权力对象:论分类的短暂性,以刚果(布)圭鲁地区为例

IF 0.3 3区 艺术学 0 ART
AFRICAN ARTS Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI:10.1162/afar_a_00654
Dunja Hersak
{"title":"权力对象:论分类的短暂性,以刚果(布)圭鲁地区为例","authors":"Dunja Hersak","doi":"10.1162/afar_a_00654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"| african arts SUMMER 2022 VOL. 55, NO. 2 Classifications, typologies, labels, and other organizational tools help us wade through complex cultural contexts and specificities. They may be a point of departure that suggests clarity, providing a veil of reassurance. Yet, if not subject to renewal in terms of temporal and spatial considerations, they can become static mechanisms that constrain and obscure the wealth of changing and seemingly anomalous factors that are essential features of dynamic cultural realities. As Gonseth et al. have stated, “the world cannot be defined solely in terms of classifications ... it has to be looked at through, between, over, and above the expressions of our codes” (2013: 19). In the domain of art, the naming and labeling game (attribution, provenance, identification of object types) is a major concern, with very different issues preoccupying scholars and those in the private sector. Where the monetary value of art works remains the fundamental driver, perennial “stylistic” criteria of authenticity related to ethnic labels are repeatedly evoked and maintained to preserve easily recognizable market indicators. In scholarly circles, Renée Bravmann definitely “opened the frontiers” in 1973 by showing “avenues of mobility” beyond the “frozen cultures” of William Fagg’s 1960s “one tribe, one style” ethnic paradigm (Bravmann 1973: 9, 10; Fagg 1965: 11), yet the “single stories” approach, to which Gagliardi and Biro (2019:1) have recently referred, in which an object is attributed to “a whole group of people or a geographical area,” is still currently used. Maxime de Formanoir (2019) has shown how the so-called Kota label, for example, applied in a 2017 major Paris exhibition to no fewer than 102 “reliquary figures”—aesthetically aligned simply on the basis of morphology and style—has obscuring their exact regional provenance and context of production and use. My concern here goes beyond the preoccupation with style and ethnicity, two vast topics of debate (see Gagliardi et al. 2020: 16–21) which remain prime Western art historical and art market concerns, that are at times a little too intertwined. What interests me has to do with the reading of interethnic visual forms, their local performative and ritual use, interpretation and labeling. To exemplify this I will deal with a cultural feature of the Congo-Gabonese Atlantic coastal region, but essentially from the Congolese sector of Kwilu province of Congo-Brazzaville, where I undertook research in the 1990s. As I have not conducted research north of the Congolese border, this research note unpacks an unbiased and hopefully useful southern view of local specificities that characterize a part of a more extensive, variegated landscape of practices and beliefs. My study of the literature and field research conducted in Congo-Brazzaville has led me to realize the extent to which intertwined, changing realities may be confusing to those unfamiliar with the terrain (Hersak 2001). In the absence of historical evidence and collection data about specific objects, as well as the anonymity (whether chosen or imposed) of carvers and users, selective readings appear as the only avenues of possible interpretation simply because they are easier to deal with. I have referred previously to the homogenization and simplistic interpretation of the vast Kongo-speaking complex, a sociocultural entity that stretches from southern Gabon to northern Angola (Hersak 2001). This “single stories” misrepresentation may be due in part to the difficulty of dealing with an overwhelming amount of documentation that exists on the region, dating from the sixteenth century onwards, but also to the sparsity of more recent field investigations. In reading synchronic and diachronic cultural features of a region, identification of object types has been subject to constraining academic taxonomies. For example, having dispensed with the admittedly vague term “fetish” (at least in English), which had been applied since the contact period in the early literature research note","PeriodicalId":45314,"journal":{"name":"AFRICAN ARTS","volume":"55 1","pages":"26-35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Power Objects: On the Transient Nature of Classifications, with Examples from the Kwilu Region in Congo-Brazzaville\",\"authors\":\"Dunja Hersak\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/afar_a_00654\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"| african arts SUMMER 2022 VOL. 55, NO. 2 Classifications, typologies, labels, and other organizational tools help us wade through complex cultural contexts and specificities. They may be a point of departure that suggests clarity, providing a veil of reassurance. Yet, if not subject to renewal in terms of temporal and spatial considerations, they can become static mechanisms that constrain and obscure the wealth of changing and seemingly anomalous factors that are essential features of dynamic cultural realities. As Gonseth et al. have stated, “the world cannot be defined solely in terms of classifications ... it has to be looked at through, between, over, and above the expressions of our codes” (2013: 19). In the domain of art, the naming and labeling game (attribution, provenance, identification of object types) is a major concern, with very different issues preoccupying scholars and those in the private sector. Where the monetary value of art works remains the fundamental driver, perennial “stylistic” criteria of authenticity related to ethnic labels are repeatedly evoked and maintained to preserve easily recognizable market indicators. In scholarly circles, Renée Bravmann definitely “opened the frontiers” in 1973 by showing “avenues of mobility” beyond the “frozen cultures” of William Fagg’s 1960s “one tribe, one style” ethnic paradigm (Bravmann 1973: 9, 10; Fagg 1965: 11), yet the “single stories” approach, to which Gagliardi and Biro (2019:1) have recently referred, in which an object is attributed to “a whole group of people or a geographical area,” is still currently used. Maxime de Formanoir (2019) has shown how the so-called Kota label, for example, applied in a 2017 major Paris exhibition to no fewer than 102 “reliquary figures”—aesthetically aligned simply on the basis of morphology and style—has obscuring their exact regional provenance and context of production and use. My concern here goes beyond the preoccupation with style and ethnicity, two vast topics of debate (see Gagliardi et al. 2020: 16–21) which remain prime Western art historical and art market concerns, that are at times a little too intertwined. What interests me has to do with the reading of interethnic visual forms, their local performative and ritual use, interpretation and labeling. To exemplify this I will deal with a cultural feature of the Congo-Gabonese Atlantic coastal region, but essentially from the Congolese sector of Kwilu province of Congo-Brazzaville, where I undertook research in the 1990s. As I have not conducted research north of the Congolese border, this research note unpacks an unbiased and hopefully useful southern view of local specificities that characterize a part of a more extensive, variegated landscape of practices and beliefs. My study of the literature and field research conducted in Congo-Brazzaville has led me to realize the extent to which intertwined, changing realities may be confusing to those unfamiliar with the terrain (Hersak 2001). In the absence of historical evidence and collection data about specific objects, as well as the anonymity (whether chosen or imposed) of carvers and users, selective readings appear as the only avenues of possible interpretation simply because they are easier to deal with. I have referred previously to the homogenization and simplistic interpretation of the vast Kongo-speaking complex, a sociocultural entity that stretches from southern Gabon to northern Angola (Hersak 2001). This “single stories” misrepresentation may be due in part to the difficulty of dealing with an overwhelming amount of documentation that exists on the region, dating from the sixteenth century onwards, but also to the sparsity of more recent field investigations. In reading synchronic and diachronic cultural features of a region, identification of object types has been subject to constraining academic taxonomies. For example, having dispensed with the admittedly vague term “fetish” (at least in English), which had been applied since the contact period in the early literature research note\",\"PeriodicalId\":45314,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AFRICAN ARTS\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"26-35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AFRICAN ARTS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/afar_a_00654\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ART\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AFRICAN ARTS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/afar_a_00654","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

|2022年非洲艺术夏季第55卷第2期分类、类型、标签和其他组织工具帮助我们应对复杂的文化背景和特殊性。它们可能是一个表明清晰的出发点,提供了一层保证的面纱。然而,如果不在时间和空间考虑方面进行更新,它们可能会成为静态机制,限制和掩盖不断变化和看似异常的因素,而这些因素是动态文化现实的基本特征。正如Gonseth等人所说,“世界不能仅仅用分类来定义……它必须通过我们代码的表达来看待”(2013:19)。在艺术领域,命名和标签游戏(物品类型的归属、出处、识别)是一个主要问题,学者和私营部门的学者关注的问题截然不同。在艺术作品的货币价值仍然是根本驱动力的地方,与种族标签相关的常年“风格”真实性标准被反复唤起并保持,以保持易于识别的市场指标。在学术界,勒内·布拉夫曼(Renée Brafmann)在1973年通过展示超越威廉·法格(William Fagg)20世纪60年代“一个部落,一种风格”的种族范式(Brafmann 1973:9,10;法格1965:11)的“冻结文化”的“流动途径”,无疑“打开了边界”,但加格里亚迪(Gagliardi)和比罗(Biro)(2019:1)最近提到的“单一故事”方法,其中一个物体被归因于“一整组人或一个地理区域”,目前仍在使用。Maxime de Formanoir(2019)展示了所谓的Kota标签是如何在2017年巴黎的一次大型展览中应用于不少于102个“圣物箱人物”的——仅仅基于形态和风格在美学上进行了排列——掩盖了它们的确切地区来源以及生产和使用背景。我在这里关注的不仅仅是风格和种族,这两个巨大的辩论话题(见Gagliardi等人,2020:16-21)仍然是西方艺术历史和艺术市场的主要关注点,有时有点过于交织。我感兴趣的是对种族间视觉形式的阅读,它们在当地的表演和仪式使用,解释和标记。为了举例说明这一点,我将讨论刚果-加蓬-大西洋沿岸地区的一个文化特征,但主要来自刚果布拉柴维尔奎鲁省的刚果地区,我在20世纪90年代在那里进行了研究。由于我没有在刚果边境以北进行研究,这份研究报告揭示了一种公正的、希望有用的南方观点,即当地的特殊性,是更广泛、多样化的实践和信仰景观的一部分。我对文献的研究和在刚果布拉柴维尔进行的实地研究使我意识到,交织在一起、不断变化的现实可能会在多大程度上让那些不熟悉地形的人感到困惑(Hersak,2001年)。在缺乏关于特定物体的历史证据和收集数据,以及雕刻师和使用者的匿名性(无论是选择的还是强加的)的情况下,选择性阅读似乎是唯一可能的解释途径,因为它们更容易处理。我之前提到过对庞大的讲孔戈语的综合体的同质化和简单化解释,这是一个从加蓬南部延伸到安哥拉北部的社会文化实体(Hersak,2001年)。这种“单一故事”的失实陈述可能部分是由于难以处理该地区存在的大量文件,这些文件可以追溯到16世纪以后,但也可能是由于最近的实地调查很少。在阅读一个地区的共时和历时文化特征时,对象类型的识别一直受到学术分类法的约束。例如,在早期文献研究笔记中,去掉了公认的模糊术语“恋物癖”(至少在英语中是这样),该术语自接触时期以来就一直使用
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Power Objects: On the Transient Nature of Classifications, with Examples from the Kwilu Region in Congo-Brazzaville
| african arts SUMMER 2022 VOL. 55, NO. 2 Classifications, typologies, labels, and other organizational tools help us wade through complex cultural contexts and specificities. They may be a point of departure that suggests clarity, providing a veil of reassurance. Yet, if not subject to renewal in terms of temporal and spatial considerations, they can become static mechanisms that constrain and obscure the wealth of changing and seemingly anomalous factors that are essential features of dynamic cultural realities. As Gonseth et al. have stated, “the world cannot be defined solely in terms of classifications ... it has to be looked at through, between, over, and above the expressions of our codes” (2013: 19). In the domain of art, the naming and labeling game (attribution, provenance, identification of object types) is a major concern, with very different issues preoccupying scholars and those in the private sector. Where the monetary value of art works remains the fundamental driver, perennial “stylistic” criteria of authenticity related to ethnic labels are repeatedly evoked and maintained to preserve easily recognizable market indicators. In scholarly circles, Renée Bravmann definitely “opened the frontiers” in 1973 by showing “avenues of mobility” beyond the “frozen cultures” of William Fagg’s 1960s “one tribe, one style” ethnic paradigm (Bravmann 1973: 9, 10; Fagg 1965: 11), yet the “single stories” approach, to which Gagliardi and Biro (2019:1) have recently referred, in which an object is attributed to “a whole group of people or a geographical area,” is still currently used. Maxime de Formanoir (2019) has shown how the so-called Kota label, for example, applied in a 2017 major Paris exhibition to no fewer than 102 “reliquary figures”—aesthetically aligned simply on the basis of morphology and style—has obscuring their exact regional provenance and context of production and use. My concern here goes beyond the preoccupation with style and ethnicity, two vast topics of debate (see Gagliardi et al. 2020: 16–21) which remain prime Western art historical and art market concerns, that are at times a little too intertwined. What interests me has to do with the reading of interethnic visual forms, their local performative and ritual use, interpretation and labeling. To exemplify this I will deal with a cultural feature of the Congo-Gabonese Atlantic coastal region, but essentially from the Congolese sector of Kwilu province of Congo-Brazzaville, where I undertook research in the 1990s. As I have not conducted research north of the Congolese border, this research note unpacks an unbiased and hopefully useful southern view of local specificities that characterize a part of a more extensive, variegated landscape of practices and beliefs. My study of the literature and field research conducted in Congo-Brazzaville has led me to realize the extent to which intertwined, changing realities may be confusing to those unfamiliar with the terrain (Hersak 2001). In the absence of historical evidence and collection data about specific objects, as well as the anonymity (whether chosen or imposed) of carvers and users, selective readings appear as the only avenues of possible interpretation simply because they are easier to deal with. I have referred previously to the homogenization and simplistic interpretation of the vast Kongo-speaking complex, a sociocultural entity that stretches from southern Gabon to northern Angola (Hersak 2001). This “single stories” misrepresentation may be due in part to the difficulty of dealing with an overwhelming amount of documentation that exists on the region, dating from the sixteenth century onwards, but also to the sparsity of more recent field investigations. In reading synchronic and diachronic cultural features of a region, identification of object types has been subject to constraining academic taxonomies. For example, having dispensed with the admittedly vague term “fetish” (at least in English), which had been applied since the contact period in the early literature research note
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
33.30%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: African Arts is devoted to the study and discussion of traditional, contemporary, and popular African arts and expressive cultures. Since 1967, African Arts readers have enjoyed high-quality visual depictions, cutting-edge explorations of theory and practice, and critical dialogue. Each issue features a core of peer-reviewed scholarly articles concerning the world"s second largest continent and its diasporas, and provides a host of resources - book and museum exhibition reviews, exhibition previews, features on collections, artist portfolios, dialogue and editorial columns. The journal promotes investigation of the connections between the arts and anthropology, history, language, literature, politics, religion, and sociology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信