CONCLUSION

We have now completed our review of the forms of primitive art and we shall try to sum up the results of our inquiry.

We have seen that art arises from two sources, from technical pursuits and from the expression of emotions and thought, as soon as these take fixed forms. The more energetic the control of form over uncoordinated movement, the more esthetic the result. Artistic enjoyment is, therefore, based essentially upon the reaction of our minds to form. The same kind of enjoyment may be released by impressions received from forms that are not the handiwork of man, but they may not be considered as art, although the esthetic reaction is not different from the one we receive from the contemplation or the hearing of a work of art. When speaking of artistic production they must be excluded. When considering only esthetic reactions they must be included.

The esthetic effect of artistic work developing from the control of technique alone is based on the joy engendered by the mastery of technique and also by the pleasure produced by the perfection of form. The enjoyment of form may have an elevating effect upon the mind, but this is not its primary effect. Its source is in part the pleasure of the virtuoso who overcomes technical difficulties that baffle his cleverness. As long as no deeper meaning is felt in the significance of form, its effect is for most individuals, pleasurable, not elevating.

We have seen that in the various arts definite formal principles manifest themselves, the origin of which we did not try to explain, but which we accepted as present in the art of man the world over, and which for this reason we considered as the most ancient, the most fundamental characteristics of all art. In the graphic and plastic arts these elements are symmetry, rhythm and emphasis of form. We found symmetry to be very generally right and left and suggested that this may be due to the symmetry of manual movements as well as to the observation of right and left symmetry in animals and in man. We also observed that rhythmic repetition runs ordinarily in horizontal bands and pointed out the general experience that natural objects of the same or similar kind are arranged in horizontal strata, such as woods, mountains, and clouds; legs, body and limbs. Rhythmic form seems to be closely related to technical processes, although other causes of rhythmic repetition are revealed in poetry. The simplest technical processes produce a simple repetition of the same motives, while with increasing virtuosity more complex orders become the rule. The more virtuosity is developed, the more complex are the rhythms that are liable to make their appearance. The ability of primitive artists to appreciate rhythm seems to be much greater than our own.

The desire to emphasize form made itself felt in the application of lines to the rim. We also observed the tendency of the rim designs to become exuberant and to encroach upon the decorative field. No less important is the tendency to attach ornament to prominent places of the decorated object and to divide the decorative field according to fixed principles.

While the features so far considered are common characteristics of art the world over, they do not explain the style of separate areas. We considered this problem in some detail in the field of decorative art. Here our attention was first arrested by the fact that purely formal art, or perhaps better, art that is apparently purely formal, is given a meaning endowing it with an emotional value that does not belong to the beauty of form alone. It is an expressionistic element that is common to many forms of primitive art. It is effective because in the mind of the tribes certain forms are symbols of a limited range of ideas. The firmer the association between a form and a definite idea, the more clearly stands out the expressionistic character of the art. This is true in the graphic and plastic arts as well as in music. In the former a geometrical form, in the latter a sound cluster, a particular type of musical phrasing, if associated with a definite meaning, evokes definite emotions or even concepts. A study of these conditions shows also that a uniform reaction to form is indispensable for the effectiveness of an expressionistic art, a condition which is not fulfilled in our own modern society, so that an expressionistic art can appeal only to a circle of adepts who follow the lines of thought and feeling developed by a master. Symbolic art can still be applied successfully in the case of a few symbols that have fixed associations which are valid for all of us.

The wide distribution of symbolic forms and the remoteness of their resemblance to the objects they symbolize led us to a consideration of the question of their history. We examined particularly the theory that all artistic reproduction is by origin naturalistic and that geometrization grows up only when the artist tries to introduce ideas that are not inherent in the object itself. We saw that this theory cannot be maintained, because realistic representation and geometrization spring from distinctive sources. In plastic art the contrast between the two tendencies does not appear as clearly as in graphic art. In the former it is found more in surface treatment than in general outline. In graphic art the matter is complicated by the difficulties involved in representing a three-dimensional object on a two-dimensional surface, a problem which the artist has to solve. This may be done in one of two ways. Either a perspective representation of the object as it appears at a given moment may be attempted, or the artist may decide that the essential point is to show all its characteristic parts, no matter whether they are visible in a single view or not. The former method lays stress upon the accidental features, it is impressionistic; the latter stresses those elements that are felt to constitute the fundamental qualities of the object, it is expressionistic. The two methods which we called the symbolic and the perspective are absolutely distinct and the one cannot be developed from the other. We have also seen that the consistent application of the perspective method is reached only when we introduce also the principle of indistinctness of those points that are removed from the center of the field of vision and that of dependence of color upon environment. Both of these have been tried in our day, without having found general acceptance. The symbolic method is always more or less wavering in the application of its principle. Sometimes perspective correctness of outline is attempted with a considerable degree of freedom in regard to the detailed treatment of those symbols that are considered important. Of this character are the Egyptian paintings with their vacillation between front and side views. In other cases the realism of outline is entirely sacrificed and the form may be reduced to a mere assembly of symbols.

The theory has been advanced that geometric ornament developed through the degeneration of perspective designs; in part perhaps also through that of symbolic designs. It is assumed that the symbol, or the object represented was misunderstood and that in course of time through a process of slurring, by careless and inaccurate representation the forms became fragmentary and finally lost all semblance to the original. It is not possible to accept this theory, because the conditions under which the supposed slurring occurs are seldom realized. Slovenly work does not occur in an untouched primitive culture. Misunderstandings may happen in cases of borrowing of designs or in that of a gradual transformation of those concepts that find expression in decorative art. Actual slurring is found in factory production. By an examination of a few cases of this kind we were able to show that it does not lead to geometrization, but to the growth of an individualism akin to that of our handwriting. It cannot be denied that in such cases occasion for re-interpretation with consequent changes of form occur, but these are not frequent. On the other hand we were able to show that reading in of realistic meanings into geometric forms is quite common. We proved this by means of a detailed comparison of the style of painting and embroidery of the North American Plains Indians which we found to be practically identical everywhere, while the interpretations varied from tribe to tribe. This phenomenon agrees with the general tendency to keep intact the form, but to endow it with new meaning according to the chief cultural interests of the people. We pointed out the prevalence of the same tendency in folk-tales and ritual. As a general explanation the geometrization of realistic patterns is, therefore, unacceptable. In the majority of cases it seems to be rather due to the inclination of man to give a meaning to geometric form, as we enjoy reading meanings into the forms of clouds and mountains. We were also able to describe a few cases in which the process of reading in has actually been observed.

Another fact prevents us from considering geometrization as a general historical process. It is very seldom only that the steps are found so distributed that they can be proved to follow one another in time. Much oftener all are found at the same time among the same people.

Considering all these points we reached the conclusion that the stylistic form which contains to a greater or lesser extent constant geometrical elements, is decisive in determining the manner in which representations are rendered. We were thus led to the attempt to find the principles underlying art styles.

We approached this subject by the study of a few art forms. We compared a number of art styles that make use of the spiral and found in each characteristic traits, as well regarding the form of the spiral as in the handling of the decorative field. In the same way we observed that in the art of the North American Indians the same kind of triangles and rectangles are used by all the tribes, but that there exist typical differences in the treatment of the decorative field. The problem was carried through in some detail by means of a study of the decorative art of the North Pacific coast which is highly symbolic in character. This example taught us an additional point, namely that in symbolic art the selection of symbols is of decisive importance in defining the style and that the arrangement of the symbols is subject to the same formal treatment of the decorative field which control the arrangement of geometrical motives.

On the basis of this study we conclude that the particular types of geometrical motives that enter into the representative form, as well as the treatment of the decorative field determine the character of the design and that the degree of realism depends upon the relative importance of the geometric and representative elements. When the purely decorative tendency prevails we have essentially geometrical, highly conventionalized forms, when the idea of representation prevails, we have, on the contrary, more realistic forms. In every case, however, the formal element that characterizes the style, is older than the particular type of representation. This does not signify that early representations do not occur, it means that the method of representation was always controlled by formal elements of distinctive origin.

The pattern of artistic expression that emerges from a long, cumulative process determined by a multiplicity of causes fashions the form of the art work. We recognize the permanence of pattern in those cases in which a useful form that has lost its function persists as a decorative element; in the imitation in new materials of natural forms used at one time as utensils, and in the transfer of forms from one technique to another. The fixity of the pattern does not permit the artist to apply natural forms unmodified to decorative purposes. His imagination is limited by the pattern. In cases of greater freedom the representative value may not be seriously encroached upon. Such is the case for instance, with the oriental palmetto and the ear ornaments of the Marquesas Islands, on which in olden times two deities were represented, back to back, while nowadays two girls in a swing are carved, in exactly the same spacial arrangement. When the pattern is highly formal and not adapted to representation, an apparent geometrization may be the result. The distinction between these two aspects appears clearly in those cases in which pictography and symbolic geometric art appear side by side.

The art of the North Pacific coast proved also that we must not assume that the style of a tribe must always be uniform, but that it is quite possible that in different industries, particularly when carried along by different parts of the population, quite distinctive styles may prevail. The excellence and consistency of a style as well as the multiplicity of forms depend upon the perfection of technique. We found, therefore, that in those cases in which technical work is done by the men alone, they are the creative artists, that when the women do a great deal of technical work they are no less productive, and that when the two sexes carry on different industries they may develop distinctive styles. It is, however, more frequent that the style of a dominant industry may be imposed upon work made by other processes. Weaving in coarse material seemed to be a most fertile source of patterns that are imitated in paintings, carvings, and pottery.

A comparison of the fundamental elements that are found in the graphic and plastic arts,—in the arts of space,—as contrasted with those of poetry, music, and dance,—the arts of time,—brings out certain differences and similarities. Common to both are rhythm, and it seems likely that the rhythm of technique is merely a spacial expression of the rhythm of time, in so far as the rhythmic movements result in rhythmic forms when applied to technical pursuits. We may perhaps also speak in both types of art of attempts to emphasize closed forms, for often we find musical phrases, and single ideas in poetry closed by what might be called a decorative end, consisting of burdens or of codas. Similar elements may also appear as introductions in the beginning. Completely lacking in the pure arts of time is symmetry, because an inverted time order does not convey the impression of symmetry, as is the case in the arts of space. It occurs only in a symmetrical arrangement of phrases. Dance contains elements of both the spacial and time arts. Therefore, the principles of the former may be clearly observed in dance forms. Rhythmic movements and rhythmic spacial order, symmetry of position and of movement, and emphasis and balance of form are essential in esthetic dance forms.

The graphic and plastic arts owe much of their emotional value to the representative and symbolic values of form. This is no less true in literature, music and dance. Narrative and poetry so far as they contain intelligible words, always have a meaning which may have a deep significance because they touch upon those aspects of life that stir the emotions. Frequently there is an added meaning, when the words have a symbolic, ulterior significance related to religious beliefs or philosophical ideas. In music and dance also symbolic significance is often attached to form.

We are at the end of our considerations, but one question remains to be answered. We have seen that the desire for artistic expression is universal. We may even say that the mass of the population in primitive society feels the need of beautifying their lives more keenly than civilized man, at least more than those whose lives are spent under the urgent necessity of acquiring the meagre means of sustenance. But among others also the desire for comfort has often superseded the desire for beauty. Among primitive people the καλὸν κἀγαθόν coincide. Goodness and beauty are the same. Do they then possess the same keenness of esthetic appreciation that is found at least in part of our population? I believe we may safely say that in the narrow field of art that is characteristic of each people the enjoyment of beauty is quite the same as among ourselves: intense among a few, slight among the mass. The readiness to abandon one’s self to the exaltation induced by art, is probably greater, because the conventional restraint of our times does not exist in the same forms in their lives. What distinguishes modern esthetic feeling from that of primitive people is the manifold character of its manifestations. We are not so much bound by a fixed style. The complexity of our social structure and our more varied interests allow us to see beauties that are closed to the senses of people living in a narrower culture. It is the quality of their experience, not a difference in mental make-up that determines the difference between modern and primitive art production and art appreciation.