Franz Boas in one of the leading and most influential scholars of the twentieth century in the understanding of Native American art. Among his better known students is Margaret Meade. His major work, Primitive Art, from which the quotation below is taken, was published in 1927. In this chapter he draws a parallel between technique and form.

     "An examination of the material on which our studies of the artistic by value of objects of primitive manufacture are founded shows that in most cases we are dealing with products of an industry in which a high degree of mechanical skill has been attained. Ivory carvings of the Eskimo, fur clothing of the Chukchee, wood carving of the northwest coast of Africa [see the headdress from the Dan Tribe and the reliquary figure of the Bakota Tribe] or New Zealand [see the Sepik River mask], the Marquesas, of central Africa, metal work of Africa [see the Benin bronze plaque], appliqué work and embroidery of the Amur River, pottery of the North American Pueblos, and the bronze work of ancient  Scandinavia are examples of this kind.

     "The close relation between technical virtuosity and the fullness of artistic development may easily be demonstrated by an examination of the art of tribes with one-sided industries. While people like the African Negroes or the Malay are in possession of many industries, such as basketry, carving, weaving, metal work and pottery, we find others among whom  the range of industrial activities is so narrow that almost all the utensils for their manifold needs are made by the same process.

     "The Californian Indians present an excellent example of this kind. [Remember, Boas is writing in the 1920s.] Their chief  industry is basketry. Almost all their house-hold goods, receptacles for storage, cooking vessels, mortars for preparing  food, children's cradles, receptacles for carrying loads, are made of basketry. As compared to this industry, others employed for the manufacture of weapons and tools are insignificant. The building of houses, of canoes, woodcarving, and painting are only slightly developed. The only other occupation in which an unusual degree of skill has been attained is feather work. A great deal of time is therefore given to the manufacture of baskets and an unusual degree of virtuosity is found among the basket makers. The beauty of form, the evenness of texture of the Californian baskets are well known and highly prized by collectors. At the same time the baskets are elaborately decorated with a variety or geometrical designs or by the addition of shells and feathers. Basket making is an occupation of women and thus it happens that among the Californian Indians, only women are creative artists. They are virtuosos in their technique and on account of their virtuosity productive. The works of art made by the men are, as compared to theirs, insignificant.

     "It so happens that conditions among the northern neighbors of the Californians are reversed. From Puget Sound northward the household goods and implements of the Indians are made of wood, and much of the time of the men is spent in woodworking. They are skilled joiners and carvers who through constant practice have acquired virtuosity in the handling of wood. The exactness of their work rivals that of our very best craftsmen. Their boxes, buckets, kettles, cradles, and dishes are all made of wood, as those of the Californians are made of basketry. In their lives basketry plays  a relatively unimportant part. The industry in which they have attained greatest proficiency, is, at the same time, the one in which their decorative art is most fully developed. It finds expression, not only in the beauty of form of the woodwork, but also in elaborate decoration. Among these people, all other aspects of decorative art are weak as compared to their artistic expression in woodwork or in art forms derived from woodwork. All this work is done by men and hence it follows that the men are the creative artists while the women seem to be lacking in inventiveness and artistic sense. Here also virtuosity in technique and artistic productivity go hand in hand."

Aristotle offers what may be a useful way of thinking about the creation of any object. He says that there are four causes (or conditions) under which something may exist. These are material cause, efficient cause, final cause and formal cause. Art history is the study of the formal cause of things. The primary interest of the art historian is where the shape of things comes from and how the shapes are transmitted.

The material cause is that "out of which" something is made. In the case of the totem pole, wood. The efficient cause is the"way in which" something is made. In the totem pole it is shaped originally by using stone cutters; later, steel chisels were used and even later, chain saws. Notice that changing the efficient cause does not effect the material cause. The final cause is the "purpose for which" something is made. A totem pole may at one time be a statement of tribal and family unity and at another time, an object for the tourist trade. The appearance of the object may not, in fact, reflect the change in purpose although in many ways it is a profound change. The formal cause is the "shape in which" something appears. Does the totem pole reflect influences from the South Sea Islands? Does it reflect European visitors and the arts which they brought with them?
 
 

Much of this course will deal with these issues and the ways in which the separate causes effect each other.

The "art as art" concept which was considered in Lesson Two can be diagrammed in this manner:
 

                                                 Idea [Form]

                                                 Inspiration

                                                 Intermediate [Artist]

                                                 Work of Art
 

In this way of looking at the creative process, the artfulness resides in the object (or, if music or literature, the performance) which has been made. This is what we see in the art gallery or hear at the concert hall. The artist is the "go-between" of the Idea and the Work. Notice the similarity of this to the many religious figures who act as the go-between from the gods to people. The neolithic shaman, the Old Testament prophets, and for many denominations and sects, the preacher. Often we see the use of trances, alcohol, or drugs to facilitate this process. The way this works is that by weakening the will of the go-between (or artist) the Idea (or God, Form, Logos, etc.) can be more clearly imprinted on the final object.

While the art-as-art concepts dominates the academic art scene in the twentieth century, it is not the only significant theory. Leo Tolstoy, author of the formidable novel, War and Peace, is the major proponent of a vastly different theory. This can be modeled this manner:
 
 

                                     Unique Experience

                                     Artist Relating the Experience
                                        (painting, story, etc)

                                     Viewer
                                        (listener, etc.)

The major difference between this theory and the art-as-art theory is not immediately evident. For Tolstoy, the artfulness resided in the correspondence between the unique experience and the aesthetic experience. Tolstoy explains it this way...
 

     Imagine a boy who is terrified at encountering a wolf (unique experience). He then tells his friends about this in such a  manner that they share the sense of terror. If they feel about the wolf as the boy did then they have a successful aesthetic experience.

The closer the two experiences are the more successful the art. Tolstoy also assigns importance to the number of people who engage in the experience. Notice that in the art-as-art, it is not necessary that anyone other than the artist understands the art. This is not the case in Tolstoy. The more people who experience the art the better. If nearly no one understands the work then it is not art. Tolstoy concludes that Beethoven is a bad composer and that Shakespeare is a bad dramatist since the majority of the people have trouble understanding them.

As a critical method the correspondence theory, as we may call it, sees quality in the number of participants in the experience. This leaves the artist at the mercy of his public. Beyond numbers, however, Tolstoy believed that the experience chosen to be related must be socially significant. A work of art communicating a trivial experience still remains trivial.

It is the correspondence theory that becomes the dominant form of those American Indian artists in the early twentieth century who become recognized as individual artists in the European sense. This is likely because it (the correspondence theory) was the popular theory of the time. If we turn to William Sidney Mount's painting of 1835, Bargaining for a Horse, we see a fine example of this very popular direction in art. We can reasonably expect that Mount had seen someone bargain for a horse and that he faithfully relates to us all the details of the experience. We might even go further and speculate on the price, etc. The same can be said for the vastly more complex work, The Country Election of 1862, by George Caleb Bingham. Here we might even suspect that some experiences are from different time frames and have been brought together for our amusement. We ask only if each detail is authentic. That is, "Did it happen?" or "Might it have happened?" In George Catlin's Buffalo Chase in the Snowdrift of the late 1830s, we see an experience of an emotional character. Not only are we to ask "Did this happen", but we are to feel the tragic plight of the buffalo. The correspondence of an emotional experience as well as a physical one.

The next three pictures are by Ernest Spybuck (#1, #2, and #3) of the Shawnee tribe. Spybuck, at the turn of the century, is a major source of our ideas of Indian life at that time. On the War Path by Cheyenne Artist, Making Medicine also has a link to literal activity despite its arrangement.  Cheyenne  by Tickematse, who like Making Medicine was  one of the imprisoned artist at Fort Marion, is somewhere between Spybuck and the free forms of Making Medicine. Unlike the formalist artists (Whistler can not see why anyone would be interested in his mother as such) our interest is largely on the authenticity of the detail. We expect the people, their ceremonies, the tents, etc. to be as they were. We want to re-experience the times.

The next picture is by Cherokee artist, Joan Hill. This records a Baptism which takes place on the trail of tears. Since the event was in the early nineteenth century and Hill is recent, we face a different use of the theory. Hill's experience was one imagined by the artist. We are to compare our own response, not to the physical event, but rather to the spiritual content as understood by the artist. The unlikely coloring (in the literal sense) is a clue. This is like a dream. We might ask, "Did Hill really feel this?" but we can not ask "Did she see it?"

The next two images are yet a different use of the correspondence theory. In the Inuit ivory carving of a Hunting Scene, we find a work which is an accessory to story telling. Only when this is combined with the narration do we have the whole work of art. The Eskimo are well known for their long and detailed story telling. It is not done as a religious or ceremonial act, but simply to relate the adventure for the listeners' delight. The Kwakuitl tribe Bird Mask is similar. While many masks, perhaps even most, are ceremonial, magical, and religious, this one was made to accompany the relating of a narrative experience.