Part 6

The second form of representation is by means of perspective drawing, in which the momentary visual impression regardless of the presence or absence of characteristic symbols, is utilized. This method is not by any means absent in the drawings of primitive man as well as in those of children, but it is not as common as symbolic representation. In a way most crude symbolic forms contain a perspective element, although it does not extend over the whole figure, but only over parts which are more or less skilfully put together, so that a semblance of the general outline is maintained. This is the case in Egyptian paintings, in those of Australians and in North American picture writing (see figs. 61, 62). In other cases the art of perspective drawing rises to real excellence. The silhouettes of the Eskimo may be mentioned as a case in point (fig. 69). Their figures are always small, scratched into ivory, antler or bone, and filled with hachure or with black pigment. Form and pose are well-done. Although there is generally no perspective arrangement of groups, each figure is well executed and renders a single visual impression. We find perspective of groups in the rock paintings of South Africa (fig. 70), not perfect, but indicated by the overcutting of figures and by the relative sizes of objects near by and of those seen at a distance. Perspective realism of single figures is even more fully developed in the paintings of later paleolithic man, found in the caves of southern France and of Spain (fig. 71). Less skilful efforts at perspective representation are not rare. On mattings from the Congo region, on basketry hats from Vancouver Island (fig. 72) rather clumsy attempts have been made. In those from the former region there are animals in profile in the latter whaling scenes: men going out in a canoe and hauling in a harpooned whale.

Much more common are carvings in wood, bone or stone, or pottery objects that are not symbolic but true to nature. Ivory carvings of the Eskimo, Chukchee and Koryak (fig. 73), prehistoric carvings, pottery from North America are examples.

As stated before, a sharp line between the two methods of graphic representation cannot be drawn. In most cases symbolic representations are at least in part perspective, either in so far as the general form is maintained, or as parts are shown in perspective form; while perspective representations may contain symbolic elements. When the Pueblo Indian paints the form of a deer with a fair degree of perspective accuracy (see fig. 142, p. 167), but adds to it a line running from the mouth to the heart as an essential symbol of life; or when the symbols are arranged with a fair degree of correspondence to perspective order we have forms in which both tendencies may be observed. Indeed, some degree of conventional symbolism is found in every drawing or painting, the more so, the more sketchy it is; in other words, the more the representation is confined to salient traits. This is particularly true in all forms of caricature.

If representative art did develop into absolute realism, stereoscopic color photography would be the highest type of art, but this is obviously not the case. Setting aside the emotional appeal of the object itself, an accurate copy of a natural object, such as a glass flower, a painted carving, an imitation of natural sounds or a pantomime may attain an intense emotional appeal, they may excite our admiration on account of the skill of execution; their artistic value will always depend upon the presence of a formal element that is not identical with the form found in nature.

Stress must be laid upon the distinctive points of view from which the two methods of graphic representation develop, because the development of perspective drawing is often represented as growing out of the cruder symbolic method. As a matter of fact the two have distinct psychological sources which remain active in the early, as well as in the late history of art. Vierkandt[42] designates the various methods of representation as suggestive (andeutend), descriptive (beschreibend), and perspective (anschaulich). Of these the former two correspond to what I have called here symbolic. They differ only in the more or less fragmentary character of the symbols. The perspective type does not develop from the former two as the result of an evolution; it is based on a distinct mental attitude, the early presence of which is manifested by the realistic, perspective paintings of a number of primitive tribes.

[42] Das Zeichnen der Naturvölker, Zeitschrift für angewandte Psychologie, Vol. 6, (1912), pp. 347 et seq.

The theory of a continuous development from symbolic to realistic art is one of the numerous attempts to prove a continuous development of cultural forms, a steady, unbroken evolution. This view-point has had a deep influence upon the whole theory of ethnology. Evolution, meaning the continuous change of thought and action, or historic continuity, must be accepted unreservedly. It is otherwise, when it is conceived as meaning the universally valid continuous development of one cultural form out of a preceding type, such as the assumed development of economic forms from food gathering through herding to agriculture. In past times these three stages were assumed to be characteristic of all human development, until it was recognized that there is no connection between the invention of agriculture and the domestication of animals,—the former developed through the occupation of woman who gathered the vegetable food supply, the latter through the devotion of men to the chase. The men had no occasion to become familiar with the handling of plants, and the women had just as little opportunity of dealing with animals. The development of agriculture and of herding can, therefore, not possibly be derived from the same sources.

It is no less arbitrary to assume that social forms must have developed in regular universally valid sequence, one certain stage always being based on the same preceding one in all parts of the world. There is no evidence that would compel us to assume that matrilineal organizations always preceded patrilineal or bilateral ones. On the contrary, it seems much more likely that the life of hunters in single family units, or that of larger groups in more fertile areas has led to entirely different results. We may expect continuous evolution only in those cases in which the social and psychological conditions are continuous.

After this brief excurse, let us revert to our subject. Representations become works of art only when the technique of their manufacture is perfectly controlled, at least by a number of individuals; in other words, when they are executed by one of the processes, that are industrially in common use. Where carving is practiced, we may expect artistic form in carvings; where painting, pottery, or metal work prevail, artistic form is found in the products of those industries in which the highest degree of technical skill is attained. The Eskimo carves in ivory, antler or bone, of which he makes his harpoons and many other utensils; his best representative work is made with the knife and consists of small carvings and etchings in which he applies the same methods that he employs every day. The New Zealander carves in wood, makes delicate stonework, and paints; his best representative work is made by these methods. Metal work and ivory carvings from Benin (fig. 74), headmasks from the Cameroons (fig. 75, p. 82), wood carvings from the Northwest coast of America (see figs. 154-156, pp. 184, 185), pottery from Peru, from the Yoruba country (fig. 76, p. 82), Central America and Arkansas (fig. 77, p. 85), basketry of the Pima, embroideries (see fig. 39, p. 47) and woven fabrics of the Peruvians are other examples.

Since representations that are intended to have artistic value are made in the most highly developed technique it is not surprising that the formal style of the technique gains an influence over the form of the representation. The angular lines of weaving with coarse materials and the steplike forms of diagonals which are determined by this technique impress themselves often upon representations and become part and parcel of a local style. There develops an intimate relation between the formal and representative elements that brings it about that representation receives a formal value entirely apart from its significance. The deeper the influence of the formal, decorative element upon the method of representation, the more probable it becomes that formal elements attain an emotional value. An association between these two forms of art is established which leads, on the one hand to the conventionalization of representative design, on the other to the imputation of significance into formal elements. It is quite arbitrary to assume a one-sided development from the representative to the formal or _vice versa_, or even to speak of a gradual transformation of a representative form into a conventional one, because the artistic presentation itself can proceed only on the basis of the technically developed forms. At another place we shall discuss this subject more fully (see pp. 118 et seq.).

In all aspects of life may be observed the controlling influence of pattern, that is of some typical form of behaviour. As we think in a pattern of objective, material causality, primitive man thinks in a pattern in which subjective causality is an important element. As our personal relations to blood relatives are determined by the pattern of our family, so the corresponding relations in other societies are governed by their social patterns. The interpretation of the pattern may change, but its form is apt to continue over long periods.

The same stability of pattern may be observed in the art products of man. When a definite type has once been established, it exerts a compelling influence over new artistic attempts. When its control continues over a long period it may happen that representations are cast in an iron mould and that the most diverse subjects take similar forms. It appears then as though the old pattern had been misunderstood and new forms had developed from it. Thus, according to Von den Steinen, the figurines on carvings from the Marquesas, which originally represented two figures back to back, have determined the type of entirely new representations, or, as he prefers to put it, they have been misunderstood and developed in new ways. I do not doubt that in some cases this process of misinterpretation occurs, but it is not the one that interests us at this place. Striking examples of the overmastering influence of a pattern may be found in many parts of the world. The style of the Northwest coast of America is so rigid that all animal figures represented on plain surfaces are cast in the same mould (see pp. 185 et seq.); the overwhelming frequency of the spiral in New Zealand is another example; the interwoven animal figures of early medieval Germanic art; the angular patterns of the North American Indians (see p. 176); all these illustrate the same condition. In an art, the technique of which does not admit the use of curved lines and in which decorative patterns have developed, there is no room for curved lines, and the curved outlines of objects are broken up into angular forms. The patterns, or as we usually say, the style, dominates the formal as well as the representative art.

However, the style is not by any means completely determined by the general formal tendencies which we have discussed, nor by the relations between these elements and the decorative field, but it depends upon many other conditions.

One more point must be discussed here. Attention has been called to the apparent absence of purely formal elements in the art of those tribes that are from an economical and industrial point of view most primitive, namely the modern Bushmen of South Africa, the Eskimo of Arctic North America, the Australians, and in remote times, the paleolithic hunters. The statement is not quite correct, as has already been pointed out by Vierkandt, because other tribes that live on the same industrial level, do not share these characteristics; particularly the Veddah and the Andaman Islanders. Furthermore, it is not by any means certain that the South African rock sculptures were made by the Bushmen. It seems fairly certain that the best ones of those recorded were made in early times and that the living Bushmen know little about their origin. In the South African paintings and petroglyphs and in the art works of the other tribes mentioned before, we find a highly developed realistic art which exhibits an astonishing truth of perspective perception, in rest as well as in motion. Verworn has based on this observation a distinction of what he calls the physioplastic and ideoplastic art; the former containing truthful, momentary visual images, the latter representing nature remodeled by thought and therefore, in a conventional style.

I do not believe that the assignment of these styles to distinct levels of culture is tenable, for physioplastic representations are not by any means confined to the tribes of simplest economic structure, nor, as indicated just now, are they common to all of them. We must avoid in these matters, as well as in all other ethnic questions, treating tribes too much as standardized units. Individual variation in physical appearance as well as in mental life is as important in primitive society as in our own. There are artists and craftsmen in all forms of society, as there are believers and unbelievers; there are creative artists who rise above the level of the skilful artisan and tradesmen who are satisfied with a slavish, though accurate adhesion to existing patterns. Where representative art has fallen under the rigid control of technique, there is little opportunity for the development of a naturalistic style; where the technique is free, there we may also expect free forms. This condition is realized in two ways, namely, in those cases in which representative art is not enslaved by a one-sided technique, and under conditions in which a high degree of freedom in the use of a variety of technical processes has been attained. A study of the whole range of art products shows that where a technique is practised that gives tree range to the development of form, naturalistic forms, that is forms relatively free of stylistic mannerisms, although sometimes of bold generalization, occur. Carving in wood, bone, ivory or stone, and modelling in clay are the principal arts that give this freedom which is not so easily found in graphic representation. Therefore we find in many cultures that are otherwise under the strict control of conventional style, at least occasionally figures in the round that are naturalistic. Examples are found in the art of the North Pacific Coast; in bronze castings, wood carvings and clay figures of Africa (figs. 74-76); in pottery of the ancient inhabitants of Arkansas (fig. 77); and in stone work from Mexico, as well as in Peruvian pottery. On the other hand, our modern realism is based on the emancipation from a single rigid style that controls all art production. Such freedom is not found to the same extent in primitive art with its more limited number of technical processes.

Another error seems to me to underlie the theory propounded by Max Verworn. It is not only incorrect to assume that representations true to nature are confined to tribes on the lowest economic and industrial level, it can also be shown that at least those living at the present time have ideoplastic art as well as physioplastic art. This is particularly true of the Eskimo. While they do produce a remarkable number of realistic carvings and etchings, they also have a number of conventional, geometric designs which are of regular occurrence. Most prominent among these are the alternating spurline and the sequence of Y shaped figures (fig. 78). The latter has sometimes a symbolic meaning, just as other conventional geometric designs among other groups of people. With small circles at the end of the bifurcated Y it is interpreted as a flower. Furthermore, the clothing of men and women is always decorated with motives that indicate or emphasize the parts of the body they cover, as the shoulderblades or the breastbone. Particularly among the Alaskan is this conventional art ideoplastic in the meaning of Verworn.

We have also shown examples of the geometric, ornamental art of the Bushmen (fig. 8, p. 23); however, we do not know whether it has a symbolic meaning. Their ornamental art is very meagre because they have so little that can become the subject of ornamentation.

It seems more than likely that man of later paleolithic time whose implements are quite on the same level as those of modern primitive tribes, who adorned his body and who used geometrical ornaments on his bone implements, decorated also his clothing and other perishable possessions of which no trace remains. If we imagine the remains of the modern Indians of the plains, or those of Australians exposed for thousands of years to the wet climate of Europe, nothing would remain to give us an insight into the complexity of their culture and into the existence of their symbolic, that is, ideoplastic art.

SYMBOLISM

We have seen that in the art of primitive people two elements may be distinguished; a purely formal one in which enjoyment is based on form alone, and another one in which the form is filled with meaning. In the latter case the significance creates an enhanced esthetic value, on account of the associative connections of the art product or of the artistic act. Since these forms are significant they must be representative, not necessarily representative of tangible objects, but sometimes of more or less abstract ideas.

In our previous discussion we have also shown that representative art may be, and generally is, strongly influenced by technical form, so much so, that in many cases the natural prototype is not readily recognized.

It is remarkable that in the art of many tribes the world over, ornament that appears to us as purely formal, is associated with meanings, that it is interpreted. Karl von den Steinen found that the geometrical patterns of the Brazilian Indians represented fish, bats, bees, and other animals, although the triangles and diamonds of which they consist bear no apparent relation to these animal forms. The design on top in figure 79 represents bats, indicated by the black triangles. The figure below it represents the uluri, a small object of clay used by women in place of a breech clout. The third figure represents a fish, the large scales of which are indicated by diamonds. The fourth and fifth figures also represent fish, while the last one is called young bees.

A number of clay dishes that were said to represent animals were in part characterized by distinct heads, limbs, and tails, while others bore no resemblance to the forms that they were claimed by the natives to represent. A general similarity of form, however, exists between the purely conventional and the realistic forms, which suggested to Von den Steinen the conclusion that the former developed from the latter. Later on Ehrenreich corroborated these observations both in South and North America. A small number of designs with names are shown in fig. 80. The diamonds in the first figure on top, represents wasps nests and may be compared to the young bees in fig. 79. The zig-zag band in the second figure, which is symmetrically arranged and has rhythmically repeated elements of unequal lengths, represents bats. In form these are identical with the frigate bird of New Ireland (see fig. 101, p. 107). The third figure from the top represents the marking on the skin of the rattlesnake, and the remaining figures also are marks on the skin of various snakes.

W. E. Roth has recorded the significance of basketry designs of the Indians of British Guiana.[43] Some of these designs contain realistic figures, but many of them are geometrical derivatives of zig-zag bands and meandric forms such as occur on coarse twined basketry in many parts of the world. Most of these forms are explained as animals; some identified by their form, others imitating the pattern of the skin or being suggestive of parts of the body. There are also a number of plant representations (figs. 81, 82). In some of these the meaning of the form is readily recognized as in the snake pursuing a frog (fig. 81 _a_) or in the human form (fig. 81 _b_). The body of the snake is represented by a broad meander, its head by a triangle. To the right of the head is the frog. Less evident is the dog shown in fig. 81 _c_. The interpretation of the designs in figs. 81 _d_, _e_ and _f_ and 82 seems quite arbitrary. The meanders fig. 81 _d-f_ represent the wild nutmeg. In _e_ the vertical connecting bar of the double T represents the main branches, the horizontal one the secondary branches. Fig. 82 _a_ is called the centipede, _b_ savanna grass, _c-f_ periwinkles, _g_ butterflies, and the three designs _h-j_ represent snakes. The square in the pattern in the left hand lower corner of _j_ is the head of the snake.

[43] W. E. Roth “Introductory Study of Arts, Crafts, and Customs of the Guiana Indians” 38th Annual Report, Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington 1924, pp. 354 et seq.

Ehrenreich was the first to observe the highly developed symbolism of the North American Indians and his observation gave the impetus to the studies of North American art which were largely instituted by the American Museum of Natural History in New York. His observations were made among the Cheyenne, and on account of their importance, they may be quoted here;[44] “Representations of heavenly phenomena are found in their highest development among the agricultural Pueblo tribes, whose whole cult consists essentially in magic performances intended to secure rain. Besides this, geographical motives are used, such as mountains, rivers, trails, camping sites, which are important to the Indians who inhabit the endless prairies. A typical example is found on the ornament taken from a moccasin (fig. 83 _a_) in which a dark blue series of triangles represent mountains, a light blue stripe a river, a red one a trail. A second ornament, also taken, from a moccasin (Fig. 83 _b_) shows a series of tents. Red dots in the triangular tents represent fire.

[44] Ethnologisches Notizblatt, vol. II, 1, pp. 27 et seq. (1899).