

American quilts made in China and sold through the Sears cata

log, twig furniture made by an Otis College of Art and Design graduate in Mendocino, California, and paintings made by el

derly artists from childhood memories. What do the above have in common? Virtually nothing other than being promoted as kinds of folk art.

Of course, the controversy is more complicated than that.

My years at the Craft and Folk Art Museum gave me the unusual

opportunity of seeing the broadest possible range of materials on, over, and off the margins of fine art. The Craft and Folk Art Museum exhibited the culturally cohesive and the cultur

ally unmediated and collected fine contemporary craft, prod uct design, and both kinds of folk art from all over the world.

Yet, for most of that time (1976-1997), our constituency was rel

atively small vis-?-vis the art world as a whole.

Volume 19, Number 1 ? 2000 ? Art Documentation 15



Olga Ponce Furginson, Folk Treasures of Mexico 1991. Mexican American (Los Angeles).

Papel picado (paper cut), 13*4 16" Collection of Robert and Joan Benedetti.

At establishment institutions there were occasional shows of contemporary craft or folk art, but by and large, they were of the small, short-run variety. Textile, ceramic, glass, and fur niture collections in survey museums were

primarily accom

modated within decorative arts departments, often housed in basement galleries or spaces far removed from the main at tractions of painting and sculpture. Painting and sculpture, however they were defined, were undeniably fine art and an art work was much more likely to enter a museum collection if it looked like what one would expect to see in a painting or

sculpture gallery. The fine arts exhibition game has had rules, the principal one

being the need for an object to have no non-art function. Occa

sionally chairs and cups displaying parody or other commen

tary could come in the back door, especially if they had been made by a bona fide artist, preferably young, white, and male. If an object met all the above criteria, but had the misfortune to be made of one of the craft media, especially glass, clay, or fiber, it went immediately to 'Dec Arts' or was relegated to 'outer Siberia,' the local slide registry. If the artist was a woman, especially a

woman of color, the rules of the game were clear: quit the game or go directly to jail; do not pass go, etc.

Of course there are fine specialized museums that have shown

only contemporary craft, or only folk art, or only design. Vic tims of art apartheid have important ceramic, glass, and cur

rently even 'visionary art' museums providing sanctuary. But

venues where one could, over a period of time, hope to survey the art of the real whole world are still very rare and are usu

ally too small to actually reflect their entire scope in their gal leries at any one time. The only time the Craft and Folk Art

Museum collection was all on view at one time was in the auc tion gallery, just before it was all sold off in 1998.3

Participants eligible to play the fine arts game are, of course,

mostly graduates of art schools. What are one's chances if one is a folk artist? However folk artists are defined, clearly they are outside of the fine art game.

For these and other reasons, few people describe themselves as folk artists. Though we may like to think of ourselves as just folks, the term folk artist is generally used by some people (e.g. curators or art dealers) to describe other people. Howard Fin ster is an exception. Finster Folk Art, Inc. even has its own Web site, (www.finster.org). When an artist does use the term folk art to describe his or her own work, what does he or she mean?

Usually they are referring to a style which is self-consciously child-like or crude in some way.4 In contrast, folk art in the sense of culturally cohesive or traditional art is often sophisti cated, highly finished, and complex in meaning and form.

Folk art in all of its manifestations has continued to grow in

popularity and dollar value, so it is not surprising that it is being appropriated by a wider market. I found the term recently in a mail-order catalog describing eccentric hand-painted things which were not-very-good knock-off s of another art world phenomenon, artist-made furniture or functional art.

Outside Of What?

Outsider art, as I've already indicated is problematic at best. Outside of what? Would artists commonly referred to as out siders describe themselves this way? Works called outsider are

certainly unconventional, outside the mainstream (another eu

phemism). As such, they are exciting to art world insiders and

they are often emotionally evocative as well. Sometimes they turn out to be the work of people who have been institutionalized, either in prison or mental institutions, about as outside (or maybe we should say as inside) as you can get. The term art brut is some times used interchangeably with outsider art, but the artist/collector Jean Dubuffet ( who coined the term art brut and who, over forty years, created the Collection de Y Art Brut in Lausanne), used it pri marily to apply to the work of institutionalized schizophrenics.5 Self-taught is a more inclusive term than outsider.

The Problem With Anonymous

For a long time, people who wrote about folk art described one of its characteristics as being anonymous. But what is most often meant when we see Anon, instead of an artist's name on

an object label is that the curator or dealer does not know the . name of the artist. Somewhere along the line the fact that many works labeled folk art were made by unidentified artists got mixed up with another unrelated fact: in some cultures, makers of things are not encouraged to promote themselves as artists in the Euro-Western sense. This sublimation of the maker's iden

tity can have several causes. In some cases it is because com

munity values are stronger than individual values. In other cases it is because the object being called art or folk art by Euro-West




Market Exploitation and other Power Struggles

Artist unknown, Tree of Life Candelabra Mexico State of Puebla, 20th C.

Ceramic, black glaze, 14x7" Collection of Robert and Joan Benedetti.

ern viewers is so bound up in the everyday routine of the maker's culture that it has no specialness for his or her com

munity. Or , the opposite may be true: items may have sacred value and have been made by religious leaders or healers, who serve a communal function.

Euro-Western dealers, curators, or museum viewers may see

in sacred objects similarities to what they call art but their view is an outsider's (!) view in terms of the culture from which the

object came. To the object's maker and the community from which it came, these religious objects may have a completely different value which honors the community and not the indi vidual priest or shaman. To take them out of their community context and place them in an art context may honor them in the outsider-viewer's eyes, but in the eyes of the maker's commu

nity, the lack of context may have exactly the opposite effect.

Application of any art world terminology to objects produced outside of the art world tends to co-opt the objects thus named,

making them part of the Euro-Western art market culture and

distorting rather than aiding in our understanding of them or their makers. The term anonymous may carry the implication that the maker wanted to remain unknown, which may or may not be the case. If an artist is actually unknown, the object label should

say so and every effort should be made to at least identify his or her community.

The potential for market exploitation of outsiders by art world insiders is the greatest source of controversy. Whether or not ex

ploitation is thought to happen more in the world of folk art

collecting and exhibiting than in the mostly Euro-Western main stream art world depends in part on how broadly folk art is de fined. Once one realizes that within the art world establishment

makers of folk art are all outsiders, taking the next logical step and acknowledging the power relationship that this represents is less difficult. How serious and prevalent exploitative practices are is a hotly debated topic and beyond the scope of this essay. That larcenous exploitation of both cultural groups and self

taught artists happens in direct relationship to the rise in mar ket value of their art is obvious. That, nevertheless, some folk art makers successfully participate in the market as individu als and as cultural groups is equally without question. As noted

above, some genuine self-taught artists, such as Howard Finster in Georgia, are famous self-promoters.

Self-promotion is especially an issue for those who consciously or unconsciously perpetuate the romantic myth of folk art as a

product of isolated innocence. Could collectors' well-docu mented resistance to both accepting a cultural definition for folk art and to accepting that folk artists and their communities

(like most people today) are multi-cultural, operating simulta

neously both inside and outside mainstream society, be a power issue? If folk art is made only by people who are outside the art market value system and especially if they are seen as naive or child-like, then it is easier to justify their non-inclusion in the economic rewards of that system. When the standard of cultural cohesiveness and community

value is used to define folk art, it can include many cultural groups, for example Native Americans practicing traditional art forms

while beginning to participate more actively in the market and at

tempting to control the unauthorized use of their tribal names and cultural symbols. Part of this latter effort is manifested in the rise of corrununity and tribal museums which can control the information and context of objects shown. After the internal de bates of the last decade, Euro-Western museums are beginning to acknowledge the powerful role they play in the art market and are starting to include in the exhibition planning process those communities whose cultural objects are being shown.

The Power of Museums

The struggle for equity in museums has only begun. Termi

nology is not more important than behavior. We all know the

meaning of the phrase "He can talk the talk but can he walk the walk?" Who talks and who listens is as important as what is said. Language influences our preconceptions and can be used to assist understanding or aggravate mistrust. Museums

are.learning that they can promote understanding through lan

guage not only in exhibition catalogs and label copy but in pub licity releases and in docent talks as well.

Eugene W. Metcalf Jr., who together with collector and sculp tor Michael D. Hall edited a collection of essays called The Artist

Outsider,6 served on an Advisory Board at the Craft and Folk Art Museum which helped establish an adjunct library program we called The Center for the Study of Art and Culture (CSAC). In




its short life, CSAC actively promoted diversity and inclusion in museums in several public programs. I owe a great deal of

my present thinking to Gene Metcalf and others who served on The Center's Advisory Board. Metcalf and Hall's book is a kind of intellectual Trojan Horse.

It functions both as compilation of the history of interest by the established art world in self-taught artists as well as a critique and record of the highly contradictory ways other constituen cies (folklorists, for example) are thinking about this and other art on the margins.

One of the editors and contributors, Roger Cardinal, is cred ited with having invented the term outsider art? According to contributor historian Kenneth L. Ames, however,..." we

prob

ably need to get rid of the whole idea of outsider art. It does more harm than good."8 Folklorist Michael Owen Jones feels that "... a different picture would emerge in exhibits and pub lications if more collectors and curators really got inside the art of outsiders. An ernie or insider approach would reveal that much of [all] people's behavior is traditional. . . . Instead of a collection of oddities by those who are abnormal, the art of outsiders is really a window onto what makes us human, in

cluding the need for tradition and the urge to create aesthetic forms in our everyday lives."9 Museums have a special responsibility for clarity in these

matters. According to Gene Metcalf, "Museums.. .cannot avoid

the struggle, the political struggle that emerges when you talk about the nature of art in culture... Who determines the dis

play? Curators, consultants, the makers of the objects, the pub lic, or who? Where is the display? Who is it made for? We have to accept that when we interpret objects, we're also in

terpreting people."10 How we make art and how we view art is affected very much

by how we are taught and by the communities in which we learn. The word community in this context means the different kinds of groups that teach us, not just the community where we

grew up, but also other groups that share some common in terest. In this culturally diverse and free society, we often en rich our cultural habits by participating in different cultures

where we work, play, pray, or go to school.

The Power of Art School

One of the most significant cultural immersions we can have is to go to school beyond high school, especially if we do it full-time, and especially if it is related to a potential vocation. After we have been to law or business or medical or library or art school, it is hard to see the world the way we did before we had that experience. Even if we have gone to an art school with a reputation for being open or progressive, we inevitably have picked up the prevailing culture of that art school which is invariably proactively or reac

tively influenced by the prevailing art world culture. Professional

schools, after all, are expected to prepare their students to operate successfully within the prevailing professional culture. This func tion is coded more in art schools than in business schools, but stu dents will probably consider it a very useful part of their training.

Mainstream contemporary art is now very diverse, but cer

tain cultural values have not changed in Euro-Western art schools in a very long time. A value of very long standing is of the artist as 'maverick,' as 'poet/ as Outsider.' My sense is

that people who are wed to the outsider idea are often also wed to the concept of great artists as necessarily social mavericks. This latter concept may work within the international art mar ket and established art institutions, but increasingly, the Euro

Western art world is having to rethink these categories including that of the 'great artist.'11

Although art schools are today attempting to expose their students to the values of people who may have a more inte

grated relationship to their expressive culture,12 the Euro-West ern idea of the artist as primarily an inventor, as a contributor of new ideas, as someone who is special for this reason, is still

predominant in art schools and in the larger society. This

value, which happens to be compatible with the historic, po litical, and economic values of this country, contributed a great deal to the development of interest in collecting American folk art earlier in this century and, not by chance, coincided with the establishment of the first museums of modern art by the same collectors.13

Lynda Hartigan, a National Museum of American Art cura

tor, describes the history of folk art collecting, including the work of self-taught artists, in her important essay in the cata

log of the Herbert Hemphill collection at the National Museum of American Art.14 She notes that the first folk art objects col lected in the late twenties tended to be the work of itinerant

portrait painters or ladies' handiwork such as hair wreaths and

mourning pictures or weathervanes and antique tools. These

objects were culturally traditional or functional items. Col

lecting simple tools, advertising signs, or architectural elements or furniture and displaying them as sculpture seemed in the same spirit as the Modernists' found objects.

Later, in the fifties and sixties, during the height of interest in American abstract expressionism, a more idiosyncratic kind of folk art became fashionable. Although the makers of this art were called folk artists because they had not been to art school, their art had more in common with Dubuffet's art brut. These artists had not been taught by cultural tradition. They were

self-taught. The irony for those who believe the most impor tant value art schools teach is independence of thought15 is that the works of self-taught artists seem to express an even more radical break with convention.16

Howard Finster, At the Sound of His Trumpet 1997. Painted plywood, 12 50"

Collection of Robert and Joan Benedetti.




Often described as visionary,17 these artists seem to come from

a wholly different perspective which gives rise to the concept of outsiderness. I believe that this is partially because self-taught artists are not immersed in art school values. Art schools may articulate independence as an essential value, but invariably turn out graduates who have values in common that are recog nizable at some level in their art work. This is not necessarily good or bad. It is the inevitable expressive outcome of any group's learning/working experience. My point is that communal learning experiences, whether as

part of a family, an ethnic group, or an art school, each leave a

distinctive cultural imprint. If one does not attend art school, one's work will express one's other (personal and cultural) ex

periences unfiltered by the art school experience. If one has been taught by, and identifies very strongly with, a particular cultural community, one's work will show evidence of that tra dition. Art school will overlay another filter over any other cultural experience, not canceling out what came before, but

modifying it and adding other, usually identifiable aspects.

The Power of Words and their Importance in Our Profession

In popular usage, the term folk art continues to be used for al most any expressive work done outside the sphere of influ ence of art schools. This is what Holger Cahill meant when he called the exhibition of folk art he mounted at the Museum of

Modern Art in 1932, American Folk Art: The Art of the Common Man in America, 1750-1900.18 For the most part, objects collect ed by Cahill and the other first-generation folk art collectors were culturally traditional objects; their makers were cultural

ly-taught, not self-taught.19 With some notable exceptions,20 folklorists have also used the term folk art in a way that ex

cludes what is self-taught. Focusing on the cultural context of the objects, they use folk art to describe the visual (or material

culture) equivalent of folklore, which describes the oral tradi tions of a particular cultural group. Folklife is now common

ly used to describe all of the expressive behavior of a particu lar culture, including folk music, folk dance, folklore, and folk art.21 At the Craft and Folk Art Museum the term folk art was

used in this latter sense in order to distinguish between cul

turally-taught and self-taught expressions. But the popular sense o? folk art as an umbrella term to describe the art of the common [wo]man will undoubtedly continue.

I believe that librarians and curators, who use words so much, must take this widespread confusion into account when cata

loging, writing, and talking about this material. There are rela

tively few folk art specialists within either the art history or folk lore disciplines. Folk art is a subject about which many

non-specialists, both lay people and scholars outside of folk art

studies, wrongly assume a level of common understanding, not

realizing the extent of the subject's complexity. One thing is certain: both the popular and scholarly meanings

of these words is still evolving. The controversy is still heated because our ideas about people and society are changing more

rapidly than our ability to find words to express our new ways of seeing the world. Words are powerful because they reflect

people's relative positions of power, their points of view, their

ideas, and their feelings. "Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words can never hurt me" is not true. Carelessly used words

can hurt people's feelings and prevent them from participating constructively in society or lead to self-destructive behavior. The inaccurate use of words is not only counter-productive, it can

damage cultural communities, which hurts us all indirectly. As a person working as an art librarian and living in the world today, I am concerned about these issues in my work and in my life. <s>

Notes

1. Folk Art terminology was the topic of an essay written by the au

thor thirteen years ago. See "Who are the Folk in Folk Art: Inside and

Outside the Cultural Context," Art Documentation 6, no.l (Spring 1987):

3-8. The present essay originated as a lecture given for the Contem

porary Arts Forum in Santa Barbara in conjunction with their 1995 ex

hibition Visions from the Left Coast: California Self-Taught Artists.

2. Kenneth Ames' book, Beyond Necessity: Art in the Folk Tradition

(Winterthur, DE: Winterthur Museum, 1977) was published in con

junction with an exhibition of the same name which occasioned a con

ference on folk art at the Winterthur Museum. Curators, scholars, and

collectors were invited, and the latter, especially, took exception to

Ames's critique of the application of fine art principles to folk art.

3. The Craft and Folk Art Museum, closed for sixteen months, re

opened in April 1999 as the Los Angeles Craft and Folk Art Museum under the auspices of the City of Los Angeles Cultural Affairs Department.

4. The folk art collector and ex-painter Herbert Hemphill coined the

phrase faux naive to describe his own forays into this painting style. See

Lynda Roscoe Hartigan, Made With Passion (Washington, DC: Smithso

nian Institution Press, 1990): 6.

5. The art collection that originally inspired Dubuffet is described

in The Prinzhorn Collection: Selected Work from the Prinzhorn Collection of the Art of the Mentally III (Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press,

1984). See also "Art Brut and Psychiatry," by Dr. Leo Navratil, founder

of the House of Artists at the Gugging Psychiatric Hospital, Lausanne,

Switzerland, in Raw Vision 15 (Summer 1996): 40-47. A photograph of

the artist-residents in front of the House of Artists is featured on the

cover. According to Navratil, "Dubuffet stressed that the typical Art

Brut artist creates his art for himself, not for others." He relates the

story by Michel Thevoz of a seventy-five-year-old woman who knit

beautiful pictures, but refused an exhibition of her work because she

always unraveled everything she knitted so the wool could be reused.

6. Michael D. Hall and Eugene W. Metcalf, Jr. with Roger Cardinal,

eds., The Artist Outsider: Creativity and the Boundaries of Culture. (Wash

ington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994).

7. Roger Cardinal, Outsider Art. (London: Studio Vista, 1972).

8. Hall, The Artist Outsider : 270-271.

9. Hall, The Artist Outsider : 327-328. Both Ames and Jones were on

the CSAC Advisory Board, as was Toni Petersen.

10. Proceedings of the First Meeting of the National Advisory Board, De cember 6, 1990 (Los Angeles, CA: Craft and Folk Art Museum, Center

for the Study of Art and Culture, 1990). Unpublished.




11. Joanne Cubb's essay "The Romantic Artist Outsider," in The

Artist Outsider: 76-93, reveals the romantic fallacy of these ideas. She

makes the interesting point that "the outsider myth is primarily a heroic male text" (see page 91, note 2).

12. Cross-cultural exposure was part of the California Institute of the

Arts ideas from the beginning (thirty years ago), with ethnomusicologist Nicholas England, former Dean of the Music School, and Ghanian mu

sicians Alfred and Kobla Ladzekpo on the original faculty. Steven Lavine,

Cal Arts President since 1988, has further institutionalized the concept by

creating several intercultural programs that place CalArts students in

community organizations. These programs provide arts training for

high school students throughout Los Angeles. Lavine co-edited with

anthropologist Ivan Karp: Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetics and Politics of Museum Display (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1991)

and Museums and Communities: The Politics of Public Culture (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1992).

13. For example, both Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, who founded the

Museum of Modern Art, and Gertrude Vanderbilt Whitney, the founder

of the Whitney Museum of American Art, had large folk art collections.

14. Lynda Hartigan, Made With Passion. For an historical overview

(and a virtual who's who and who was who) of twentieth century American folk art and self-taught art collecting, see the curator's live

ly seventy-page biographical essay on Herbert Hemphill, her equally

lively notes, and the catalog's excellent bibliography (which serves as

a checklist for the basic documents on the subject). The essay itself, with

the addition of material on the western United States, could serve as

the primary text for a course in the history of collecting self-taught art.

15. Another irony is that this work, along with other kinds of folk

art and crafts, began to be taken seriously by the art world only when

it was presented in a typical art gallery environment: "neutral...white

walls, pedestals, and spotlights." (Made With Passion: 28). According to Lynda Hartigan, "Artists spearheaded the first folk art rush...[and]

artists were generators of the second wave...during the late 1960s...Based

in New York, the first group had championed modernism...Spread

throughout the country, the second group...embraced contemporary folk art ['contemporary folk art' is a euphemism for the work of self

taught artists] because it reinforced the latter's search for individual

ity (Made With Passion: 39-40).

16. Along with M.O. Jones (quoted above), Lynda Hartigan points out that this is not always the case (Made With Passion: 80, note 159); just because something seems different or eccentric within the viewer's

frame of reference does not make it so within the artist's community. When we place a high value on what we perceive as eccentric, we must

understand that this is a relative value.

17. The new American Visionary Art Museum in Baltimore is but the

latest example of the popularity of this particular synonym for 'self

taught.' Others include the publications Visions from the Left Coast:

California Self-Taught Artists (Santa Barbara, CA: Santa Barbara Con

temporary Arts Forum, 1995); Naives and Visionaries (New York, NY: E.P.

Dutton, 1974); Howard Finster: Man of Visions (New York, NY: Alfred

A. Knopf, 1989) and especially Raw Vision: The New International Jour

nal of Outsider Art (subscription information: 163 Amsterdam Avenue,

#203, New York, NY 10023-5001).

Two other, more modest, publications for collectors of self-taught art deserve notice: Folk Art Finder (subscription information: One River

Road, Essex, CT 06426) and Folk Art Messenger (c/o Folk Art Society of

America, P.O. Box 17041, Richmond, VA 23226). These two titles (as

well as the Museum of American Folk Art's journal Folk Art) are promi nent examples of the popular use of folk art as an umbrella term, al

though in practice they are all more focused on self-taught than tradi

tional folk art.

18. "The work...is folk art because it is the expression of the common

people, made by them and intended for their use and enjoyment. It is

not the expression of professional artists made for a small cultured class,

and it has little to do with the fashionable art of its period. It does not

come out of an academic tradition passed on by schools, but out of

craft tradition plus the personal quality of the rare craftsman who is an

artist." Cahill, American Folk Art: 6. This was the third in a series of folk

art exhibitions mounted by Cahill and was drawn almost entirely from

the collection of Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, who had just founded the Museum of Modern Art three years before. The two earlier shows,

American Primitives (1930) and American Folk Sculpture (1931), were or

ganized at the Newark Museum under the influence of the progres sive museum director, John Cotton Dana. According to CahiU's biog

rapher, John Vlach, "Dana believed that there was an art of everyday life that was as important as the art of high style civilization...Cahill

learned [from Dana] that the broader base of the social pyramid de

served more attention than it was getting." ("Holger Cahill as Folk

lorist," Journal of American Folklore 98 (April-June 1985): 153). Cahill's three folk art exhibitions, together with the published ver

sion of his Index of American Design, edited by Erwin O. Christensen

(New York, NY: Macmillan, 1950) have largely served up to now to

embody in the popular imagination what is meant by 'American folk

art.' The documented objects are principally Anglo-Saxon American,

mostly from those states that were among the original colonies, and

were made primarily from Revolutionary War times to the end of the

nineteenth century. These were, of course, the items still available to

Holger Cahill, his colleagues and friends, when they went 'picking' in

eastern seaboard antique stores and attics of the early twentieth cen

tury. See also Wendy Jeffers, "Holger Cahill and American Folk Art,"

Antiques 148, no.3 (September 1995): 326-335.

Though Cahill has rightly been credited for making a place for the folk

art of the earliest (primarily Anglo-Saxon) immigrant populations in

American art museums, a less well known individual, Allen H. Eaton,

working with the Russell Sage Foundation, was doing comparable work

concerning more recent American immigrant folk art at exactly the same

time. Eaton's book, Immigrant Gifts to American Life: Some Experiments in Appreciation of the Contributions of our Foreign-Born Citizens to Ameri

can Culture (New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation, 1932) was pub lished the same year that Cahill's American Folk Art: The Art of the Com

mon Man was exhibited at the Museum of Modern Art. Immigrant Gifts describes Eaton's efforts (mostly in fairground settings and ethnic club

exhibition halls) at organizing exhibitions of 'arts and crafts of the home

lands' during a period when the flood of immigration was drawing re

actionary voices at least as shrill as those heard today. It is clear that the

relative popularity and social acceptance of Cahill's work was largely a matter of the political context in which the two men worked.




19. There is continued confusion about "the possibility of genuine

contemporary [folk] expression" (Made With Passion: 29). In fact, as

mentioned above in note 15, the term contemporary folk art has come to

mean something completely different?a code phrase for self-taught folk art. Those who are interested in early American items, in partic

ular, have difficulty accepting that culturally traditional folk art's pa rameters can include contemporary material, especially items whose

cultural origins are mixed or aimed at the tourist market. Holger Cahill and his first generation collecting peers thought that "The great

period of American folk art covers about two hundred years, from the

second quarter of the seventeenth century up to the third quarter of the

nineteenth." (American Folk Art: The Art of the Common Man in Ameri

ca 1750-1900 (New York, NY: Museum of Modern Art, 1932): 8). But a third generation of collectors and curators has a different point of

view. The clearest manifestation of this viewpoint yet is in an exhibi

tion that originated at the Museum of International Folk Art. See Char

lene Cerny and Suzanne Seriff (eds.), Recycled, Reseen: Folk Art from the

Global Scrap Heap (New York, NY: Harry N. Abrams, 1996).

20. Michael Owen Jones, Professor of Folklore at UCLA, and Alan

Jabbour, ex-Director of the American Folklife Center in Washington,

DC, have taken centrist positions on this controversy, while others,

such as John Vlach, Professor of Folklore at George Washington Uni

versity in Washington, DC, have sought to exclude self-taught artists

completely from folk art studies. This exclusion is based on the

grounds that, from the perspective of folkloric studies, by definition

the term folk art can only be applied to objects that are the products of cultural communities. This is, of course, a much more strict defi

nition than what is generally in use, especially in the popular con

sciousness, but for a museum or library that has to deal with both

types of art, it is a very useful distinction.

21. A good definition of folklife is in the language of the 1976 Amer ican Folklife Preservation Act (P.L. 94-201), which is quoted in Mary

Huf ford's American Folklife: A Commonwealth of Cultures (Washington, DC: Library of Congress, American Folklife Center, 1992): 5: "The tra

ditional expressive culture shared within the various groups in the

United States: familial, ethnic, occupational, religious, regional."




words, words, words: folk art terminology—why it (still) matters

Documents