Ray Evans Harrell wrote:

Sigh,

Will we find that the Chinese invented the tempered scale a thousand years
ago as well?

Ah! But even if they did, what did they *do* with it?


Joseph Needham spent most of a long and distinguished life
trying to answer the question why, since they discovered so
many things first, did the Chinese not take the lead in
bringing about The Modern Age ("Modernity")?  As I have said, Needham, a
humanist socialist, came to the lamentable-for-him
conclusion that capitalism is what made the difference
between Europe and China.

But this also has to do with the issue of "paradigms".
I do not believe the Chinese *used* perspective for any
other purpose than landscape paintings in which
man is portrayed as a vanishingly small figure
in the landscape --> a very different use than
the European Renaissance artists made of the
concept.  Would you agree that Mona Lisa is not
thinkable as a pre-European influenced Chinese
painting?

Does anyone who knows more about China than I know
if there is a Chinese "Tsale of Genji", and whether the
"Middle Kingdom" ever had a cultural period of
[yes, albeit aristocratic, like just about everything
of value before the 19th century...] humanism
like Heian Japan?  From what I know, I'd take Japan
to China any day.  But, in today's global race to
the bottom, those times may be over, too.

\brad mccormick


REH



----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad McCormick, Ed.D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ed Weick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Karen Watters Cole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 8:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] What does art say about cultural development?




Ed Weick wrote:


Interesting.  I consider the art of Lascaux and Chauvet so sophisticated
that it was probably based on generations of development, much like the
medieval art of Europe was.  It could not have been created instantly,
but had to be part of a long tradition.  Somewhere, there must have been
other caves, or perhaps if one scratched away the upper layers of paint
at Lascaux or Chauvet, one would find earlier, more primitive,

renderings.


As the article urges: Perhaps we need to think about human existence
on a different model than the objective processes which form
a large part of the "content" of human existence.  Darwin
(and some others) invented "evolution".  I do not believe the
theory of evolution evolved over generations like Darwin thought
the evolving species did (and even this has been called into
question by the more recent notion of "punctuated evolution").

Man is not a thing in the world but rather a perspective upon the world.

The article says there is indeed progress, in a kind of Kuhnian
sense of paradigm shifts.  But, within a paradigm, sophistication
may come early.

The article is, I believe, wrong on one point: The Chinese discovered
perspective in painting before 1400CE, albeit the exact extend of

precedence


is in question due to scholarly disagreement whether
the epochal painting in the collection of The Metropolitan Museum
of Art (NYC) is a forgery.

    Greatness is in the beginnings.
                 (--Heidegger/Holderlin)

One of the most amazing things about human beings is
how degraded a self-understanding of themselves they
often work very hard to have.

\brad mccormick


Ed

   ----- Original Message -----
   *From:* Karen Watters Cole <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


   *Sent:* Monday, January 12, 2004 6:04 PM
   *Subject:* [Futurework] What does art say about cultural

development?


   Thought this might be interesting from a scientific POV as well as
   the comments about art itself. - KWC

   *Exquisite Cave Art Offers New Perspective on Development*
   Sophisticated Ancient Works Suggest Talent for Art Is Not Tied to
   Evolution

   By Guy Gugliotta, Washington Post Staff Writer, Monday, Jan. 12,
   2004 @
   http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8312-2004Jan11.html

   What does it take to become an artist?  Do you need to study it
   first, or do you just pick up a brush or a knife and do it?

   This question lies at the heart of a prolonged debate among
   archaeologists and anthropologists over the origin of figurative art
   -- drawing, sculpting or otherwise creating recognizable images of
   figures or objects -- and what it implies about human cultural
   development.

   For years, scholars regarded the appearance of figurative art as the
   initiation of an evolutionary process -- that art became
   progressively more sophisticated as humans experimented with styles
   and techniques and passed this knowledge to the next generation.



   <javascript:void(0)>
   Small bird figurine of mammoth ivory found in Germany's Hohle Fels
   Cave was likely carved 30,000 years ago by Europe's first modern
   human inhabitants.

(Hilde Jensen -- University Of Tuebingen Via AP

   But a growing body of evidence suggests that modern humans,
   virtually from the moment they appeared in Ice Age Europe, were able
   to produce startlingly sophisticated art. Artistic ability thus did
   not "evolve," many scholars said, but has instead existed in modern
   humans (the talented ones, anyway) throughout their existence.

   Last month in the journal Nature, anthropologist Nicholas J. Conard,
   of Germany's University of Tuebingen, added to this view, reporting
   the discovery in a cave in the Jura Mountains of three small,
   carefully made figurines carved from mammoth ivory between 30,000
   and 33,000 years ago.

   The artifacts at Hohle Fels Cave -- of a water bird, a horse's head,
   and a half-human, half-lion figure -- made up the fourth such cache
   of ancient objects found in Germany. All are more than 30,000 years
   old, and, taken together with cave paintings of a similar age in
   France's Grotte Chauvet, constitute the oldest known artworks in the
   history of modern humans. A handful of other sites more than 30,000
   years old are under study.

   "It was a big cave, filled with ivory-making debris," Conard said in
   a telephone interview from his Tuebingen office. "We found 270
   pieces of ivory waste, a half-dozen beads and a good number of bone
   and ivory tools. Whoever made the figurines spent a lot of time

there."


   And did remarkable work with primitive implements. All three
   figurines are skillfully shaped, and the water bird is exquisite --
   its long neck extended in flight and its wings swept back with
   decorative ridges to mark layers of feathers.

   "It confirms the sophistication of the art of that early period,"
   said archaeologist David Lewis-Williams of South Africa's Rock Art
   Research Institute and author of "The Mind in the Cave," a
   discussion of the origins of art. "If there were earlier periods
   when they made cruder art, why haven't we got them?"

   Also, noted Lewis-Williams, Conard and others, the Hohle Fels
   artifacts and the Grotte Chauvet paintings are as sophisticated as
   art produced thousands of years later. "Those who argue for
   development from primitive scratches are perhaps unconsciously
   extending the idea of human evolution to encompass other forms of
   human endeavor," Lewis-Williams said.

   Still, though the development of figurative art may not be a marker
   for biological evolution, many experts suggest that its emergence is
   a major "threshold event" for cultural development, comparable
   perhaps to the invention of agriculture, the domestication of
   animals or the development of metal tools.

   "The crucial move seems to be when humans make something that stands
   for something else," said Oxford University art historian Martin
   Kemp. "It usually starts with 'indirect tools,' implements that go
   beyond simple sharpened tools or a needle and thread. This
   conceptual step is the evolutionary aspect of ancient art."

   Also, noted Kemp and others, art itself does indeed "evolve," but
   these changes are more likely to be dictated by the purpose served
   by the art, or by advances in technology or materials, than by the
   supposed attainment of progressively higher levels of "talent."

   "What these people achieved is amazing, given the bare subsistence
   in which they lived and the tools they had," said Cornell University
   psychologist James E. Cutting, a specialist in perception. "There's
   a sense that they were just as smart as we are but didn't have
   societies in which information could be passed, or places where they
   could work. It's not easy to paint on the walls of a cave."

   But while "cave artists often drew better than anyone today except
   those trained highly in drafting or technical illustration," other
   elements of artistic technique are virtually absent in prehistoric
   work, added John M. Kennedy, a perception psychologist at the
   University of Toronto at Scarborough.

   Chief among these is perspective, the ability to create the illusion
   of three dimensions on a two-dimensional surface. There are several
   techniques involved, but common ones include drawing a figure that
   is smaller and higher on the surface of the image than the principal
   foreground character, using an imaginary "vanishing point" to create
   the illusion of depth or receding distance, and using shading to add
   three-dimensionality to a figure or object depicted in two

dimensions.


   So far, the only perspective technique found in cave painting is
   "occlusion," in which one foreground object partially obstructs the
   viewer's ability to see what's "behind" it. Cutting suggested that
   occlusion, which is also frequently used alone in Egyptian art, may
   have been the first technique employed by humans to depict depth.

   But Kennedy noted that cave painters "never painted 'scenes' -- they
   did not set themselves the problem of placing multiple objects
   around an observer." Asking why they did not use other perspective
   techniques "may be the wrong question." More important, he said, was
   what the art meant to them -- quite likely a question that will
   never be fully answered.

   Also, several experts noted that formal perspective did not exist in
   art -- not in Egypt, Greece or China -- until the Florentine artist
   and architect Filippo Brunelleschi demonstrated in the early 15th
   century that a rigorous application of geometric principles in a
   painting could create an illusion in two dimensions that rivaled
   what people see in the physical world.

   "Perspective is very exceptional in the history of art, because it
   is one of those rare things that is both precise and teachable,"
   Oxford's Kemp said. "Anybody can learn it, but learning it doesn't
   mean you're going to produce a painting that's going to be
   attractive to anybody."

   In an evolutionary context, Kemp said the invention of perspective
   was akin to the impact of jazz alto saxophonist Charlie Parker after
   World War II. Anyone who came after Parker had to know how to play
   scales like Parker, but his genius did not make Parker "better" than
   those, such as Louis Armstrong, who preceded him.

   "Within any given period of art, there is amazingly sophisticated
   use of the techniques available at the time," Kennedy added. "At any
   particular time, the practitioners are usually as good as their
   techniques will allow them to be."






------------------------------------------------------------------------

   _______________________________________________
   Futurework mailing list
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework


------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework


--
  Let your light so shine before men,
              that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)

<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
  Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework





--
  Let your light so shine before men,
              that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)

<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
  Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to