Problematic Stigmas Present in Art History

 Why is it important to understand Art History and its fallacies?

    Art: A Brief History brings the history of art to life. It is the 7th edition of its collection and it talks about many things such as discoveries, perspectives, and research. Art: A Brief History is a very informative textbook about global art history. It provided many different artworks that we didn’t know even existed. The cultural aspects behind each artwork are fascinating and it also teaches you a lot about its culture. The vocabulary is probably one of the most informational parts of the textbook. Each word is unique on its own and applies to other artwork even outside of the textbook. The artworks talked about in this book range from all over the world from western to non-western and eastern to non-eastern. As an art textbook, it strives to bring light to such artworks that aren’t really seen or talked about. It also serves to be educational which helps those who are interested in learning about global art history. From sculptures to paintings, they go over a variety of artworks. Each artwork discussed is distinctive and beautiful. 

    After time spent reading through Art: A Brief History by Marilyn Stokstad, it is clear that Stokstad may have a bias or is not as knowledgeable when it comes to non-western artwork. When it comes to the artwork from the west, Stokstad provides a detailed and thought-out illustration relating to the piece. She provides context such as history, meaning, and importance regarding the art which helps readers have a better understanding of why the artwork is significant. This is all great. However, when it comes to non-western artwork, Stokstad appears to be more generalized with the art as well as referencing the west when it is not needed. 

    Regarding the western pieces, a great example would be page 298 when Stokstad covers Jan and Hubert. As she does with most if not every artwork shown in the textbook, Stokstad talks about how the artwork was created and the different techniques that went into making it the way it is. However, for this western artwork, Stokstad goes into much detail, covering the artist himself as well as his wife. She goes on for about three paragraphs about the relationship between the painting and what people thought it could mean. She also implies that the meaning of the artwork is a great mystery and that art historians to this day are still trying to figure out the true meaning. When it comes to Stokstad's non-western artworks in the textbook, the chapter feels empty. An example to show why this is coming from page 84 of the textbook. On this page, multiple Asian artworks are shown. Stokstad gives readers an explanation of how the artwork was made as well as the techniques that went into it as she does with every artwork in the book. However–that is all that is provided. The artworks are missing the more detailed and insightful explanations that Stokstad provides readers when it comes to western topics. She introduces the non-western artworks by giving a quick explanation of the general category the artwork fits under. Another example is on page 86, Stokstad talks about Pagodas after introducing The Great Wild Goose Pagoda. She talks about the general use of the Pagodas as well as what they generally looked like. Another example that shows the clear difference between the western and non-western artwork Stokstad has in her textbook is seen on page 301. When she covers A Goldsmith in His Shop, she also provides a detailed and lengthy breakdown of the artwork and what each part of the artwork means. Stokstad gives context to the explanations and gives readers an understanding of the art that they would not have had if it were not for the added detailed breakdown provided. When we look at non-western examples on page 81, it can be seen that Stokstad also provides a breakdown of the artwork Rubbing of a Stone Relief. However, it is quite clear the difference between the two breakdowns. Regarding this non-western breakdown, each part is no longer than a sentence and simply describes what is happening in the picture. With all of these instances, it can be seen that there is a clear difference when it comes to Stokstad’s presentation of non-western and western artworks

. 

    Ultimately, while insightful and educational, Art: A Brief History would not be the best choice to learn about non-western artworks. Stokstad does not provide the same attention, detail, and context with them as she does with western pieces. Whether it is due to a bias or a lack of knowledge in the eastern area is unclear. What is clear however is that western and eastern artwork are not given the same effort and attention when it comes to educating readers about them. While continuing to read Stocktad’s work in Art: A Brief History, there is a clear pattern that is continued throughout the book. That would be the lack of depth and comprehension that is found within the topics that are encapsulated in the non-western world of art history when comparing them to the ones of a western background. 

    A clear example of this lack of information and amicable representation of non-western art can be seen in the first section of chapter 15 (Arts of the Americas) which focused on Mesoamerica which one would think would be a very rich and informed section that could detail artist, techniques, and patterns that the specific civilizations that were once in the Mesoamerica’s. But when looking at Stocktad’s section on Mesoamerica the most they spend on each one of the few civilizations within the 6 pages worth the Mesoamerica’s the most they would spend on civilization was 1 ½ page. For the most part, each one of the civilizations that Stocktand covered was rushed and at points, ill-informed based on the information that she presented which would focus on aspects of the society but not go into full detail about the movements that the Mesoamericans had at the time. It was very glossed over and a typical reader who didn’t know much about Mesoamerica, to begin with, would walk away with a very baseline level of information about the Mesoamericans. A work that truly shows this issue is the piece The Founding of Tenochtitlan which before it gave a brief overview of the Aztec society and went over the geography of the Aztecs, the invasion of Mexico, and then the actual piece which Stocktad briefly looked into and describes the scene presented in the colored ink and paper image. There was more information given about the invasion of the Aztecs by the Spanish than the actual art presented in the chapter which is especially disappointing to think about because it is showing that the most important thing to happen to the Aztecs in Stocktad’s eyes is the invasion and downfall of the Aztec society. This is such a horrid message to send as the major point within the chapter section when talking about Mesoamerica because it degrades these societies in the view of the audience by making the most important takeaway being the losses of these culture-filled and beautiful societies being given this treatment.

    This inexcusable treatment of non-western art in history is especially seen when looking at Stocktad’s work when she talks about western art and this can be especially seen when looking at the 5th chapter where she talks about Ancient Greece. To begin with there are already multiple sections within this chapter alone based on one society when in comparison to chapter 15 so many societies all over the Americas were meshed together due to the effort difference of a western work compared to non-western art. But to truly focus on the section that will be analyzed to further this point is the third section where she speaks on the Classical period of Ancient Greece. Here alone we see a shift in the content and quality of the work through the information and detail within everything she presents within this period. This is especially present when talking about the Parthenon, where this building alone has as much written for it as the entire society of the Aztecs has. When comparing the effort and work alone these 2 sections have, there is a difference in quality and time spent studying these non-western vs. western artworks. The bias that Stocktad has presented through all her work is entirely problematic because giving so much spotlight and attention to a certain group of people, especially of a more eurocentric descent, in comparison to one group of people from marginalized communities shows the problematic biases that people may not realize they may have but then is made apparent through the work that they publish which Stocktad is guilty of in her work when comparing the Mesoamerican art to the Classical Ancient Greece art.

    For our art detective work, I recently went to visit a friend at their place when I noticed that the rug they had was very similar to the patterned fabric that was seen with the Inca civilization which was best known as the T’oqapu. This rug could also be called an unconventional mosaic since it is made up of a lot of different small parts brought together based on the fabric woven together to bring the whole rug together. Ricky Lima

    Recently, I was given a poster from my BIG in an organization that I’m in. This poster is from a popular anime that I’ve watched since my high school years. I have it hung up in my room and I noticed how the poster uses different types of perspectives as well as registers. By perspective, the author drew the poster in a way where we can see the players in action while they’re playing the game. They’re in various angles all looking another way trying to receive the ball. In the bottom middle of the poster, you can see a ball come out. In a way, we view it as if we’re the ball getting spiked by the main player of the anime. For registers, we see that the main protagonist of the poster is larger than the others. They’re also seen facing toward the viewer and they appear larger. There’s also another enemy team placed on top of the main players of the anime. The register shows that because they’re on top, they’re viewed as players who are higher than the main players. It shows that they’re going against one another but the main team is seen and expected as the one to beat the team that is placed on top of them. Kaylin Lor

    I have a picture of the statue of Ashurbanipal, located in the civic center in San Francisco. This statue seems to be made from bronze, which could have been made using the lost wax technique we learned about in the lecture. This technique allows for more precise castings as well as more freedom when it comes to creating the mold itself. Justin Ly 

In the textbook, the author, Marilyn Stokstad, writes about different types of art but one that she seems to be lacking in knowledge when it comes to non-western artwork. She gives vague details for non-western artwork and provides unneeded references. In addition, for our comparisons, we compared Jan and Hubert and Asian artworks. Jan and Hubert were provided more details to learn about while for Asian artworks, the artworks are missing details and insightful explanations. Another comparison would be Goldsmith in His Shop and Rubbing of a Stone Relief. Goldsmith in His Shop was actually given a thorough analysis and Rubbing of a Stone Relief didn’t. With these comparisons, we can see how biased Marilyn was while writing the textbook. Even though it seems she was biased, she still decided to include those artworks which did shed a light on them. We were able to learn about them and differentiate the favoritism. Besides the comparisons, we were able to experience what it’s like to be art detectives. From detecting different types of art in our daily lives, we were able to use our knowledge gathered from the textbook to use in real life. With the usage of vocabulary and examples from the textbook, we were able to really see global art history brought to life.