Friday, October 31, 2014

The Asian Artistic Tradition

The Power Of Narratives.

There has been an interesting discovery of prehistoric art made in caves of the Indonesian island of Sulawesi that has thrown some doubt on the long-accepted narrative of how art originated as a practice and as an indicator of the development of abstract thinking in the evolution of the human mind. Until this most recent discovery, the oldest examples of cave art had only been found in Western Europe and have been dated back to around forty-thousand years. The Sulawesi cave art is at least as old - if not older - than all of the cave art found in Europe.

Although interesting in and of itself, there is another aspect to the phenomenon of prehistoric cave art that is worth talking about. I have written many times about how history and the historical experience are cornerstones of culture and identity. Personal history defines our individual view of the world and is further shaped and given context by the norms outlined by cultural narratives of society that are drawn from the historical experience. For instance, our American historical experience of fighting against unjust British rule contributes to the ongoing cultural narratives of  freedom-loving American individuals who reject and stand up to tyranny at home and in the world, fostering a national identity of a society of individuals who are fundamentally on the proper side of moral choice who make personal decisions based on an internal mechanisms of reason, and not some social conditioning determined by factors beyond our immediate consciousness. It's all about the narrative.

As this interesting documentary from the BBC suggests, cave art marks a point in human cognitive development when the race began to see, and express through art, deeper meanings in the objects and things around them and thus expand their understanding of their place in the world through abstract thinking about the real world. In other words, cave art reflects an awareness of differences between humans and other animals, hence, art is the indication of an evolving or developing agency. In Western thinking, this notion of personal agency has been a huge influence on social and political ideas.

On the positive side, personal agency lies at the root of the idea of individualism and the concept of individual rights. At the same time, imperialism and white supremacist thinking have justified themselves partly by denying or downplaying the existence of, or potential for, personal agency among the world's non-white races. Although these ideas existed long before the discovery of prehistoric European cave art, the idea that Europeans "invented" art and, thus, became the first group or race to make the cognitive leap into a more sophisticated conceptualization of agency, fits nicely into the narrative of the mature and superior agency of the white race.

As this BBC article covering the story suggests, European cave art marks a significant milestone in human cognitive ability, the implication being that there was some kind of tradition of European reason that can be traced all the way back to the prehistoric era......
For decades, the only evidence of ancient cave art was in Spain and southern France. It led some to believe that the creative explosion that led to the art and science we know today began in Europe.
Similarly, the BBC documentary proposes a narrative that implies a continuity of creative lineage from the cave art of prehistoric France to the remarkable sculpted megaliths of Gobekli Tepe in southern Turkey several thousand years later, that extends further back into antiquity the more familiar  narrative of Western Civilization beginning in what is now Iraq - a region that somehow was "western" in antiquity, but is now Middle Eastern.The narrative implies continuity and associations that can only be described as hopeful and tenuous. But it all supports the narrative and that is what is important.

The BBC article again.....
The discovery of 40,000-year-old cave paintings at opposite ends of the globe suggests that the ability to create representational art had its origins further back in time in Africa, before modern humans spread across the rest of the world........"That's kind of my gut feeling," says Prof Stringer. "The basis for this art was there 60,000 years ago; it may even have been there in Africa before 60,000 years ago and it spread with modern humans".
The cynic within wonders if the idea of an Asian origin to art and reason is such anathema to the western narrative (and present-day political sensibilities) that accepting Asia as the birthplace of creative expression is like daylight to a vampire. No, if Europe can't be the birthplace of art (and subsequently science), then the Asians certainly won't be allowed to claim it! They would rather give it to Africa.

Yet, the BBC documentary contradicts this hypotheses that there needs or is likely to be  common African origin. According to it, the imagery of cave art is the result of stimuli on the human brain that is experienced during "trance-like" episodes. That's why, it is suggested, cave art from 30,000 years ago in France resembles cave art from Africa 2,000 years ago - shaman enter the trance-like state and return with trippy ideas that they then paint onto the walls of caves. Similarity between cave art as distant as France is from Indonesia need not mean a common origin elsewhere - it could be the result of a common human physiological response to trance-like states possibly induced by hallucinogens (why else would - or could - anyone crawl into the deepest, darkest, recesses of prehistoric caves to draw polka dot covered animals and stencils of their hands unless they were fucked.up).

But cynicism aside, it is hard not to notice the parallel of the white-washing of Asians out of this country's  cultural narrative (itself occasionally a feat of historical revisionism) and what seems to amount to a similarly aversive ad-hoc denial of Asia as the birthplace of art. If it makes people feel any better about it, it is likely that the Asians who produced this ancient rock art were of a different ilk to present-day Asians.


  1. I am an American man, and I have decided to boycott American women. In a nutshell, American women are the most likely to cheat on you, to divorce you, to get fat, to steal half of your money in the divorce courts, don’t know how to cook or clean, don’t want to have children, etc. Therefore, what intelligent man would want to get involved with American women?

    American women are generally immature, selfish, extremely arrogant and self-centered, mentally unstable, irresponsible, and highly unchaste. The behavior of most American women is utterly disgusting, to say the least.

    This blog is my attempt to explain why I feel American women are inferior to foreign women (non-American women), and why American men should boycott American women, and date/marry only foreign (non-American) women.


    1. I like American women - especially the outspoken ones.

  2. Fuck off you piece of shit.

    You "honorable" "Christian" hypocrites created this mess amongst many other messes.

    Go clean it up you fucking degenerates instead of spreading your filthy culture and "Christian values".

  3. Interesting. There will definitely be some re-visioning going on. If the white supremacists are involved, it is to be expected.

    You really think white people would rather give that kind of credit to Africa? Why?

    1. Rashnu

      The science community is self-evidently giving that kind of credit to Africa. Why they would prefer that is is anyone's guess - of course I don't preclude African origin as a possibility.

    2. I'm just suspecting that they wouldn't have any big reservations about not giving that kind of credit to Africa. It fits the purpose of the current racial hierarchy well.

      Maybe it's their ego. I'm reminded of a video I saw of a white nationalist (white supremacist) meeting where in one part they were coming up with reasons (improvising, not even attempting pretend they were being scientific, pure ego stroking) to explain why they are still superior to Asians even though many Asians have been outperforming whites in education (now and in history).

    3. I would probably agree with that. In the global geo-political climate, Africa is not a cultural and economic threat to western sensibilities. Asia need not be a threat, for that matter, but xenophobia seems to be the default position on anything to Asian.

  4. I really don't know what is wrong with white men. So many absolutely have to prove their superiority over Asian men. They don't mind losing out in some regards to black men (perhaps because they aren't as threatened as you've said), but with Asian men they go absolutely nuclear. I think that people with power and privilege tend to fight harder to hang on to it than people without it tend to fight to attain it.

    1. Apollyon

      That is an interesting point. I think that the white power structures are threatened by black men - they just don't have the same degree of cultural and social backing to make expressions of it acceptable.

      Plus, Asian economic and even military power represents the first time in about 300-400 years that the west has had any serious threat to its own position as the center of human progress. That is threatening - hence, even something as seemingly innocuous as discovering that Asian had artistic expression (i.e. the basis of art and science) as the same time or probably even before the west is something that cannot be tolerated.

    2. It's not "human progress" they care about.

      They want full control of the world. Asians stand in the way.

      I can't tell if it's genetic or culturally programmed. However, I can't think of another group of "ethical god-fearing Christians" who rape, slaughter, steal from every non-white group on the planet, and then calls it white man's "burden".

      The resemblance to "psycopath" is uncanny.

    3. This has been the strategy of the Anglo countries for several centuries now. It has been a smashing success and there is no end in sight, also, because you Asian-Americans support America rather than your countries of origin. In fact, the situation of all countries other than America is utterly hopeless. Many Non-Americans delude themselves about their prospects and chances, those who see things clearly, have no choice but to give up.

      No, it's not genetic, it's cultural. In Europe we have many different peoples with different national psychologies.