How to Talk to Children About World Art

For anyone who wants their children to understand and love the art of Africa, Asia, Oceania and the Americas, this guide has questions and answers about thirty amazing objects.



Anticipating how children will react to artifacts ranging from a Congolese mask or a Sioux warrior's tunic to a Javanese puppet or an Easter Island Moai, each section begins with very simple observations - 'This face doesn't look very African!' - and moves on to more complex questions such as 'What do the decorations on the forehead and temples represent?', 'Does white mean something special in Africa?'.



Written in everyday language for people with no art expertise or teaching experience, the book includes maps, colour coding and thumbnail images to help you see where each featured work of art comes from. The explanations also include guidance on what's most appropriate for what age, from four to fourteen. There are invaluable tips for planning a visit to a museum and a thorough discussion of modern western perceptions of world art and the tricky terminology associated with the subject.

o Foreword

o What to call it

Primitive Art?

Early Art?

Exotic Art?

Distant Art?

Negro Art?

Ethnic Art?

Tribal Art?

Non-European Art?

Extra-European Art

o Re-viewed: The Western way of seeing art has evolved

o Art or craft?

o Some Keys to reading

Before you look

Face to face with World Art

Preconceived ideas

o Featured works

How to use these pages

Yup'ik mask - Alaska

Kwakwaka'wakw (Kwakiutl) mask - Canada

Numakiki (Mandan) tunic - USA

Olmec head - Mexico

Aztec/Mixtec pectoral - Mexico

Tairona pectoral - Columbia

Mundurucu head - Brazil

Baga, nimbi (D'mba) shoulder mask - Republic of Guinea

Statue of Jenné-Jeno - Mali

Dogon couple - Mali

Senoufo deble (or pombia) statue - Ivory Coast

Benin plaque - Nigeria

Mandu yene bamoum throne of King Nsangu - Cameroon

Fang reliquary figurine (Emiya Biéri) - Gabon

Double-headed Kongo dog - Democratic Republic of Congo

Punu Okuyi mask - Gabon/Democratic Republic of Congo

Mbala (giguma) headrest - Democratic Republic of Congo

Tsam dance mask -Mongolia

Miao women's celebration clothing - China

Gusoku armour - Japan

Dayak earrings -Indonesia or Malaysia

Nias ancestor figurine (Adu siraha salawa) - Indonesia

Javanese puppet of Haruman - Indonesia

Aboriginal painting - Australia

Yimam (yipwon) statue - Papua New Guinea

Ceremonial malagan statue from New Ireland - Papua New Guinea

Mask-head-dress from Malakula - Vanuatu

Club ('u'u)- Marquesas Islands, French Polynesia

Hawaiian feathered head - USA

Easter Island Moai - Chile

o Want to know more?

Books

Audio-visual and multi-media publications

Museums

[unedited text]



Numakiki (Mandan) Tunic



Upper Missouri Region, United States of America

Circa 1820

Deer and Bison skin, porcupine quills, glass beads. Height: 82.5cm

Bought by George G Heye in Paris and acquired by NMAI in 1929

National Museum of the American Indian, New York, USA.



It looks like an Indian costume

This Indian tunic does seem familiar. It is like the ones worn in westerns by Indian warriors or buffalo hunters in headdresses riding across wide open countryside. The Indians of the prairies in the centre of modern day USA (now known as the Great Plains region) are just one element of America's Indian population. Clothing was for them a major means of artistic expression as well as being used to convey social status. This tunic was made to honour a warrior in about 1820.

Is it a shirt made of buffalo skin?

No. Buffalo skin was too heavy and thick for a shirt - instead it was used for cloaks and tipis to protect from the cold. Making a shirt required the skins of two animals - deer, antelope or mountain sheep - one for the front and the other for the back of the shirt. The hind-quarters of one of the skins would be used for the body of the shirt and the front-quarters would be cut in two to make the sleeves. They can't be seen in this photo but at the bottom of the tunic (front and back) hang the animal's back-feet. The overall shape of the animal was retained so as to retain the power of the beast. This tunic was slipped on over the head and hung down nearly to the knees, like a poncho.

How was the skin prepared?

Firstly the fur was removed and then the leather was tanned -using a solution made from the animal's brain and liver - until its surface was smooth enough to be painted. Europeans were fascinated by how soft and white the Indians were able to make their leather but it wasn't until the nineteenth century that they managed to match the Indians' expertise at tanning.

What do the painted designs mean?

The warrior would have decorated his own tunic - representing his rank and telling of his exploits and prowess in battle. On the right there are fourteen pipes - represented by parallel lines each ending in a triangle. These correspond to the number of battles the owner of the tunic had successfully fought and indicating that the wearer was the 'pipe-carrier' (or leader) at the battles in question. These war pipes, related to the famous peace pipes, were carried into battle as ceremonial objects. The smoke from the war pipes would form a symbolic bridge for communication with the protective spirits that influenced fate. On the left seventeen enemies killed during battle are shown in a stylised manner - a head and torso on a single leg.

Do all their tunic designs show acts of war?

No. Some have designs which are harder to interpret - for example linked to spiritual visions, making a connection with the supernatural world or obtaining the protection of the spirits. Such leather designs act as a sort of social memory; depicting heroic acts on the battlefield, the visions of spiritual leaders or the successes of famous huntsmen.

Does it have fringing that hangs down?

Fringing like this was common on the arms or backs of warriors' tunics and (wrongly) earned them the name of 'scalp shirts' (the scalp is a tuft of hair taken from the head of an enemy, with the skin still attached). In fact this fringing is made from leather thongs and hairs from a horse's mane - sometimes locks of human hair were also used but these were more likely to come from the family of the tunic's owner (denoting ownership and the responsibility to protect the wearer) than from enemies. A warrior earned the honour of decorating his tunic with hair only once he had killed an enemy. So fringing like this became a kind of personal display of the wearer's strength as well as creating a dramatic effect when it moved in the breeze.

Who made the shirts?

As in most traditional societies men and women had very distinct roles. The men were warriors responsible for protecting the group. It was they who dealt with wood, canoes, hunting and so on. The women cultivated crops and took responsibility for food. They also made clothing using animal skins and added decorations made from embroidered glass beads or woven porcupine quills (as here on the shoulders and along the sleeves). The quills were flattened and dyed then sewn with bison sinew thread onto fine strips of buffalo leather. If there were abstract patterns these were created by the women and then the menfolk would draw on their own figurative designs.

Did Indians wear this kind of tunic every day?

Tunics like this were only worn for public ceremonies, for riding into battle or hunting on horseback. Horses only arrived in the Americas via the Spanish colony of New Mexico and they didn't reach the Great Plains until the end of the seventeenth century. Their arrival was to result in deep cultural shifts for the Indian communities. Thanks to horses the Indians could truly master their domain and they were easily able to follow the buffalo migrations. But though hunting on horseback was very effective it also brought with it new conflict as now numerous tribes found themselves hunting on the same territory.

Does this shirt come from a nomadic tribe of buffalo hunters?

No. This tunic is made in a style used by the Mandan people - a tribe of Indians from the Sioux language family who raised their own crops. They lived by the upper Missouri in North Dakota. The buffalo hunting tribes used to live in tipis - conical tents made by stretching buffalo hides over long poles. But the maize-farming tribes of the prairies lived in houses made of mud, only leaving their settlements for periodic hunting or fighting expeditions.

Why are American Indians called 'redskins'?

Not because their skin was actually red, but because when they went into battle (and on other occasions) they used to paint their bodies and faces. The same natural pigments they used to paint their bodies were used to decorate their leather.

Is the Indians' culture still alive today?

Yes, in fact the Indian culture is undergoing something of a renaissance as many Indians are embracing their heritage anew. Indian communities are increasingly getting involved with managing ethnographic museums so as to be sure that their culture and heritage are presented accurately.