Cultural Bias Towards African Art
African art has often been controversial, misunderstood, and appropriated due to Western colonialism. Many critics and curators in the Modern Art world have undoubtedly substantial power over the present discourse of Art and how that translates in defining African art. In order to call an African piece inherently authentic, the art world considers an object’s ritualistic purpose, social function, and the overall aesthetic criteria determined by Western Art. This model of evaluating an object’s authenticity determines its value, and how it will be displayed in art galleries and presents a serious matter of debate. What constitutes an artifact and what is designated as an art piece, is discussed in Sally Price’s article, Objects D’Art and Ethnographic Artifacts. Price attempts to present a framework in order to analyze the curatorial display of African art in Western museums and galleries. Furthermore, she states the importance of the observer’s eye perceiving the artwork through two types of lenses; one “eye” that views art from a Western cultural education point of view and the other known as a discriminating' “eye” that “reflects their own cultural education.” The anthropological view of understanding African art considers moral value, community, and religious beliefs and must, therefore, shift towards viewing art from a design perspective in order for these pieces to be revered in the art world.
Focusing on the moral values of African artists’ preoccupation with life, survival, death, and sexuality devalues the significance of African art. A culture’s values determine their behavior, desires, and what inspires them to create. When looking at other Western cultures’ artwork and their perceptions of an art piece, that usually involves the universal idea that the piece of work has been acknowledged for its pleasing form. African sculpturists prize their ability and human potential to carve intricate forms with great mastery. Even though a part of the allure of African aesthetics is the moral content of a piece and might determine its value to the people of Africa, delving too much into its meaning can signify that a piece is more of an artifact than a piece of art. In Western art galleries, viewers are rarely made aware of the object’s original purpose or meaning and therefore allowing them to appreciate the genius behind the artist’s skill and creative flair. A person who recognizes the moral value and purpose surrounding a piece might argue that it is not an art piece since it serves a purpose within a culture. For example, a fertility figure serves the purpose of promoting the idea of sexuality and reproduction. However, for African art to be studied within the context of Western art criteria, viewers need to assess a piece based on its design and aesthetic appeal. Emphasizing an art piece based on the artist’s moral values and the purpose for the object clouds the piece’s mysticism and use of design principles.
When the Western art world solely considers the ethnographic relativity of an art piece and its community, it reduces it to a confined idea of what African art includes. A vast continent such as Africa includes tribes and ancestral heritage that brings significance to their art, however, curators need to place more emphasis on a piece’s merit rather than its origins. Part of an ethnographer’s mission is to think of the gallery’s audience and their education around a piece. In some cases, a room full of labeled objects with a lengthy synopsis on a piece often comes across as informative and impersonal. The objective here is for one culture to attempt to understand another, however, for observers to fully digest the functional beauty of African art, curators must allow that art to speak for itself. Many pieces from various tribes are constructed from a wide variety of materials, differing carving skills, diverse mask making, and subject matter to suit a tribe’s community. However, the background of a tribe and their beliefs need to come in second when discussing an art piece based upon its design. Promoting Africa as “a unified or monolithic artistic practice” would be an incorrect perception of African art due to its diversity. For instance, Nok sculptures are geometric in nature with elaborate hairstyles while from Nigeria to New Genuine, Africans had made contact with Europeans resulting in the commissions of style fusion in order to create salt cellars. Although both are considered African art, both communities of people had different influences from different time periods. Seeing that some ethnographic exhibits of African works are muddied together rather than commemorating each tribe, this would be an invalid representation of the art and illegitimate to the African people’s point of view. As Price recalls, when objects are isolated, an implication of value within the work is revealed to museum-goers rather than the museum’s “own aesthetic merit.” Furthermore, Price elaborated that African art is represented through dog tag labels is due to generalizations of African societies being exotic. Ethnographers do have ethical concerns when presenting an exhibit since they can potentially interject their own biases. This fact would manipulate and change the demeanor of the particular culture in the eye of the public. Understanding that new perceptions of African art have only been around in the last millennium, makes it clear to why Western cultures show ignorance towards authentic African art. Community plays an active role in the production of African art, however, it cannot be considered above the aesthetic appeal of the piece.
African art is demystified when Western art focuses on the spiritual aspects of why African people produce art in the first place. For centuries, the African people have created art for the Gods and for the prosperity of their people. An ethnographic look at what drives artists to create masks, headdresses, and statues, draws Western art critics away from the significance of design. Many Western museums view African art in a performative and ritualistic context rather than objects that both become and perform art. An example of performing a visual, kinetic, and audial expression of art would be the “festival of images” where communities celebrate the richness of life through dance wands, masks, and sculpture. When observing these priceless pieces of personal adornment it would be an injustice to represent these stylized forms through a one-sided informative statement. To some extent, ethnography involves some type of narrative, guiding observers away from viewing the art alone. Since ethnographers cannot be wholeheartedly certain on a subject, there is some degree of storytelling which could be fallacious when representing a group of cultural items. Regardless, a simple ethnographic label could not inspire any emotion while these artforms can evoke feelings of power and strength. The change from an anthropological display to an art exhibit changes the observer’s appreciation and communicates an imperative aesthetic experience that simply cannot be recreated through facts about African life.
Removing all cultural bias toward African art is a demanding task when taking into account the injustices that have surrounded African art and its people. While ethnographers attempt to write a narrative around a collection’s moral values, community, and spiritual beliefs, they compartmentalize African art. Furthermore, they confuse the art and categorize it as an artifact. Instead of noting the aesthetic beauty of African art’s enlarged heads, elongated necks,s and pointed breasts for their unique perspective of design, ethnographers pull viewers in the direction of explanation and education. African art must stand alone and be considered for its use of elements and principles of design in order to hold a place in the Western art world.
