The Trouble with (The Term) Art

The Trouble with (The Term) Art
Author(s): Carolyn Dean
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Art Journal, Vol. 65, No. 2 (Summer, 2006), pp. 24-32
Published by: College Art Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20068464 .
Accessed: 26/02/2012 22:38
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 of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
College Art Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Art Journal.
http://www.jstor.org
3
Inca,"Funerary
Machu Picchu,
stone,
Rock," c. 1400-1530,
Peru (photograph
by the
author)
Much
is today
of what
with
to
regard
made
objects
of
the objects
and
together
and
Carolyn
sion
field.
bition
toward said works. Still, despite his own reserva
tions, Adam entitled his book Primitive Art.
2. Adrian Gerbrands, Art as an Element of Culture,
Especially inNegro-Africa (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1957),
commentary
that discussion,
even when
on
varied
concerns
of
those
the
issue.
not
who
all can
inconsistent
only has to peruse the pages of Current
Anthropology inwhich, over the past five decades,
some forty anthropologists and art historians have
published their opinions, to see that plenty of
very smart people have attempted to reckon with
terms and labels of this ilk. In 1965, for example,
in response to a letter from Adriaan G. H.
Claerhout, the editors of Current Anthropology
published the comments of twelve internationally
recognized authorities on the term "primitive
art," which was widely used at that time, but
widely disliked as well. See Claerhout, "The
Concept of Primitive Applied to Art," Current
1965): 432-38. Several
Anthropology 6 (October
years earlier Herta Haselberger offered readers of
cultures
of Africa,
to those
employ
the
term,
"art"
is an
that
a
meanings,
scholars
by
only
concur
studying
most
labeled
commonly
art
Painting
catalogue
art
non-Western
or
no
points
that
art
that
sometimes
make
other
things
25
art
function,
journal
specifi
the many
the Americas.
faraway
he
at the very
multifarious
in the
recent
Some
on.6
coherent
of
domain
that
can
aesthetic
owing
distinctions
precisely
his
art
and
geographic
has
asked
should
his
be
between
provenance,
objects
aesthetic
our
own
in the negative
and
so on,
has
boundaries,
the assump
reservations,
in every
found
own
spatiotemporal
largely
society
people everywhere
value
distinctions,
and
of
"whether
of subcategories
value,
in
sociocultural
the discipline. Although
to these
and
recognition
its indistinct
with
collected
and
our
art
to say
exceptions;
"Western
query
Despite
study8
perhaps
of
beyond
rhetorical
history,
of
the
been
a few
education,
sense
answers
it
places;
to be
that have
that
Preziosi
much
and
Such
art historians
of
is one
events,
category of things and practices composed
medium,
about
head
objects
she notes
Donald
area,
the discipline
is a universal
those
Universe,
in every historical period pervades
above
to focus
time
those fields focused on cultures
Reents-Budet
art make
horizons";
defined,
clearly
tion
of
conceptions
out
term without
term with
this problem
to historical
the AOA
socio-cultural
and
theMaya
is vulnerable
Outside
fashion."7
modernist
on what
instead
as art do. Dorie
in the West
displayed
her
focus
is; they
case
is the
"art." This
or
number
fact
adjective?
in the diversre AOA fields skirt the issue by declining
historians working
what
face
"primitive,"
the
is seems
ambiguous
surprisingly
on
and
art
in
exhi
focuses
long-ago
cri
seen
"Primitivism"
writing
for what
small
as was
is the
be
Oceania,
so-called AOA fields (Africa, Oceania, Americas),
9-24.
3. One
used
indige
and
proposed
a difficult
it may
Thus,
the
art;
this
the noun,
is also
"art"
usage.5
currently
visual
matters
all
While
and
as
autochthonous
a discussion
that
agreed-upon
"art"
than
you?rather
acknowledges
and
term
the
have
art; pre
in all of
invariably
-
ethno-art;
indigenous
Rubin's
me
interests
in the
those
the art of pre
or
resolved,
1984 by William
to the present,
i9?OS
or what
been
discus
proposed
by
art;
all been
has
What
catalogue.4
the
author
definition
proper
cally
the
in
provoked
from
exotic,
primitive,
little
his
non-Western
people;
"primitive
'
In
thorough
criticized
art;
the Americas?have
of discussion,
its companion
and
heart
1.As early as 1942, Leonhard Adam, inPrimitive
Art (Harmondsworth:
Pelican Books, 1942), 14,
noted that only a certain foreignness in form and
content linked the arts of Africa, Oceania, and the
in the minds of Europeans. He argued
Americas
that, because the linkage is extraneous to the
works themselves, the alleged association of
African, Oceanic, and indigenous American arts
depends solely on the attitudes of Europeans
of
and
Oceania,
a
art; ethnic
art; native
grouped
century.
Yet
traditional
tribal
art;
popular
term
twentieth
also
has
art historians
the
the name."2
art;
art; ethnological
decades
Despite
array
of
to
traditionally
as art are
to offer
the first
problem
the art of precivilized
art;
arts of Africa,
tiqued.3
of
art?was
or
folk
people;
ethnographical
the
one
"the
the
of
only
regard
than in the past),
that
about
fussing
alternatives?exotic
Suggested
urban
was
called
of
the fact
the middle
term?non-European
industrial
nous
suggestions offered by many of those who attend
ed the session. My thanks also to Shelly Errington,
Catherine M. Soussloff, Dana Leibsohn, Elisabeth
L. Cameron, Steve Chiappari, and an anonymous
reviewer who commented on early versions of
the paper. Funds for manuscript preparation were
generously provided by the Arts Research Insti
tute at the University of California, Santa Cruz.
he
been
since
Gerbrands
of what
substitute
The Trouble with
(the Term) Art
This essay was originally formulated as a paper
delivered at the 2005 Annual Conference of the
in a session entitled "Art
College Art Association,
History, Theory, and Ancient American Visual
Culture" and organized by Dana Leibsohn and
Bryan R. Just. Iam grateful for the comments and
its synonyms
and
19^7, Adrian
Dean
have
others,
art
not made
despite
not
also with
less frequently
that were
is so
art." This
among
is the case
but
the concept
(although
the West
"primitive
anthropologists,
where
places
outside
as art. This
and monuments,
infrequently
from
called
art"
in
the West
outside
not made
artifacts
European
early
not been recognized. Not
many
art was
called
certain
"art"
things
as a
special
defined variously by
is not recognized
Current Anthropology a critique of various terms
used to describe what she called Ethnological Art;
twenty-four scholars, including George Kubier
and Douglas Fraser, responded to her essay. See
Haselberger, "Method of Studying Ethnological
Art," Current Anthropology 2 (October
1964):
341-84. For additional discussion of the term
"primitive" as applied to societies and their cul
tures (including "art"), see Lois Mednick, "Mem
orandum on the Use of Primitive," Current
Anthropology I (I960): 441-45, and Francis L. K.
Hsu, "Rethinking the Concept
'Primitive,'" Current
Anthropology 5 (June 1964): 169-78.
4.William Rubin, ed., "Primitivism" in 20th Century
Art: Affinity of the Tribal and theModern (New
York: Museum of Modern Art, 1984).
5. See, for example, essays by Emma Lou Davis
and Tatiana Proskouriakoff (both inClaerhout,
433 and 436). Discussions about the (impossi
bility of defining art have filled the pages of The
British Journal of Aesthetics and The Journal of
Aesthetics and Art Criticism. See, for example,
Morris Weitz,
"The Role of Theory in
Aesthetics," Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism
15, no. I (1956): 27-35; James Carney, "Defining
Art," British Journal of Aesthetics 15(1975):
191-206; Robert Matthews, "Traditional
Aesthetics Defended," Journal of Aesthetics and
Art Criticism 38, no. I (1979): 39-50; Thomas
inDefining Art," Journal
Leddy, "Rigid Designation
of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 45, no. 3 (Spring
Jerrold Levinson, "Refining Art
Historically," Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism
47, no. I (Winter 1989): 21-33; and David
Novitz, "Disputes about An," Journal of Aesthetics
and Art Criticism 54, no. 2 (Spring 1996): 153-63.
See alsoW. B. Gallie, "Art as an Essentially
1987): 263-72;
Contested Concept," Philosophical Quarterly 6,
no. 23 (April 1956): 97-1 14,who argues that art
is a concept that should always, necessarily be
contested.
6. See, for example, Lynn Mackenzie, Non-Western
Art: A Brief Guide, second ed. (Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2001). Like Mackenzie,
Arnold Rubin, inArt as Technology: The Arts of
Africa, Oceania, Native America, Southern California,
ed. Zena Pearlstone (Beverly Hills: Hillcrest,
1989), 16, also elects not to define "art," but sug
gests that itdoes three things: I) establishes para
meters of identity; 2) teaches and enculturates;
and 3) enables societies and individuals to relate
to their environment and secure their survival.
He also suggests that these three things are what
art does everywhere and, to demonstrate this,
includes some cultural practices of Southern
California in his introductory AOA text.
7. Done Reents-Budet, Painting theMaya Universe:
Royal Ceramics of the Classic Period (Durham:
Duke University Press, 1994), 29.
8. Donald Preziosi, "Art History: Making the
Visible Legible," inThe Art of Art History: A Critical
Anthology, ed. Donald Preziosi (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1998), 14-15; see also Preziosi,
Rethinking Art History: Meditations on a Coy Science
(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 146-55.
9. Elisabeth L. Cameron, Art of the Lega (Seattle:
Press and Regents of
University of Washington
the University of California, 2001), 53.
10. Paul Oskar Kristeller, inRenaissance Thought
If it were,
worldwide.
term
the
defining
not
"art" would
be
a
such
in our
elephant
disciplinary
art historian
The
is today the Democratic
rate
the
from
realm
"heavy
things,"
endowed
with
culture
objects
powers
by
institution
concerned
with
wisdom
are
acculturated.
Had
our
Lega
well
be
apart
virtue
their
which
of Lega
Of
Things.
canon
The
the majority
a
would
be
comprised
differently,
we
of
might
of heavy
history
our
and
an
society,
precepts,
course,
are
and
the Bwami
through
out
or
activities
mundane
use within
grown
as masenao
describe
they
from
and morality
of Heavy
of what
people
look quite different from a history of art; different
things would
privileged.
that exist
of
the Lega
(formerly Zaire).9 The Lega sepa
the objects
discipline
Historians
self-described
about
Republic of the Congo
meaning
special
writes
L. Cameron
of material
of art is the
room.
living
Elisabeth
and
persistent
vexing problem. The fact that there is no globally acceptable definition
things would
definition
be
a
of
masterpiece
(if we used the term at all) would be altered, perhaps drastically
Whether we find this proposition enticing or humorous or simply ridiculous,
that we
curious
art
where
fields
don't
not
its aesthetic
and
exist.
In
in the
re-creating
West
the modern
or more
but
primitive.
art
of
concept
ought
to
about how
the discipline
(and
Art?",
the European
modern
collected
turn
the
highly
were
masks
spot-lit,
by
the
of
they
torical
that
and
are
"counted
is, things
made
In a video
class,
flint
26
She
I often
a well-known
recently
excavated
SUMMER 2006
of
image
the
possess
the concept
having
a conversation
as
in fact
colonialist
the needs
and
iconic
and
materials.
'art' because
were
desires
been
and
become
the durability
content.
on
Errington
as these
originated
Maya
were
and
podiums,
such
as such
pre-Hispanic
At
like African
calls
appropriation"
still
accustomed.
Objects
with
the
could
of materials
placed
claimed
outside
of
things
"art
as other
at certain
"art by
his
intention,"
as art.
purposefully
students
archaeologist
at the
such
they
"art by
art had
Authentic
as art from
and
had
Cleaned,
"sculptures."
juxtaposes
what
to which
that objects
show
by
art was
Became
"What
in the West
portability
as
article
driven
became
of natural
reconstituted
moments."'3
are
what
recognized
functions
recognizing
appropriation,"
things
century,
ritual
stripped
were
in
risk
insufficient,
not
to open
I seek
in her
in the manner
twentieth
often
or
lesser
of
or does
it, we
in the
that did
benefit
reinforced
was
What
displayed
as were
valued,
then,
in essence,
was,
art market.I2
and
essay,
Errington,
that what
argues
Western
they
somehow
concept
naming
rather,
them
cultures
some
did
rationales.
Shelly
tradition
or
West,
dehis
to consider
to our
to render
suggesting
of both
a
such
prior
that
technologies,
anthropologist
Primitive
found
enough
that
Iwant
for
have
many
implications
where
the modern
In this
and
judgments,
The
not
independently
then,
in societies
of
and
the
"art"
valued
of art history all too often has, through many of its
epistemological
perspectives,
be
risk
them.
for)
eighteenth
it was
to have
introduced
European
art
the word
century.IO While
it is
into
contact.
European
originated,
visual
art
of
history
to
prior
concept
have discussed
"
art.
In this essay,
image
also
the
a
taking
exist
didn't
something
the
just different
We
of
few
art where
societies
of
at least
identifying
locating
art)
where
sense
universalizing
of
of
Europe
too
circumstance,
consequences
not
in
until
qualities
this
toricizing
the
even
that,
in the modern
used
noted
recognize
is, the notion
(that
It is a fact
was
the capriciousness
in my
exclaims
site of Copan.
"This
In
is art!"
making
visual-culture
referring
this
claim,
to an eccentric
the archaeolo
and the Arts: Collected Essays ( 1965; Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1980), 163, dates
modern notions of art to the eighteenth century,
as does Larry Shiner, inThe Invention of Art: A
Cultural History (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 2001). Douglas F. Fraser, inHaselberger,
368, however, writes "This term [art] was not
used in the modern sense of something valued
independently for its aesthetic qualities until the
second half of the 19thcentury." The origins of
the word "art" as used today are further explored
by Victor B?rgin, The End of Art Theory: Criticism
and Postmodernity (Atlantic Highlands, NJ:
Humanities Press International, 1986), 144;
Preziosi, Rethinking Art History and The Art of Art
History; and David Summers, Real Spaces: World
Art History and the Rise of Western Modernism
(London: Phaidon, 2003), 3 I and 67.
I I. Elisabeth L. Cameron,
in "In Search of
Children: Dolls and Agency inAfrica," African Arts
30, no. 2 ( 1997): 19, finds the following: "At the
core of the problem [regarding whether certain
small African figurai sculptures are dolls or art or
both or neither] is the question of whether a uni
versal understanding of art exists." The question
is not pursued in this article, however. Preziosi, in
Rethinking Art History, 1989, also observes and
comments on this problem as does Cecelia F.
Klein, "Objects are nice, but..
.",Art Bulletin, 76,
no. 3 (September
1994): 401-04.
12. Shelly Errington, "What Became Authentic
Primitive Art?" Cultural Anthropology 9, no. 2
(1994): 201-26.
13. Ibid., 203; as Errington herself notes, Andr?
Malraux, inMuseum without Walls, trans. Stuart
Gilbert, Bollingen Series 24 (New York: Pantheon
Books, 1949), called these kinds of objects "art
as did Jacques Maquet, in
by metamorphosis,"
Introduction to Aesthetic Anthropology, second ed.
(1971; Malibu, CA: Undena Publications,
1979).
14. FrankWillet
(in Haselberger, 379) observed
that "If the form of an object is pleasing, it can be
treated as an object of art in European terms, but
not necessarily in the terms of the society which
produced it.This is comparable to a European
artist's admiring a work of primitive art for the
(ethnologically) wrong reasons. It is a permissible
form of aesthetic appreciation, though not of the
most profitable kind."
15.Homi K. Bhabha, "Of Mimicry and Man: The
Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse," October 28
( 1984): 126, argues that mimicry is inherent in
cultures subjected to colonization. "Colonial mim
icry," he states, "is the desire for a reformed,
recognizable Other," an Other who is the same
(thereby affirming the beliefs and practices of the
colonizer), but not quite (thereby affirming the
inferiority of the colonized).
in The
16. Esther Pasztory, "Andean Aesthetics"
Spirit of Ancient Peru: Treasures from theMuseo
Arqueol?gico Rafael Larco Herrera, ed. Kathleen
Berrin (New York and London: Thames and
Hudson; Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco,
1997), 60-69.
17.Meyer Shapiro, "Style," inPreziosi, The Art of
Art History, 147.
18. J.Alden Mason, The Ancient Civilizations of
Peru (Baltimore and Harmondsworth,
UK:
Penguin Books, 1957), 231.
gist
to the
attention
draws
extraordinary
and
craftsmanship
merits
aesthetic
of
is to raise the value
the finely carved offering he holds in his hand. His intention
of the unfamiliar object in the eyes of the viewer who he justifiably fears might
not
its exquisite
recognize
art
something
calling
it reveals
rather,
applied;
in this
instance
words,
by
identifying
things.14
In this moment
imposes
and
we
when
similar
the
creation
and
defended
of
translate,
just
inevitably
the
recognition
them
image
somehow
course
can
we
as I show
seen
as an
I tell
the
sure
Inca
I
silver,
about
Rock
Funerary
not
Machu
tion
has
of Andean
visual
out
objective
move.
ture
27
In fact,
"was
do
will
always
Thus,
other
in ways
it can
visual
that
render
in
19^7
missing"
that
from
and
is
used
by
(in
showing,
means
by
I also
that we
slide
of
them
show
them
the
the
suspect
so-called
Incas
val
than they did figurai sculptures, for it
and
this
the
and
in her
a
turn
than was
argued
that
to a more
led
possible
some
Inca
abstract
1953 by Meyer
art have
of modern
arts
to abstraction
r??valua
of
in
on
essay
insightful
recognition
it were
like
mid-twentieth-century
an essay written
even
possibly
others
twentieth-century
the
be
but
textiles,
rock
Pasztory,
values
certainly
the historian
visual-culture
made
who
tell
to exotic
ever
Andean
figurines
beverages
echoes
"the
approach
one would
entirely
art journal
indis
categories.
only
eloquent.
particular
she
that
ago."17 While
no
Inca
encouraged
in
culture,
and Pacific Island origin propelled
abstraction,
find
art we
art, we
to reconstruct
an art historian
Esther
recently.
pointed
concluded
and
years
image
its cultural
figurine
Inca figurines,
unlike
In this observation,
who
and
alcoholic
only
and America
Europe
pathetic
that we
that this object is to be valued over other
not wax
Picchu
as art until
aesthetics,
Shapiro,
dred
of not
figurines.
forms.'6
a favor,
cultures
of
to
rise
is bestowed
"art"
century. Imay not utter those words
even more highly
However,
recognized
inWestern
suggesting,
in naming
pre-Hispanic
remember
I do
which
from
offerings
Andean
other
different
by being
students
ued this kind ofthing
received
term
about
gave
system
the
and
than
values,
to a notion
llama-shaped
I am telling them implicitly
artifacts
small
but
don't),
and making
quizzes,
and
words,
this or
recognize
terms
because
attempt
in my
students
a small,
them
I'm pretty
discussing,
In other
ourselves
in the
West,
the Incas (Inkas) in the late fifteenth
fact,
as akin
its aesthetics,
be
not
granting
more,
excavated
simultaneously
about
often,
were
artifacts
the colonizing
to other
insufficient.ls
is art!"
"This
place.
In other
the ancient
about
flint.
that do
term
the
sensibilities.
the eccentric
Too
calling
However,
the archaeologist
than whatever
objects
the West,
of
aesthetic
indigenous
re-create
rather
it. Thus
tells us nothing
say more
What's
culture.
to which
in relation
of
more
doing,
uncanny
"art"
of
in the
cultures
matters
of
recenter
and
supplant
in so
in the
object
the archaeologist
only
system
(to us)
but
not
also
though,
something.
in societies
in the first
to the concept
pensable
the flint
reading
we
the object
their
recognizing
values
for
that
own
his
as art, he
"art"
for
values
flint
self-revelation,
things,
value
as
he
name
we
study,
that our
perhaps,
not
of
we
the objects
the viewer
aWestern
and
recognize
much
foregrounds
of
prioritizes
categories
inherent
carved
tells us how
he
rather,
Maya;
and
the
is effective,
of words
held
nothing
how
reveals
choice
estimation
the
art reveals
something
His
quality.
to elevate
tends
fifty
objects
or
sym
a hun
of African
European artists toward certain kinds of
assert
that
J. Alden
Inca
visual
carved
Mason
Inca
rocks
concluded
culture.18
played
that
a part
stone
in this
sculp
is
Factors
Inca, llama figurine, c. 1400-1530,
crimped
silver sheet metal,
9% x 8% in. (23.8 x
Museum
of Natural
20.6 cm), American
in
#B/1619
(artwork
History,
photograph
the public domain; photograph
by
provided
Museum
of Natural
the Library, American
History)
include
the
methods
of
of
part
against
long militating
the
it is not
that
fact
collection
and
significance
of
tain on
the horizon
at from
a different
except
display
a
mimetically
have
scant
book
on
carved
attention
on
the clear
ture.20
Despite
of
examples
is the
imagistic
one
Errington,
a person
tification
of what
question:
Do we
that
our
a puma
Incas
that
the
stems
Incas'
Inca
Monica
both acts of collection and display. Today, many
of the site's carved outcrops,
including the
"Funerary Rock," are roped off and specially
protected.
20. C?sar Paternosto, Piedra abstracta: La escul
tura Inca;Una visi?n contempor?nea (Lima: Fondo
de cultura Econ?mica,
1989), available in English
as The Stone and the Thread: Andean Roots of
Abstract Art, trans. Esther Allen (Austin: University
of Texas Press, 1996); Maarten Van de Guchte,
IncaMonumental Sculpture
"'Carving theWorld':
and Landscape," PhD dissertation (Department of
Anthropology, University of Illinois at Urbana
is a practicing artist
1990). Paternosto
Champaign,
and Van de Guchte is an anthropologist.
tainly
Perhaps
at Inca
guides
of Machu
bird"
to find
tourists
Inca
in the
leging
of
built
didn't
likely
the
Iconocentric
28
or
others
categories,
disciplinary
a
and
looking
knows
SUMMER 2006
how
is no
there
like
still
we
has
by
have
to value.
This
kind
"images"
found
masks
own
aesthetic
Inca
Inca
of
images
similar
visual
culture
looking,
By
as more
to
its natural
panoptic
privi
worthy
expectations,
something
the heir
of
Incas
that resulted
above).
of
days
ruins
the
to those
artifacts
culture
these
where
standards,
into
structures
in the
(discussed
certain
separating
"cosmic
in the
imagery
tour
Salazar,
the
Pisaq,
cer
and
uncommon
it is not
to find
African
stripped
transformed
at
in processes
remains
Elorrieta
Edgar
and
reserva
serious
settlement,
"hidden"
continue
of our
reason
for
congruence
Zuidema
puma-shaped
condor"
more,
engage
imagistic,
by
"flying
search
from
fibers
and
any
a puma
of
shape
than
puma-shaped
of other
we
That
the
was
What's
in the
that we
have
a
in the
offered
J. Slive
of
the
variety
settlements.2?
of natural
iconic
In
art?
its putative
for
that R.Tom
fact
Inca Cuzco
Fernando
by
out
point
today
idea
book
environment.
suggests
than
by
a recent
that
the
participating
removal
study
already
Inca
of
at
rock
for
Certainly,
rather
the
and Daniel
the notion
Picchu,
environs
and
the
sites
the
prompts
expectations
built
iconicity
Despite
practices.23
inspired
by
prompted
for
desire
Barnes
to this
hypothesis,
popular.24
iden
if the appeal of the claim
was
of Cuzco
capital
our
from
with
19. Itcould be argued that the twentieth-century
conversion of Machu Picchu from remote, over
grown ruins into an accessible tourist destina
tion?a museum al fresco?has
accomplished
the
to a puma.
Similarly, we might well wonder
tions
for
in the natural
sake?
art's
ability
she writes,
criterion
this outcrop
valued
appropria
the
observation
and
to
recognizable?
"Iconicity,"
puma
for
"art by
something
needs
as
It is an
According
she means
repressed
crouching
to meet
the
border.
as art."22 Her
a
find
is this
words,
evidence
to
even
and
cited
Grande.21
made
an animal.
counts
in order
K'enko
ness
or
Sometimes
by which
iconicity,
the
frogs,
at K'enko
things
resemblance
an unstated
"remains
of
quali
as the pumas,
a masonry
by
cul
on
remains
monolith.
Rock
the aspects
to find
notably
other
Puma
calls
she
of observers
most
the Saywite
dis
focused
in Inca
had
focus
framed
of
is what
tion"
of
de Guchte's
the abstract
most
such
C?sar
region
rocks
of
carving,
so-called
outcrop,
unsculpted
these
considerations
carving,
imagistic
terraces
and
rock
when
Van
in the Cuzco
importance
Inca
of
Inca-manipulated
recently,
and Maarten
outcrops
recent
such
ties of much
steps,
Inca
until
moun
looked
to represent
Indeed,
peak.
more,
sacred
that matter
its ability
attention
Piedra abstracta
sertation
the
for
relocated?or
mountain
specific
What's
it echoes
that
affecting
received
Paternosto's
few
be
of view?without
to traditional
subject
photography.I9
through
is the fact
this outcrop
behind
not
as art
Rock"
"Funerary
therefore
portable?and
it. It cannot
point
rocks
the
identifying
or
fibers.
the West
looking?
which
21. Paternosto, The Stone and the Thread, 66;
Rebecca Stone-Miller, Art of the Andes: From
Chavin to Inca, rev. ed. (London: Thames and
Hudson, 2002), 200, fig. 158. Fernando E.
Elorrieta Salazar and Edgar Elorrieta Salazar, in
Cusco and the Sacred Valley of the Incas, trans.
Beverly Nelson Elder (Cusco: Tanpu, 2001), 59,
find a toad in this same rock instead of a puma.
22. Errington, 208.
23. The claim that Cuzco was laidout in the form
of a puma was originally suggested by Manuel
Chavez Ballon and first argued inprint by John
Howland Rowe, "What Kind of a Settlement
Was
IncaCuzco?" ?awpa Pacha 5 (1967): 59-77.
24. R. Tom Zuidema, "The Lion in the City: Royal
Symbols of Transition inCusco," Journal of Latin
American Lore 9, no. I (1983): 39-100; Monica
Barnes and Daniel J. Slive, "El Puma de Cuzco:
?Plano de la ciudad Ynga o noci?n Europea?"
I (1993): 79-102.
Revista Andina ll.no.
25. The Elorrietas have found the following in the
layouts of pre-Hispanic settlements: a guanaco
a condor,
at Tiwanaku; a deity named Wiracocha,
a sacred tree, two llamas, and a corn cob at
a condor at Pisaq; and a lizard, a
Ollantaytambo;
crouching puma, a standing puma, and a cosmic
bird at Machu Picchu.
26. Michel Foucault, The Order of Things, trans.
Alan Sheridan ( 1966; New York: Random House,
1973); Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison,
trans. Alan Sheridan ( 1975; New York: Random
House,
1977).
27. Foucault, Discipline and Punish, 218.
28. Ibid., 184.
29. David Summers has recently questioned the
ability of many traditional art-historical categories
to adequately describe the full range of both non
Western
andWestern
objects. Unfortunately
he retains what must surely be one of the most
problematic categories of all?art. Although
Summers recognizes that the word "art" has had
its problems historically when applied to visual
cultures outside theWest,
he continues to use
itwithout definition. He does suggest that what
has been called "visual arts" ought to become
"spatial arts" so as to acknowledge that, for many
cultures, much more than sight and vision are
involved. Summers, I I.
30. Art is not the only term imposed from outside
that creates a homogenizing category for cultures
that did not use it. For example, "shamanism" is a
term introduced to (imposed on?) almost all cul
tures that are said to practice it. Some scholars
fear that the term "shamanism" homogenizes as it
normalizes; see, for example, Cecelia F. Klein et
al., "The Role of Shamanism inMesoamerican
Art: A Reassessment," Current Anthropology 43,
no. 3 (2002): 383^20.
"Race" and "writing" are
but two more examples of terms with problem
atic, unreflective global application.
31. Hayden White,
"The Politics of Historical
Interpretation," inThe Politics of Interpretation, ed.
W. J.T Mitchell (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1983), 129.
32. For a study of Inca stories about saykuska, see
Maarten Van de Guchte, "El ciclo m?tico de la
piedra cansada," Revista Andina 4, no. 2 ( 1984):
539-56.
takes
the world
us
to consider
reminds
of
and
things
the work
ofThings and Discipline andPunish, explores
in the West.26
cipline
academic
practice
Many
following
rate,
sure
related
and
we
and
of
in or
participated
a
Foucault
emphasized
as well
as to make
nize
its assorted
all, useful.28
Art, with
normalized
distinctions.29
to normalize
category
"sculpture"
have
imposed
been
current
my
people
Imean
carved
not
warning
from
their
Inca
eyes.31
own
their
On
Western
ways.
of
rocks
in
called
Some
territories
hirauqui,
Rocks
called
sayhua,
stand.
they
Puruauca
through
embody
like
that of
embody
Chacrayoq
embody
or
the valleys
called
the
Incas
seems
rulers
revered
For
example,
the petrified
they
are
consid
boundaries
embody
came
than
many
are
of which
who
on
Rather
of whom
Saywite,
still
than
depended
forms,
they
(from
as the
in other
relation.
of which
fields
themselves
index.
they
things
through
as well
to have
m?tonymie
the
seeing
rocks
rocks
resemblant
warriors
petrified
see
chronicles,
rocks
mimetic
rocks,
where
owners.
prototypes,
embody
agents,
impor
den White's
Hay
cannot
with
the
signify
of past
that which
value
kinds
both
to
to understand
how
assumes
not
did
cues
from
and
legends,
prototypes
huanca
they
nested
I tell
rocks. When
in mind
that we
categorizing
through
their
embody
rocks
of
their
Incas
visual
take cues
can
cate
Western
everyone
the
Keeping
in the
place
myths,
practices)
present
of other
about
Inca way
One
brothers.
fied
their
we
the
in the Maori
simultaneously,
Inca
nearly
ones;
acknowledge
hand,
rocks,
know,
or not.
oneself
"put
recorded
Inca
variety
carved
we
a prototype
representing
ered
to
the other
render
owners.
whether
of view,"
point
traces
certain
rocks
a
some
of
uncarved
many
or utilized
words
how rocks
from
they
expanded
example,
While
have,
but
arbitrary
as
carving,
above
cultures.30
as far as we
But,
skin
scarification.
non-Western
concerns
project
rocks.
to attempt
visible
Inca
to a consideration
book
frames
certain
of
to return
For
world.
others,
on
differently
in masonry
tance
by
with
these
art have
of
categories
schemata
carved Inca
rocks
encounters
of
homoge
and,
logical,
one
is but
with
to
the power
natural,
appear
incorporate
tattoo
combines
altered
it is useful
to
I'm
can
including academic disciplines,
in the non-Western
only
stretches
which
disciplinary
Here
that
now
of Mok'o,
practice
gories
found
practices
rank,
acts.
such
he meant
Western
distribute,
all art historians
discipline,
subcategories,
Traditional
sepa
the undisciplined.27
experienced
distinctions
arbitrary
the
doing
divide,
categorize,
punish
by which
normalization,
the
both
he describes
as
differentiate,
they
practitioners
have
organize,
they
From the long list of things that disciplines,
do,
of us who
observes,
multiplicities,"
compare,
they
exclude;
well-disciplined
of ways
The Order
to those
as Foucault
of human
things:
isolate;
and
normalize,
as
that
think
and
identify,
homogenize,
them?
of various kinds of dis
are useful
in fact,
the ordering
assuring
overlapping
segregate,
who,
the development
are,
ranks
in both
and its subjects. He identifies disciplines, which
for
"techniques
Foucault,
observations
who
disciplines,
agents of discipline
as
of his
and
orders,
segregates,
of Michel
they
to life
are
of
to
in order
defend specific territories before repetrifying. Rocks called saykuskaembody
from
of
instances,
these
the
stone
may
29
rocks
field,
place?whether
into
masons
which
quarries
stone
may
represent
art journal
removed
embody
valley,
provide
aspects
quarry,
locations
of
rocks
the animate
or
king.
for
but
of
specific
of niches
carving
or
a
imagistic
carving
does
carving
not
or
person
and
the
In each
projects.32
building
"spirit"
The
for offerings,
the prototype,
Inca
the
the petri
flat
on
appear
places
the
to
have
been
tially
c. 1400-1530,
stone,
Inca, carved monolith,
approx. 8 x 10 x 9 ft. (244 x 305 x 274 cm),
Peru (photograph
Saywite,
by the author)
entirely
are
they
nothing
cept,
In so
rocks
sacred
doing,
That
all manner
Inca
about
is, they
Inca
the
serves
as
can
methods
intend
a
according
by
were
they
observes
to
fail
not
in mind.
that discipli
to reveal
"evolutive
the notion
implic
intention,"
standards
Foucault
called
con
are
invariably,
only,
such
above,
standards
since
up,
with
he
as
judgment
aesthetic
they
nary
such
named
to "art
by
toWestern
measure
which
a non-Inca
invites
that
par
signify
with
appropriation,"
itly compared
made
those
normalize
"art by
which
things
categories,
to further
move
that
the
such
rocks,
made
rocks,
rocks
embody
art-historical
Inca
of
and
of
significance
conventional
Stretching
so as to embrace
art.
and
metonymy.
through
identified.
sculpture,
reveals
to the function
essential
or
time"
of progress.33
what
by
charting
histor
Since,
ically, European art has been held (by
those
in the Western
schooled
tradi
tion) to represent the highest degree
of
evolution,
cannot
help
aesthetic
that
art elsewhere
naming
but
reinforce
too often Western
all
are
standards
33. Foucault, Discipline and Punish, 160.
34. Preziosi, Rethinking Art History, 25
35. As early as 1842, Franz Kugler's Handbuch der
Kunstgeschichte included descriptions of what was
called "art" from Oceania and North America.
Not long after, indigenous artifacts from sub
Saharan Africa, the Americas, and the Pacific were
irrevocably linked.
36. Preziosi, Rethinking Art History, 29; Nelson
Goodman, Ways of Worldmaking (Indianapolis:
Hackett,
1978), 66.
37. Both Klein, in "Objects are nice, but. . .", and
in "In Search of Children,"
Cameron,
18-33, have
provided models for this kind of reflectivity when,
independently and with regard to different cul
tures, they both discussed the implications of the
labels "doll" and "art"when applied to certain
objects.
38. James Elkins, review of Real Spaces: World Art
History and the Rise of Western Modernism by
David Summers, Art Bulletin 86, no. 2 (June 2004):
377-78.
39. Felipe Sol?sOlguin, "Art at the Time of the
Aztecs," inAztecs, ed. Eduardo Matos Moctezuma
and Sol?s (London: Royal Academy of Arts,
2002), 56.
40. Beatriz de la Fuente, "Traces of an Identity," in
The Aztec Empire, ed. Felipe Sol?s Olguin (New
York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 2004),
41,52.
41. A Dominican friar, Domingo
the author of a Quechua-Spanish
de Santo Tom?s,
dictionary pub
dent
instruments
of
been
early modern
much
art
authorized
and
history
the
came
colonies
reasonably
into
by
rest of
the
of
inextricably
intertwined
ten about
the development
have
while
the
things
shaped
by
replaced
non-Western
objects
30
were
fields?would
named
SUMMER 2006
art and
in
others,
often
respond
is art?"
"what
"when
then
art and, more
always
important,
the
of
of
ask
and
and
in his
so
not
contexts
consequences ofthat
book
ought
just
are
it is
suggests,
and
the
Europe
by
avenues
Goodman
question
are
writ
been
colonizing
discourses
historians?and
cognizant
has
we
as Preziosi
might
history
colonized
certain
of
European
Europe's
the questions
is the wrong
art
much
to colonial
both
colo
the discipline
of
once
by Nelson
is art?"36 Art
be
how
Perhaps,
offered
exploring
and
place.35 We
with
enables
discipline
about
Itwas
or former
same
of
born
history,
century.
that
While
regions
art
that
the discipline
in concert
of
ladder
evolutionary
accident
in the
and
history
an observation
that
be no
apparatuses.
disciplinary
the
were
who
colonization.
our
the ways
on
indepen
instruments
and monotheistic
to remember
anthropology
art
the wheel,
low
are
they
arts of
European
time
about
to examine
the query
by
same
discouraging
seriously
ofWbrldmaking:
Ways
It can
so-called
practice
choose
European
to take
time
be
we
or
Europeans
European
of
little
very
questioned
investigation
with
of us who
those
the
that notions
recognize
agenda,
same
of
"Aesthetic
or
absolute,
in the nineteenth
maturity
at the
being
high
the world.
of
linkage
the use
how
the
neutral,
find
aesthetic
observes,
In short,
ideologies.
It is important
reached
Preziosi
not
and
like writing,
perched.
Europe,
and
authored
social
to gauge
used
As
hegemony.
arbitrary
or
art,
its producers
culture
nizing
and
classes,
Historically,
has
religion,
cultural
conventional
institutions,
power."34
in
of
we
(and are still)
standards have been
as
wielded
European
Indeed,
supremacy.
to
those
in which
naming.37
in
We
ask ourselves
would
has
either
we
stone,
lnca,"Puma
Rock," c. 1400-1530,
Peru (photograph
K'enko Grande, Cuzco,
by the author)
at
term
counterproductive
In
even
and
that
"art," we
of
place
it as an
to discard
ought
or
it in our
studies
If it has
neither,
if not
actually
utility.
unproductive
we
what
be
using
theoretical
the use
can
thev
are
intellectually
consider
where
as we
"art"
to render
tends
might
epistemologies
term
the
in the vernacular
parity
linguistic
then maybe
whether
as insufficient.
study
of
terms,
indigenous
the
recovered,
categories,
reservations
recently
discussed by James Elkins notwith
In his
standing.
text
history
of
critical
concepts
to the
that
saying
terms
art
global
indigenous
studied,
unfamiliar
The Art
Real Spaces, Elkins
entitled
vocabulary
tures
for
Summers's
to the use
objects
and
review
of David
Bulletin
and
cul
"too many
no
text may
the
longer feel like art history"38 With
regard to cultures that have (or had)
no
use
not
the notion
for
feeling
bad
Those
thing.
example,
ation
lished in 1560, translates quillcani (to make quillca)
as pintar (to paint), labrar alguna obra con colores
generalmente (to color something generally), or
debuxar (to draw) and arte de debuxar (the art of
drawing); quillcacamayoc (creator of quillca) as
pintor generalmente (painter, generally) and debux
ador (one who draws); and quillcasca (a thing with
quillca) as debuxada cosa (something drawn) or
esculpida cosa (something sculpted); see Santo
Tom?s, Gramm?tica o Arte de la Lengua General de
los Indios de los Reynos del Peru (Lima: Universidad
1951 ), 98, 188,
Nacional Mayor de San Marcos,
357. The Jesuit Diego Gonz?lez de Holgu?n,
author of a Quechua-Spanish
dictionary published
in 1608, defines quellka as labor (needlework or
ornamental work), matiz (tint), and adorno
(adornment), and quellkani as dibujar (to draw)
and pintar (to paint); see Gonz?lez de Holgu?n,
Arte y diccionario Qquechua-Espa?ol correjido y
aumentado por los RR. PP. Redentoristas (Lima:
Imprenta del Estado, 1901), 293.
42. Santo Tom?s, 131, 357, translates quillca as
letra o carta mensagera (letter or messenger's
note) and libro o papel generalmente (book or
paper generally). Gonz?lez de Holgu?n, 293,
defines quellka as carta (letter) and escritura
(writing). For a discussion of quillca in the colonial
period and indigenous Andean responses to
alphabetic script, see Joanne Rappaport and Tom
Cummins, "Between Images andWriting: The
Ritual of the King's Quillca," Colonial Latin American
Review 7, no. I (1998): 7-32.
of
that
"the
could
toltecayotl
was
the
has
and
could
Mexican
nuances
the
of Aztec
in the
wonder,
and
more
are elided
to
is so
straight
Is de
translation?
the Aztecs
about
we
when
tolte
or
us?
Employing
translation.
"visual
the
blush,
to
arts." According
the
of
language
the
ornamental
drawing,
consideration
enterprise,
of
for,
period
quillca
thing
unknown
3 I art journal
terms
indigenous
At first
was
the
in addition
used
early
Incas,
work,
term
in the way
Incas
exposes
appear
the word
quilico and
and
engraving,
how
to refer
in the
pre-Hispanic
to common
Andes.42
named
surfaces
The
its cognates
proves
above,
with
ready
act of
simple
that
approximates
dictionaries,
sculpting.41
translation
to the practices
a term
had
Quechua
colonial-period
a
is not
I suggest
to have
Yet
to be
in the
writing
recognition
Quechua
to
refer
even
paint
a cursory
an awkward
Spanish
on
colonial
them,
la
than
render
the Aztecs
say about
are
region,
however,
female)
the
terms
between
How
of monuments
tolteca referred
might
masking
thought
dialogue
'artist.'"40
reception
male
is
explains,
a
an
cities
We
ele
opposed
had
called
today
cre
the
she
who
confused?in
ideas,
the disparity
might
or
added,
sensitivity."39
toltecayotl,
root word
(both
a
toltecayotl,
the dual,
long-abandoned
discussed.
further
toltecayotl with
person
the
toltecatl as "artist"
ancient
What
where
be
lost?or
"the
it affected
how
and
usefully
of
been
and
as a toltecatl,
society,
monuments
transforming
is revealing?
about
ing,
articulated
rendering
catl as artist? What
being
known
Mexican
that
What
Fuente
was
heart
ancient
of
questions
forward.
she
own
of
the universe";
heart,"
Mexico,
usefully
of
a
such
in the pre
central
concept
between
equilibrium
throughout
and
ideal
(Mexica)
perfect
head
Central
postclassic
whether
found
visually
the builders
open
be
or her
his
a
"reach
between
dialogue
with
the Aztec
equates
that
things
ments
in
la Fuente
of
as "artistic
translates
de
isn't
term that Felipe Sol?s Olguin
N?huatl
Beatriz
art, perhaps
history
might
the
explore
of
interested
societies
Hispanic
for
art
like
some
of mundane
faces
painting,
was
marking
the visual,
one
cial
rather
a whole
nate
discussed
concepts
are
important
then
To my
traditions.
our
in the naturalization
art
of
tropes.
on
at least
some
into
for
concern,
explorers
the discipline
in the processes
intervene
converted
scholarly
and
museums,
market,
tively
level,
art,
is the
example,
cultures
often
climb
through
on
the Western
of
areas
outside
autochthonous
systems
referred
to earlier?have
frequent
Eurocentrism
essay
to
provoke
and
much
and
promote
Western
tradition,
of
those
of us
imperialism.
is
of non
from
digressions
familiar
to conversations
intellectual
effec
particular
of us
it, those
fibers
art
culture
chapters
exotic
too
all
the
most
A
things?
I see
natural
to contribute
such
than
we
material
in which
As
history.45
signification?the
concomitant
text
little more
provide
of
categories
art-survey
"global"
the progressivist
European
visual
through
history
the discipline,
for
might
ideas,
art
of human
of
resources
How
con
notions,
of
places
non-Western
today
bound
future
margins
than
scholars
history's
and
accepting
issues
historically
new
history?
which
other Western
and
craft,
of
times
so-called
art his
of
and
the ways
art
locating
art
part,
conven
vocabularies
flexible
is the
all
at the
and
profound
and
of modern
incorporate
embod
its rejection
with
consequential
of us working
rock
terms
as usual.
indigenous
more
concerned
quillca,
elimi
business
are more
there
as
would
the most
for
that,
with
judgments,
usage
to
expands
those
where
culture,
particularly
qualify
revered
with
of
spe
that approximate
proceed
the culturally
of
even more
Perhaps
Are
occupation.44
I am
terminology.
as the
discipline
itself
value
the unreflective
through
and
terms,
to
however,
mind,
are
words
of visual
and
of
of native
in fields
those
boundaries
it is clear
us
order
indigenous
discuss,
allow
the concept
the particulars
cept
ground. While alphabetic writing may have been
identified as quillca, itwas not deemed remark
able. Thus scribes and notaries created quillca just
as did painters, carvers, and embroiderers. See
and
especially
find
conventional
implicated
and
substitution
simple
terms
accessible,
of nonart
by the Spaniards under the command of conquis
tador Francisco Pizarro just before they took
Atahualpa prisoner, as the quillca de Dios y del rrey
(quillca of God and king). Atahualpa, not seeing
anything of interest in the book, tossed iton the
a
researchers,
Many
tory's
to consider
that
argue
superficial
arts, we
the
of
many
Iwould
while
Thus,
a
that
the visual
of
technique;
all
not
and
sur
of
to the
highest
to works
studies
Inca notion
or
writing,
refer
the visual,
of monuments?including
art-historical
are not
not
does
our
to restrict
to an
or
embroidery,
of
to the
marking
refers
of medium
regardless
a subset
truer
above.
is not
solution
tional
were
range
iments
the
were
the word
in itself
quillca
describes
If we
that we
color)
engraving,
quillca.43 Thus,
at that.
thinking
of
drawing,
but
that
suggests
quillca
the addition
(including
whether
43. The indigenous chronicler IngaDiego de
Castro Titu Cusi Yupanqui, a descendant of Inca
in 1570, describes
rulers who wrote his memoirs
the bible or breviary, shown to the ruler Atahualpa
as
writing
alphabetic
with
the
of meaning
about
focusing
art
I offer
loss
that
I
history's
this
conversation.
Carolyn Dean, professor of History of Art and Visual Culture at the University of California, Santa Cruz,
researches aspects of Inkavisual culture both before and after the Spanish conquest. She is currently
working on a book entitled A Culture of Stone: Inka Perspectives on/in Rock.
Titu Cusi Yupanqui, Relaci?n de la conquista del
Per? (Lima: Ediciones de laBiblioteca Universitaria,
1973), 16.
44. See Preziosi, Rethinking Art History, 10, 33,
where he offers relevant discussion of art histo
ry's "disciplinary machinery" and its need to
expand, to extend its "disciplinary horizons to all
places and times" as if to prove its universal
applicability.
45. For a cogent critique of what she calls the
Hegelian narrative of the history of art, see Shelly
Errington, The Death of Authentic Primitive Art and
Other Tales of Progress (Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1998), 51-54.
32
SUMMER 2006