Having admired and in a small way collected African masks for years,
I've recently begun to study them. Isn't this a bit late? Well, no: I've
followed the advice a wise friend gave me long ago -- that I should just buy
what I liked. But now I find I want to know more about these things that I
like.
Unfortunately a lot of what I'm learning is unsettling. For instance,
the question of authenticity: is an authentic mask one that was carved for use
in ritual practices embedded in African custom? If that definition is right,
then two things would follow. (I say this based slightly on my own experiences
looking for masks, but more on what I’ve been learning from reading,
particularly in the fascinating book by Christopher B. Steiner, African Art in Transit (1994), which
studies the African art trade in Côte d’Ivoire.)
First, it's very unlikely that many of the masks for sale in African
markets today are authentic in this sense. The traditional practices of which
the masks were a part are fading – though I doubt that these practices are
entirely gone – and so presumably fewer and fewer masks are being made for
actual use in ritual. Moreover, there are a lot of masks for sale, so many that
there probably just aren't enough villages to support the commerce from their
own ritual stock. Most masks, instead, are probably being made right now, and
mainly for the tourist trade. They may look old, but that’s because they’re
specially treated to appear that way.
Second, if a mask actually is authentic, how did it make its way from
ritual to commerce? Steiner offers this description of bargaining “[a]t the
village level of the art trade”: “[M]uch art is obtained during times of
personal or regional crisis…. Bargaining here is less concerned with price as
it is with the negotiation of a sale – i.e., convincing someone to sell
something.” (64) On the same page, Steiner quotes an African art trader on this
process:
When buying in villages, you have to be very
careful about what you say. You have to be gentle and polite. You have to
explain to the elders that these objects are things which people want to learn
about. “Your children,” you must tell them, “won’t be able to appreciate or
understand these things unless we take them and preserve them in museums and in
books.”
I recently heard Michael Sandel speak about his current work on the
intrusion of market thinking into areas of life that used to be regulated, at
least on the surface, by other forces. (For example: government programs that
pay children for reading books during summer vacation.) He was worried about
the moral corrosion that might be caused by market values' "crowding out" of other human impulses, and that's an important concern. But the moment when an
authentic mask is pulled from the world of its creation into the world of art
and commerce seems worse -- an act of cultural destruction rather than mere
corrosion.
Paradoxically, almost all masks that are really old (say, a century
or more) seem to be in Western museums. There they have been preserved against
climate and pests, which are not kind to wooden masks. There too, it seems,
they get treated as objects for preservation rather than for use and in due
course replacement.
But now, today, it seems right to say that those Westerners who
simply like African masks should not seek masks that fit the definition of
authenticity I started this post with, because if they succeed they will be
contributing to the disintegration of a culture. Instead, they – we – should embrace
masks made today, for trade, as today's expression of this traditional art. And
we should buy what we like.
No comments:
Post a Comment