Picking at the Paint: Viewing Contemporary Bushman Art as Art

In most writing on contemporary Bushman art the art is discussed as a tool of development, a tourism endeavor and an income generator. While these are aims both legitimate and beneficial to the communities involved, they also work (implicitly yet effectively) to separate the art, artist and subsequently the community out of which the art is produced from “the rest of us,” defining these communities as “other.” This article attempts to engage with contemporary Bushman art as art objects. Using criteria of judgment based on a functional semiotics of art, two works will be analyzed to prove that the works may be discussed as Art. The premise is that once people recognize the aesthetic intelligence imbued in these artworks they will be able to engage with the work in a way that is similarly intelligent and contemporary. The art and its people will then stand a better chance of being accepted into the realm of the everyday as opposed to being relegated to the sarcophagi of history. Once taken from this starting position, goals of community development and tourism endeavors linked to indigenous art can become that much more beneficial and life-changing for the communities concerned.     

Art and Agency: A Reassessment

In his book, Art and agency , Alfred Gell presents a theory of art based neither on aesthetics nor on visual communication. Art is defined by the distinctive function it performs in advancing social relationships through 'the abduction of agency'. Art objects are indexes of the artist's or model's agency. This article examines Gell's use of agency, particularly in relation to the ritual art that is central to his argument. Focusing on Gell's employment of Peirce's term 'index' (out of his triad of index, icon, and symbol), I note that Peirce's approach deflects attention from signification towards the link between art works and the things to which they refer. I consider what Peirce meant by abduction, and conclude that while Gell makes a good case for the agency of art objects he does not explain the distinctive ways in which art objects extend their maker's or user's agency. Gell lacked the time to make detailed revisions before publication and I acknowledge that, given more time, he might have revised some parts of the book.