How sad to lose Hans Witte, who died last Friday....after years of
contributing his fine mind, words, and heart to the field of African
Art...
Sympathy to his family and friends...

Elizabeth Bennett

Hans Witte :
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0438/is_1_35/ai_90331350

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0361-7882(1996)29%3A1%3C176%3ATYANTP%3E2.0.CO%3\
B2-O

 

Threads of Time: African Textiles from the Traditional to the Contemporary

January 22nd - April 14, 2007

Hillwood Art Museum

C.W. Post Campus
Long Island University
720 Northern Boulevard,
Brookville, NY 11548-1300
Phone: 516-299-4073

 

OPENING RECEPTION: THURSDAY JANUARY 25, 5 - 8 p.m.

 

"Threads of Time, draws on Hillwood Art Museum’s extensive collection of African textile arts and related artifacts generously donated by collectors including Dr. Gilbert and Mrs. Roda Graham. Besides its rich array of textiles, the collection includes various hats, cloth-constructed masks, and weaving implements, coming from several African countries, including Mali, Liberia, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Nigeria, Cameroon, and the Republic of the Congo (formerly Zaire). Exhibition curator, Professor Lisa Aronson of Skidmore College, has organized the exhibition according to five themes: (1) Techniques & Production; (2) Prestige; (3) Headgear; (4) Masquerades; and (5) Textiles, Trade, and Globalization. Together, these topics weave an interesting story about the production, meaning, and history of textiles in sub-Saharan Africa.

 

If there is one theme that surfaces throughout this exhibition, it is the idea that cloth in Africa functions as a kind of language, and facilitator of speech. In Africa, where oral traditions often take precedence over written ones, cloth plays an important role in this communication. To some Africans, even the very structure of a woven textile, with its interconnecting warp and weft threads, bears a striking similarity to speech, in which words weave together to create linguistic patterns, or syntax."

 

Exhibition catalog (VERY large file 22.32MB)

http://www.liu.edu/cwis/cwp/but06/hillwood/threads_catalog.pdf

 

Hillwood Art Museum website"

http://www.liu.edu/cwis/cwp/but06/hillwood/

 

Cheers!

RAND

 

If you live in New York or the area, there are a lot of interesting programs coming up later this month and next month at the Met.

Black History Month at the Metropolitan Museum of Art

Celebrate Black History Month

----- Original Message -----

From: maremaria2001

To: African_Arts@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 11:31 AM

Subject: [African_Arts] Merry and Happy by Paolo Paretti

...one of the most beautiful works of African Art I could purchase in the last years.

This year I made a three week trip by an Italian container-ship from Hamburg, Germany, to
Lome, Togo, The crew of the ship - the "Repubblica di Venezia" - was coming from South
Italy, most of them from Palermo, Sizila. I was the only passenger together with my old
Toyota Jeep and 4.500 other rusty cars for my African friends.

Here a short video, which shows the Loading of the cars and my passion for Chairs

http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-6382746191919665745&q=setubal

and because I love African Art & Chairs you can´t imagin how attached I am to this fine
exemplare, which is one the most beautiful pieces I could purchase in the last years. It is now
exhibited in my house in Bamako, Mali and will be part of an African Design Exhibition in the
Museum for African Art, NY. in 2009.

http://www.jaenicke-njoya.com/s517/pages/IMG_232213.htm

Merry and Happy

Paolo Paretti

Hello All and Happy New Year,
does anybody have any references(books or internet sites) with
information about Dogon hunter masks? As I'm sure most of you are aware
it is quite easy to get information about Kanaga,Sirige,Satimbe and
Walu masks etc but I'm having real difficulty finding any decent
references about hunter masks.
Any information will be gratefully received!
Cheers
Craig

Hello All and Happy New Year,
does anybody have any references(books or internet sites) with
information about Dogon hunter masks? As I'm sure most of you are aware
it is quite easy to get information about Kanaga,Sirige,Satimbe and
Walu masks etc but I'm having real difficulty finding any decent
references about hunter masks.
Any information will be gratefully received!
Cheers
Craig

>   A little while back we had a breif discussion
> about this topic in the group.

...which reminds me that I forgot to thank Lee and
RAND for their typically well-considered and
informed replies to my original query.

From Rand's reply: "The example you provided from
the Hamill Gallery was evaluated (as early 20th
century) by someone pretty knowledgeable on Dogon
art."

Well, that was certainly nice to hear, as there is
a very close correspondence between the stylized
geometric treatment of the beard on my and the
Hamill examples.  Not quite enough to say that they
belong to the same regional or chronological sub-style

but at least it raises the possibility...

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/African_Arts/photos/browse/461e?c=

http://www.hamillgallery.com/DOGON/DogonMasks/DogonMask12.html



Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Dear Craig,

 

Here are some photos & informations in english - found in Ladislas Segy "Masks of Black Africa" and "African Sculpture speaks" (for the text).

The mask in the first picture is in Quai Branly.

The second one might be from Segy's collection.

Be well !

Vero

 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Thank you Lee, I'll try to find a copy.
Cheers
Craig

--- In African_Arts@yahoogroups.com, Lee Rubinstein
<LeeRubinstein@...> wrote:
>
> Craig:
>
> I don't have much information to add -- and no detail regarding
the
> removal of teeth -- but there are three additional illustrated
> examples identified as Hunter Masks on pages 36 (#9 -- no teeth)
and
> 38 (#'s 7 and 8 -- teeth remaining) in Dogon Cliff Dwellers:  The
Art
> of Mali's Montain People by Pascal James Imperato (New York:
Kahan
> Gallery/African Arts, 1978.)
>
> Lee
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 4, 2007, at 8:21 PM, craig lewis wrote:
>
> >
> > Rand, Ari and Vero,
> > thanks for the photos and information, they have been very
useful
> > and hopefully I can find more information as well.
> >  I don't know if anyone can answer a couple of questions also.
> > Firstly is it correct that sometimes the teeth are removed from
the
> > mask when it is no longer of use? and secondly are any offerings
> > etc made to the hunter mask?
> > Cheers
> > Craig
> >
> > Veronique Martelliere <proximatribal@...> wrote:
> > Dear Craig,
> >
> > Here are some photos & informations in english - found in
Ladislas
> > Segy "Masks of Black Africa" and "African Sculpture speaks" (for
> > the text).
> > The mask in the first picture is in Quai Branly.
> > The second one might be from Segy's collection.
> > Be well !
> > Vero
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> > Send instant messages to your online friends http://
> > uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> >
> >
>

Rand, Antwan,
I think that painted works predate the 20thC but by how far I'm not
sure. I know of a Gelede mask in Manchester museum that was
collected, (if my memory serves me well) in the 1860's and painted
with European oil paints. Also I'm sure that painting
with "traditional" natural pigments goes even further back than that.
Cheers
Craig

--- In African_Arts@yahoogroups.com, Rand African Art <rand@...>
wrote:
>
> Hello Antwan,
>
> Well, I'm stumped. I've looked through lots of books that I have
and can't find specific reference to dates as to when the production
of masks and objects started including polychrome paint. As with
many other things, I would guess it was introduced as a trade
material in the early part of the 20th century, but that's only a
guess on my part.
>
> The only reference I found was about Senufo masks, but it was
pretty general:
>
> "Older examples of the Wanyugo made in the 1950's prior to the
iconoclastic ravages of the Massa religious movement, are marked by
a strikingly simple composition. More recent versions, in contrast,
show great elaboration and are brightly painted."
>
> I sent an email to Herbert M.Cole, who is an African art
historian, and I will see what he knows about the subject and I will
share it with the group.
>
> RAND
>
> Antwan Martin <smoothy01@...> wrote:
> Can someone give me an education on the introduction of
Poly Chrome Paint in
> African art?
>
> Thanks
>
> Antwan Martin
>

Antwan,

 

I finally have some answers for you from Herbert M Cole (aka Kofi Kole).

 

I'm sorry for the huge delay, it was my fault. I get so behind on personal correspondence emails sometimes that I don't feel I can ever catch up. It's a goal of mine for the new year to get better, and faster and getting back to people.

 

Since the question was asked some time ago, I'll repeat it for people who are new to the group.

 

You asked:

 

"Can someone give me an education on the introduction of polychrome paint in African art?"

 

When I had originally started looking in various books that I thought would most likely contain answers to your question, at least for specific cultures, I was surprised that I found almost no reference at all to the introduction of polychrome paint (aka European oil paints) to the cultures even though the introduction of paint dramatically changed the aesthetics of a lot of their art. (Mainly books on Senufo, Bamana, and Yoruba)

 

When I emailed Mr. Cole, I prefaced the email with a statement that I was sure it was impossible to nail down a date since the introduction most likely occurred in various cultures at different times depending on trade routes etc., he agreed, and provided the response below:

 

"Hi Rand:

As you suspect, the dates vary according to area, but I'd guess that some Yoruba pieces were painted with enamels in the teens and twenties, rather later for the Igbo. Some Akan things were painted with euro colors in the 30s, maybe even in the 20s, but by the 30s many Fante drums almost depended upon the newly available variety of colors. Fon things were also painted early.

Then if you count the use of recketts blue, "washing blue" surely it appeared in

19th c yoruba art, esp in hairstyles and other selected details. Bozo and Bamana puppets, though, were probably not painted with enamels until the 50s, but after that they were common. Probably there has been more use of enamels in masks than in figures, in part because masks tend to be rather more secular, like puppets, whereas "tradition" and traditional colors prevail in most shrine sculpture long after enamels are used for other things. And of course many African people never used enamels at all. The Dogon started painting toguna posts I think in the 1980s only. Dogon masks sometimes now show western pigments, but not very often, same with Burkinable masks; some Burkina peoples used them in the 70s and 80s, probably even more today, and they are common today in Ibibio masks and have been for 25-30 years, but selectively. As far as I know western paints have not caught on much in Cameroon, Gabon, and the Congo, though there are a few Kongo images that -- if not pigmented with western oils, at least were probably inspired by the coloration of western statuary.

The above is an impressionistic review, not well-documented or very precise, but

I hope it answers some of your questions."

 

So, as you see, it can vary depending on culture and depending on object. Some cultures that were living in the coastal areas had more significant contact with European and Western peoples who introduced various types of trade items to these cultures. You would assume that the cultures of these coastal areas, and cultures not far from these coastal areas, would be the first cultures that you would start to see incorporating polychrome paint into objects they produced. Cultures in inland Africa, down the rivers on the trade routes you could assume would have these paints introduced to them next and you would start to see the incorporation of the paint in their objects soon after.

 

Was there a specific object that you were posting your question about?

 

I appreciated having Herbert M Cole (aka Kofi Cole) take the time to respond to the question. For those of you who aren't familiar with him, he spent a lot of time in Africa doing field research on various cultures which resulted in the publication of many books. He also taught Art History at UC Santa Barbara for many years. You can find out more about him on his About Me page on his website:

http://koficoleart.com/AboutKofipage.html

 

Recently he started carving miniature African masks and statues which are incredibly detailed for their size. He showed me a group of them last year at the San Francisco Tribal Arts Show and I really loved them.

 

If you haven't seen his carvings before, below is a link to his website, they're definitly worth checking out!

http://koficoleart.com/index.html

 

Cheers!

RAND

Craig Lewis <craig_n_emma@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Rand, Antwan,
I think that painted works predate the 20thC but by how far I'm not
sure. I know of a Gelede mask in Manchester museum that was
collected, (if my memory serves me well) in the 1860's and painted
with European oil paints. Also I'm sure that painting
with "traditional" natural pigments goes even further back than that.
Cheers
Craig

--- In African_Arts@yahoogroups.com, Rand African Art <rand@...>
wrote:
>
> Hello Antwan,
>
> Well, I'm stumped. I've looked through lots of books that I have
and can't find specific reference to dates as to when the production
of masks and objects started including polychrome paint. As with
many other things, I would guess it was introduced as a trade
material in the early part of the 20th century, but that's only a
guess on my part.
>
> The only reference I found was about Senufo masks, but it was
pretty general:
>
> "Older examples of the Wanyugo made in the 1950's prior to the
iconoclastic ravages of the Massa religious movement, are marked by
a strikingly simple composition. More recent versions, in contrast,
show great elaboration and are brightly painted."
>
> I sent an email to Herbert M.Cole, who is an African art
historian, and I will see what he knows about the subject and I will
share it with the group.
>
> RAND
>
> Antwan Martin <smoothy01@...> wrote:
> Can someone give me an education on the introduction of
Poly Chrome Paint in
> African art?
>
> Thanks
>
> Antwan Martin
>

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 12:18:58 -0800
From: Skip Cole <scole@...>
To: rand@...
CC: African_Arts@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [African_Arts] Re: POLY CHROME PAINT

Dear all:

 

Surely color in African art long predated the use of western paints, and since polychome means many colors, polyschrome was there too, although black, white and red (with its variations, from yellow to orange to red, often from camwood or varied clays) have long been the most common prevailing colors, and date way way back. Colr is of course used in the cave painting both in the Sahara and in southern Africa. Coler was also intoduced to objects, such as those in Cameroon, through bead applique and using cloth, as in Bembe Niombo figures that date back to the 19th century. Washing blue was introduced at least as early as the 19th c, possibly the late 18th and has been selectively used over wide areas (west african and the Congo, Yaka masks, for eg).

 

Those are a few additional notes.

 

herbert cole


Quoting Rand African Art :

> Antwan,
>
> I finally have some answers for you from Herbert M Cole (aka Kofi Kole).
>
> I'm sorry for the huge delay, it was my fault. I get so behind on
> personal correspondence emails sometimes that I don't feel I can ever
> catch up. It's a goal of mine for the new year to get better, and
> faster and getting back to people.
>
> Since the question was asked some time ago, I'll repeat it for
> people who are new to the group.
>
> You asked:
>
> "Can someone give me an education on the introduction of polychrome
> paint in African art?"
>
> When I had originally started looking in various books that I
> thought would most likely contain answers to your question, at least
> for specific cultures, I was surprised that I found almost no
> reference at all to the introduction of polychrome paint (aka
> European oil paints) to the cultures even though the introduction of
> paint dramatically changed the aesthetics of a lot of their art.
> (Mainly books on Senufo, Bamana, and Yoruba)
>
> When I emailed Mr. Cole, I prefaced the email with a statement that
> I was sure it was impossible to nail down a date since the
> introduction most likely occurred in various cultures at different
> times depending on trade routes etc., he agreed, and provided the
> response below:
>
> "Hi Rand:
> As you suspect, the dates vary according to area, but I'd guess
> that some Yoruba pieces were painted with enamels in the teens and
> twenties, rather later for the Igbo. Some Akan things were painted
> with euro colors in the 30s, maybe even in the 20s, but by the 30s
> many Fante drums almost depended upon the newly available variety of
> colors. Fon things were also painted early.
>
> Then if you count the use of recketts blue, "washing blue" surely
> it appeared in
> 19th c yoruba art, esp in hairstyles and other selected details.
> Bozo and Bamana puppets, though, were probably not painted with
> enamels until the 50s, but after that they were common. Probably
> there has been more use of enamels in masks than in figures, in part
> because masks tend to be rather more secular, like puppets, whereas
> "tradition" and traditional colors prevail in most shrine sculpture
> long after enamels are used for other things. And of course many
> African people never used enamels at all. The Dogon started painting
> toguna posts I think in the 1980s only. Dogon masks sometimes now
> show western pigments, but not very often, same with Burkinable
> masks; some Burkina peoples used them in the 70s and 80s, probably
> even more today, and they are common today in Ibibio masks and have
> been for 25-30 years, but selectively. As far as I know western
> paints have not caught on much in Cameroon, Gabon, and the Congo,
> though there are a few Kongo images that -- if not
> pigmented with western oils, at least were probably inspired by the
> coloration of western statuary.
>
> The above is an impressionistic review, not well-documented or very
> precise, but
> I hope it answers some of your questions."
>
> So, as you see, it can vary depending on culture and depending on
> object. Some cultures that were living in the coastal areas had more
> significant contact with European and Western peoples who introduced
> various types of trade items to these cultures. You would assume that
> the cultures of these coastal areas, and cultures not far from these
> coastal areas, would be the first cultures that you would start to
> see incorporating polychrome paint into objects they produced.
> Cultures in inland Africa, down the rivers on the trade routes you
> could assume would have these paints introduced to them next and you
> would start to see the incorporation of the paint in their objects
> soon after.
>
> Was there a specific object that you were posting your question about?
>
> I appreciated having Herbert M Cole (aka Kofi Cole) take the time
> to respond to the question. For those of you who aren't familiar with
> him, he spent a lot of time in Africa doing field research on various
> cultures which resulted in the publication of many books. He also
> taught Art History at UC Santa Barbara for many years. You can find
> out more about him on his About Me page on his website:
> http://koficoleart.com/AboutKofipage.html
>
> Recently he started carving miniature African masks and statues
> which are incredibly detailed for their size. He showed me a group of
> them last year at the San Francisco Tribal Arts Show and I really
> loved them.
>
> If you haven't seen his carvings before, below is a link to his
> website, they're definitly worth checking out!
> http://koficoleart.com/index.html
>
> Cheers!
> RAND
>
> Craig Lewis wrote:
> Rand, Antwan,
> I think that painted works predate the 20thC but by how far I'm not
> sure. I know of a Gelede mask in Manchester museum that was
> collected, (if my memory serves me well) in the 1860's and painted
> with European oil paints. Also I'm sure that painting
> with "traditional" natural pigments goes even further back than that.
> Cheers
> Craig
>
> --- In African_Arts@yahoogroups.com, Rand African Art
> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Antwan,
>>
>> Well, I'm stumped. I've looked through lots of books that I have
> and can't find specific reference to dates as to when the production
> of masks and objects started including polychrome paint. As with
> many other things, I would guess it was introduced as a trade
> material in the early part of the 20th century, but that's only a
> guess on my part.
>>
>> The only reference I found was about Senufo masks, but it was
> pretty general:
>>
>> "Older examples of the Wanyugo made in the 1950's prior to the
> iconoclastic ravages of the Massa religious movement, are marked by
> a strikingly simple composition. More recent versions, in contrast,
> show great elaboration and are brightly painted."
>>
>> I sent an email to Herbert M.Cole, who is an African art
> historian, and I will see what he knows about the subject and I will
> share it with the group.
>>
>> RAND
>>
>> Antwan Martin wrote:
>> Can someone give me an education on the introduction of
> Poly Chrome Paint in
>> African art?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Antwan Martin
>>
>
>
>
>

Many items are described as rare. How can you determine if that is true
if there are few examples of it. What makes the dealer assume that it
is rare-especially if it isnt the standard? elly

Elly:

I -- and others -- have often mused about (and been amused by) the limited descriptive vocabulary used in the catalogue captioning of works offered by auction houses (and other purveyors), and I have contemplated sending a thesaurus to each of the houses to encourage the use of a broader vocabulary in the writing of descriptive text.  I remember calculating once the number of times that item description titles for an auction used the terms, "fine," "rare" and "superb" (or "exceptional").  "Fine" is applied to a seeming majority of objects -- with "rare" and "superb" being applied more sparingly --  as if the words themselves can bestow value upon the objects so described.  

Some very general thoughts and more questions than answers:

The question of rarity can be treated as a sub-set of the consideration of authenticity, purported "importance"  and the machinations that are undertaken to elevate "value". ("Important" is another adjective that appears on the list.)   Of course, the application of such a descriptive term as "rare" is wholly subjective and inter-twined with the need to isolate particular objects within a broader selection of such objects to create a limited body of authentic works of higher value within the commercial realm.   Indeed there are forms that appear less frequently than others, but I think that the idea of "rarity" is often used with the implicit intent to exclude the open consideration of comparative examples in order to establish (perhaps merely through suggestion) a value derived from rarity -- as opposed to (or in addition to) quality;  as such, the implication of stating the rarity of an object is meant to suggest that -- while other examples may exist -- they could not possibly be authentic based on the claim that the form is in itself "rare":  How could there be numerous authentic examples of a work which was stated to be rare? Is the use of such a description as "rare" meant to suggest  that other examples are necessarily inauthentic or is it rather a strategy to imply the need that they be considered so in order to maintain the market values previously generated (or sought to be generated) through such classification of like objects as rare?   

Logically wondering... must the authenticity of newly discovered comparable examples that challenge earlier claims of a particular object's rarity be presumed false since we were once told the class of object is rare, as if de facto?  And what do we do in the case of objects previously defined as rare that new knowledge suggests are relatively more common?  What takes precedence -- market history or scientific analysis -- in this determination? Who makes the call?  On what basis is the determination made?  What are the motivations behind the use of the classification?  Once objects have been designated -- and sold -- as "rare," what objectivity remains to reclassify the object otherwise?  Is the primary objective to maintain the market value (and commitment to the client to whom the implicit promise is made)?  Or, is the ultimate objective to represent and recast object's identity and value as part of an ever-changing understanding of the works emerging from diverse cultural milieus?  Would reclassification of the rarity of objects be more fluid in a context wherein market value was not a pressure?

Four related questions to illuminate the point:  

1)  How many authentic  (let's say...) Eyema Byeri could have existed (and/or survived) from the period of ritual production (and what is the accurate time-framing of this period of ritual production?) ?

2)  How many Eyema Byeri can be considered authentic without diminishing the value of those which have been bought or sold based on the premise that they are indeed rare?

3)  Would it be possible to consider more "objectively" newly discovered examples if market pressures did not impact upon the analysis of the objects's authenticity?

4)  Does the insistence upon the object class's rarity super-cede  future "objective" analysis and possible inclusion of other examples within the class of authentic objects?

When we use the term "rare" as a primary defining feature of an object, do we mean that few were produced, or that few are available on the market?  It is much more difficult to elicit an extremely high bid or price for something which is broadly available -- unless its unique qualities (such as "fineness" or "rarity") can be seen to distinguish it from other related objects within the class.  In some cases, the "rarity" of a seemingly common object or form is posited on the ability to document its provenance -- from an early period and/or a specific gathering, collection or exhibition history -- and thus to distinguish it from other examples, or offerings that may be authentic examples from later periods of production but not desirable in light of a predilection for older works.  (Here we are drawn back into the conflation of authenticity and age...  Can we not consider newly discovered objects as authentic because there is no scientific proof of ritual use?  Or, can we not consider them as such because this will subvert previously established market values?  Again, in order to grapple with assignations such as "rare" and "authentic," we must define our terms:  Is an object rare in terms of age? form?  provenance?)  

The idea of "rarity" may arise also in the consideration of works that are gathered from smaller, lesser known or  minimally accessible populations.  As such, the quality of rarity may derive from the fact that a particular object is of an object class that is logically fewer in number simply because it arises from a more limited population, or perhaps arises from a culture that was subsumed by a more dominant political culture in a region and thus ceased to exist in its previous "unadulterated" style.  

Are there very few?  Or, are there very to be had?  Is a type of object rare in what sense?  A need exists to specify what exactly is "rare" about an object. (How is the term being used?)  For instance, is a particular "rare" object a rare example from a specific period and distinguished from other later examples of which there are many?  Or is the form itself rare because it is hardly ever seen at all from any period?  Or... perhaps an object could be considered rare because of specific elements that distinguish it from a larger body of similar objects but which tend not to consist of certain details (e.g., a Janus example of a mask that is generally produced as a single-faced mask or an object produced in metal that is usually crafted in wood).  Some objects are rare to the market perhaps but may have been plentiful in situ at one point and not accessible, or appropriate, for collection or commercial trade.  Others are seemingly plentiful but, lacking provenance documentation, do not have the "pedigree" to be placed within a particular historical period or commercial class.  So, what attributes of a specific object are we considering in classifying it as rare?  

Again, these are just some general thoughts and I apologize if my comments are "rare" (i.e., not well cooked).  For reference, I touched upon some of these matters in the latter half of a previous posting long ago with specific references to the May, 2005 auction at Sotheby's (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/African_Arts/message/101).

In short, one must define one's terms and explore the underlying assumptions and objectives brought to bear in applying such a classification with regard to rarity.  What is rarest of all things is, quite clearly, a simple answer to questions pertaining to matters of classification, representation and truth.

I will be interested to hear other thoughts and opinions on this topic.  Lee

On Jan 12, 2007, at 10:32 AM, gazelle252000 wrote:

Many items are described as rare. How can you determine if that is true
if there are few examples of it. What makes the dealer assume that it
is rare-especially if it isnt the standard? elly

Elly:

I -- and others -- have often mused about (and been amused by) the limited descriptive vocabulary used in the catalogue captioning of works offered by auction houses (and other purveyors), and I have contemplated sending a thesaurus to each of the houses to encourage the use of a broader vocabulary in the writing of descriptive text.  I remember calculating once the number of times that item description titles for an auction used the terms, "fine," "rare" and "superb" (or "exceptional").  "Fine" is applied to a seeming majority of objects -- with "rare" and "superb" being applied more sparingly --  as if the words themselves can bestow value upon the objects so described.  

Some very general thoughts and more questions than answers:

The question of rarity can be treated as a sub-set of the consideration of authenticity, purported "importance"  and the machinations that are undertaken to elevate "value". ("Important" is another adjective that appears on the list.)   Of course, the application of such a descriptive term as "rare" is wholly subjective and inter-twined with the need to isolate particular objects within a broader selection of such objects to create a limited body of authentic works of higher value within the commercial realm.   Indeed there are forms that appear less frequently than others, but I think that the idea of "rarity" is often used with the implicit intent to exclude the open consideration of comparative examples in order to establish (perhaps merely through suggestion) a value derived from rarity -- as opposed to (or in addition to) quality;  as such, the implication of stating the rarity of an object is meant to suggest that -- while other examples may exist -- they could not possibly be authentic based on the claim that the form is in itself "rare":  How could there be numerous authentic examples of a work which was stated to be rare? Is the use of such a description as "rare" meant to suggest  that other examples are necessarily inauthentic or is it rather a strategy to imply the need that they be considered so in order to maintain the market values previously generated (or sought to be generated) through such classification of like objects as rare?   

Logically wondering... must the authenticity of newly discovered comparable examples that challenge earlier claims of a particular object's rarity be presumed false since we were once told the class of object is rare, as if de facto?  And what do we do in the case of objects previously defined as rare that new knowledge suggests are relatively more common?  What takes precedence -- market history or scientific analysis -- in this determination? Who makes the call?  On what basis is the determination made?  What are the motivations behind the use of the classification?  Once objects have been designated -- and sold -- as "rare," what objectivity remains to reclassify the object otherwise?  Is the primary objective to maintain the market value (and commitment to the client to whom the implicit promise is made)?  Or, is the ultimate objective to represent and recast object's identity and value as part of an ever-changing understanding of the works emerging from diverse cultural milieus?  Would reclassification of the rarity of objects be more fluid in a context wherein market value was not a pressure?

Four related questions to illuminate the point:  

1)  How many authentic  (let's say...) Eyema Byeri could have existed (and/or survived) from the period of ritual production (and what is the accurate time-framing of this period of ritual production?) ?

2)  How many Eyema Byeri can be considered authentic without diminishing the value of those which have been bought or sold based on the premise that they are indeed rare?

3)  Would it be possible to consider more "objectively" newly discovered examples if market pressures did not impact upon the analysis of the objects's authenticity?

4)  Does the insistence upon the object class's rarity super-cede  future "objective" analysis and possible inclusion of other examples within the class of authentic objects?

When we use the term "rare" as a primary defining feature of an object, do we mean that few were produced, or that few are available on the market?  It is much more difficult to elicit an extremely high bid or price for something which is broadly available -- unless its unique qualities (such as "fineness" or "rarity") can be seen to distinguish it from other related objects within the class.  In some cases, the "rarity" of a seemingly common object or form is posited on the ability to document its provenance -- from an early period and/or a specific gathering, collection or exhibition history -- and thus to distinguish it from other examples, or offerings that may be authentic examples from later periods of production but not desirable in light of a predilection for older works.  (Here we are drawn back into the conflation of authenticity and age...  Can we not consider newly discovered objects as authentic because there is no scientific proof of ritual use?  Or, can we not consider them as such because this will subvert previously established market values?  Again, in order to grapple with assignations such as "rare" and "authentic," we must define our terms:  Is an object rare in terms of age? form?  provenance?)  

The idea of "rarity" may arise also in the consideration of works that are gathered from smaller, lesser known or  minimally accessible populations.  As such, the quality of rarity may derive from the fact that a particular object is of an object class that is logically fewer in number simply because it arises from a more limited population, or perhaps arises from a culture that was subsumed by a more dominant political culture in a region and thus ceased to exist in its previous "unadulterated" style.  

Are there very few?  Or, are there very to be had?  Is a type of object rare in what sense?  A need exists to specify what exactly is "rare" about an object. (How is the term being used?)  For instance, is a particular "rare" object a rare example from a specific period and distinguished from other later examples of which there are many?  Or is the form itself rare because it is hardly ever seen at all from any period?  Or... perhaps an object could be considered rare because of specific elements that distinguish it from a larger body of similar objects but which tend not to consist of certain details (e.g., a Janus example of a mask that is generally produced as a single-faced mask or an object produced in metal that is usually crafted in wood).  Some objects are rare to the market perhaps but may have been plentiful in situ at one point and not accessible, or appropriate, for collection or commercial trade.  Others are seemingly plentiful but, lacking provenance documentation, do not have the "pedigree" to be placed within a particular historical period or commercial class.  So, what attributes of a specific object are we considering in classifying it as rare?  

Again, these are just some general thoughts and I apologize if my comments are "rare" (i.e., not well cooked).  For reference, I touched upon some of these matters in the latter half of a previous posting long ago with specific references to the May, 2005 auction at Sotheby's (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/African_Arts/message/101).

In short, one must define one's terms and explore the underlying assumptions and objectives brought to bear in applying such a classification with regard to rarity.  What is rarest of all things is, quite clearly, a simple answer to questions pertaining to matters of classification, representation and truth.

I will be interested to hear other thoughts and opinions on this topic.  Lee

On Jan 12, 2007, at 10:32 AM, gazelle252000 wrote:

Many items are described as rare. How can you determine if that is true
if there are few examples of it. What makes the dealer assume that it
is rare-especially if it isnt the standard? elly

I'll take a shot at parsing "rare".

The only kind of "rare" that I think is totally
legit is when only a few examples of a highly-valued
and well-documented type (in terms of age, style, AND
function) exist in academically impeccable
collections and then another one comes to market
with no question as to its authenticity and aesthetic
appeal.

Every other use of the word "rare" is polluted to one
extent or another by one or more of the commercial
considerations already discussed.  The question of
course (as always) is "how polluted?"  How much of
the description is hype and how much of it is, if
not rigidly scientific, at least consistent with
the preponderance of opinion of those who know and
care?

In other words, whether its a major auction house,
or a minor dealer, where there's selling there's
hyping and that will never change.  Lies and errors
can be policed by individuals, but only the market
can police hype.  The only thing an individual can
do is listen to Public Enemy and "Don't believe
the hype!"  Rely on your own judgement and that of
those you completely trust.

One last thought on "rare".  As I first stated,
a certain kind of documented rarity can and should
positively impact value.  But something can be too
rare, in other words, anomalous, so that even if
it is beautiful and seemingly authentic, the market
will often shy away from it because there's nothing
to compare it to.

And that's when, to bring us full circle, a high-
powered dealer buys it for next to nothing,
"authenticates" it, pronounces it not an anomaly
but rather wonderfully "rare", and puts six figures
on it.  If that dealer's honest and skilled, he's
done the cultural world a favor.  And if he's not,
he hasn't.  And often only time will tell which it is.




Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

"ari.b" wrote:

> Herman Bigham & Associates mounts successful Exhibit
> "Symbolic use of animals in African cultural art"
> http://www.octobergallery.com/bigham/

In checking out this link, there is more similarity
between the Senufo mother pictured and one I own
than I have yet to find elsewhere:

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/African_Arts/photos/browse/a175?c=

In particular, there is the use of two birds on
the mother's head instead of one, the hoof-like hands,

the pedulous conical breasts, the armbands, the
general posture, etc., enough similarities I think
to put the two figures relatively close in time and
space.  I tentatively think of mine as post-1940,
pre-1970 based on the quality of the carving and the
apparently genuine weathering of the wood, so I guess
I'll write Bigham and see if he has any more info on
his piece.

Does anyone have any more info on this twin-bird-head
Senufo style? WK





Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com