Speaking of Indigenous Art
The Pitfalls of the words "Traditional" and "Contemporary"
What Do I mean?
If you are like me, you have used the words “traditional” and “contemporary” to describe Native American art. But what do I actually mean when I use these terms? This is not a topic that I have ever explored in depth, at least not until I read an article about it in First American Art Magazine titled “Why Categorizing Native Art as ‘Traditional’ and ‘Contemporary’ is Toxic,” which inspired me to sit down and really think about it. I believe I have used the term “contemporary Native American art,” to refer to art that has either been made by a living Indigenous artist or to refer to modern art that pushes the boundaries and expectations of what Native American art is. I have used the term “traditional Native American art,” to talk about an art form, which has been practiced within a specific tribal community for many generations, often passed down by older relatives to younger relatives, like quill-working or basket-making for instance.
Another take on traditional
In the article “Outside the Box” written by Victoria Hutter and published by the National Endowment for the Arts, we are introduced to Cannupa Hanska Luger, an artist of Mandan, Hidatsa, Arikara, Lakota, Austrian, and Norwegian descent who says that for him, “traditional art is less about materials and forms and more about adaptation, using what is currently available—whether that’s clay and horsehair or video and film—to express ideas.”
For example, in one of his 3D artworks he constructs “a deer skeleton [...] with red and pink yarn from deconstructed thrift store clothes gushing from an imagined wound. Luger said, ‘The deer represents a life destroyed by empty nostalgia. Nothing is harvested, all is waste.’” [1]
Encyclopedia Britannica’s online dictionary says the definition of tradition is “a way of thinking, behaving, or doing something that has been used by the people in a particular group, family, society, etc., for a long time,” so in the example of the deer skeleton, the artist is abiding by a tradition of thinking and behavior. By reusing resources, which are available in abundance today (i.e. thrifts store clothes), Luger is adapting to his current environment. The materials may not be what his ancestors used, but he is still upholding a traditional value to not be wasteful.
At first glance I might call (No)stalgia contemporary, but according to Luger himself and to the Encyclopedia Britannica, Luger’s art is traditional.
There are several examples of Indigenous artists on the Old Cedar Native Arts website who are breaking with their tribe’s tradition of material. Take for instance Josef Reiter, an Anishinaabe (Ojibwe) silversmith. Generally, the Anishinaabe are not known to work with silver, however, they do have a very ancient tradition of working with copper and using hammers to form the copper into desired shapes. There are copper mines near Lake Superior and on Isle Royale that are thousands of years old, but it appears that there is no evidence that tribes in North America employed the technology of smelting or making alloys, not until a Navajo man named Atsidi Sani learned silversmithing in 1853. But Josef has adopted silversmithing and has developed his own unique style, which draws upon his Anishinaabe culture for inspiration.
Sterling Silver Birch Earrings by Josef Reiter
Day and Night Earrings by Carolyn L. Anderson
You can also use my work as an example as a Diné (Navajo) beadworker. Bead weaving and bead embroidery is a relatively new tradition among the Diné. Tribes such as the Ojibwe and Dakota have a long history of embroidering with quills to decorate their clothing, moccasins, and ceremonial items. Switching over to using beads instead of quills was an adaptation of the original artform. The Diné, however, do not have a tradition of quillworking or embroidery. Beadworking with tiny glass seed beads is considered to be a result of the influence from other tribes. It is interesting to note that the Diné are notorious for adopting other tribe’s artforms and making them their own.
Are these terms helpful or harmful?
Infographic by America Meredith, First American Art Magazine
In First American Art’s article, America Meredith writes, “the English language is rich in antonyms, or binary opposites, such as hot/cold, good/bad, rich/poor, etc. This structuralist grammatical device influences the logic of English speakers. Pairing traditional and contemporary implies they are opposites. If contemporary is new, then traditional must be old.” She proceeds to describe several examples of how this dichotomy doesn’t hold up. One of her most interesting insights are in regards to an Indigenous photographer who developed her first photographs in 1887 and two Indigenous filmmakers who made their first films in the early 1900s. Meredith notes that despite historical facts, “the practice of photography and filmmaking still struggle for acceptance in the public perception of Native art. Instead of following any kind of timeframe, the arbitrary designations of traditional and contemporary rely on the lingering stereotype that Native Americans should use natural materials such as plants and should not harness technology and machines.” [3]
Where do our expectations of Native American Art come from?
Native American peoples have always been adapting and changing. You could say that being adaptable is a traditional value, so why is there so much expectation that Indigenous artists use specific materials and make art in a specific style? Hollywood was probably the biggest influence on America’s perception of Native Americans, which I believe led to the invention of more rigid definitions of who Indigenous peoples are, how they dress, how they live, and what sort of art they make. The Euro-Americans, who invented and initially controlled the Native art markets only perpetuated the romanticized version of Indigenous peoples and Indigenous artists. They were in business to make money and the art that often sold best were the items most aligned with Hollywood’s version of Native Americans.
Applying what we have learned
The main takeaway that I have drawn from First American Art’s eye-opening article is this: If you are going to be talking or writing about Native American art, the ideal situation would be to use alternative phrasing to the words, “traditional’’ and “contemporary” but if you can’t help but to use these words then provide your intended definition first. For me, this has been another reminder on the pitfalls and limitations of language. If you are captivated by this topic as much as I am, I encourage you to read the article. The author, American Meredith, has many other important insights, which I have not covered here.
What do you think?
In what ways have you used the words “traditional” and “contemporary” to describe Native American art. Do you think these terms are useful? Can you contribute to the infographic from First American Art? Can you think of any other alternative terms? Old Cedar Native Arts would love to hear from you! Please feel free to share your thoughts and opinions. Just remember that respect is a traditional value.
Author: Carolyn L. Anderson (Navajo)
