Understanding Visual Communication

AHVS 121 Understanding Visual Communication Winter 2021 Assignment 6 (two options)

We at UVic acknowledge with respect the Lekwungen peoples on whose traditional territory the University of Victoria stands, and the Songhees, Esquimalt and WSÁNEĆ peoples whose historical relationships with the land continue to this day.

Over the last few classes we’ve started discussing the connections between art history and other disciplines. There is no formal tutorial on March 2, to give you time to do do the tour or other research on your own.

There are two options for this assignment depending on whether you can/have access to an in-person experience, or must/prefer to do the virtual assignment. You only have to write on one option, but please read through both halves of the assignment anyways as there are shared concepts and concerns between the two.

The goals of the assignment are to: 1) to consider the issues and concerns of interdisciplinary viewing

2) to consider the issues associated with “dominant readings” of the arts (here the implicit link between First Nations arts and Anthropology)

3) to experience some of the art embedded into the campus experience (for option 1)

Write a short paper, minimum 750 words, due to me by email [email protected] Before Monday March 15, 2021 at 3:30PM. Please see course outline for important details on how to format & submit assignments.

OPTION 1: This assignment is an option for those who have access to the UVic campus in person. Download a copy of the Coast Salish Art Guide for the Cornett Building and consider your experiences in following the self-guided tour. The tour guide can be found HERE. (If the link doesn’t work (they keep moving stuff), search “Cornett art tour” - it should be the first topic that gives you the PDF link). Note that they also move the art around, so it’s not always an exact guide, but it should provide some reference to the permanent and variable installations.

How do you perceive the various types of art? (for example, would you have considered the doors? even looked at them? what do you consider is the significance of having art incorporated into this specific location?). What was your favourite piece? Why did it have resonance for you?

Studies of First Nations arts are often linked with Social Sciences, in particular Anthropology, (as opposed to most other cultures, predominately studied in Art or Art History departments. The distinction that I’m getting at here is that while some art history departments, like ours, do offer courses on First Nations arts, there are very few Anthropology departments that include, for example, 19thC European material culture).

How do you perceive this connection? Do you think it is (the most) appropriate? (Note: this paper isn’t oriented towards cultural appropriation, but concepts of culture in relation to disciplinary silos. Also keep in mind that here is nothing inherently right or wrong about these divisions, as you’ll find in option 2 where the various arrangements each have approval and disapproval of affected peoples. It is thinking through the implications and not blindly accepting them that is important.)

What does it mean to you to have art around UVic? Are you now more aware of the other painting and sculpture on campus? Do you feel that First Nations art on display elsewhere around campus “reads” differently in those other environments? Why or why not?

Sorry not to be able to offer a virtual version of this tour, but Google maps street view doesn’t go inside the UVic buildings.

Option 2: This assignment is based around a virtual exploration of the National Gallery of Canada’s Àbadakone Exhibit. ‘Àbadakone’ is an Algonquin word that translates as ‘continuous fire’, here “intended to refer symbolically to a ceremonial fire, or the concept of Indigenous peoples’ persistence and survival; it also refers to the individual creative fires burning inside each artist in the exhibition” (Wahsontiio Cross, NGC Magazine: 2020. article online here).

The exhibit is now over, but the National Gallery (NGC) has maintained some information on their website here: https://www.gallery.ca/virtual-ngc/abadakone

A particularly useful case study for the purposes of this assignment is the third entry down the page: Will Wilson’s K’ó moks Imperial Stormtrooper (Andy Everson), Citizen of the K’ómoks First Nation, 2017. Read the blurb and listen to the audio clip. One of the things I want to draw your attention to in the audio, is the historical idea of “the vanishing race”. How does this concept relate to the practice of studying First Nations arts primarily within anthropological contexts? How does Wilson (Dinè) confront this idea in his image? How is Everson confronting this idea within the traditional Kwakwaka’wakw practice of mask making? (Everson is a local artist, so I’ve included his website and bio here in case you’re interested :-)

Refer to the paragraphs in Option 1 about how studies of First Nations and other indigenous arts are often separated from similar studies of the arts of other cultures and in disciplinary silos. How do you perceive this connection? Do you think it is (the most) appropriate? We can also see similar divisions in museum settings as well. In 2017, the NGC reshaped their chronological galleries (19th-20th century rooms) to include First Nations and Settler cultural arts together. Previously these were displayed separately, and the change was intended that: ‘the newly transformed galleries provide the ideal setting to tell a more complete story of artmaking in this land, which dates back thousands of years. We worked closely with partner institutions and indigenous communities to create a meaningful display, representative of Canada’s unique diversity and heritage’ (Marc Mayer, then NGC director & CEO; press release, widely quoted). Review of the revamped galleries by Adrienne Huard, citizen of the Anishinaabe peoples, is here, if you’d like to see her take on the new arrangement).

In the RBCM in Victoria, objects from these two cultural categories are almost universally separated, even when they come from the same space- time location. The Royal British Columbia Museum recently had a visiting show of Emily Carr paintings, including several from the RBCM’s own collection, along with their own show containing: 22 smaller artworks ranging from sketches to small watercolours, as well as other objects related to Carr and her work. Lou-ann Neel (Mamalilikulla & Kwagiulth people of the Kwakwaka’wakw speaking peoples), who is the acting head of Indigenous collections and repatriation for the museum, says the show was complementary to the museum's permanent collection: "After seeing Carr's paintings, visitors can head upstairs to the First Peoples Gallery to experience first-hand the Indigenous art that inspired her paintings” (CBC news, October 24, 2020, article here). Here, while they are drawing the connection, they were maintaining physical separation for their displays, so objects from different cultures were not shown together.

In both cases, the institutions’ stated purpose is to be respectful with the integrity of the objects and their makers. Do you think they work? Reflect upon the pros and cons of each arrangement and consider your own thoughts on the issues.