This paper takes a postcolonial perspective on the existing canon of art history and examines to what extent the low representation of non-European and non-North American arts is a continuity of European colonial times and which steps could contribute to decolonizing the canon.
Postcolonial research asks how colonial rule and domination have manifested themselves in science, politics, economics, literature, art, law, popular culture, and everyday contexts and continue to have an impact into our present. There’s no dispute that the prefix "post" does not refer to a final status, but to continuity.
The topic is gaining ever more increased relevance resulting from current globalization processes and the accompanying internationalization of art, which pose new challenges to art history, art criticism and exhibitions. Thus, in recent years, the European art system has begun to self-reflect on its own art historical canonization in distinction to possible other art histories and to modify its criteria of exclusion and inclusion for canonization in such a way that a – still limited but – constantly growing number of artists from the formerly colonized territories are now represented. Nevertheless, in Germany, colonial history seems to be only hesitantly recognized as part of general education, and also the art historical discourse in Germany shows comparatively little interest in the international and interdisciplinary debates on postcolonialism. Due to the fact that German art history still remains largely silent on postcolonial questions, and that the German government did not recognize the colonial crimes in present-day Namibia as genocide until 2021, voices of activists of color are growing louder; and it shows the need for further debate.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Canon and Canonization
3. Colonialism and its impact on the Canon
3.1 Coloniality and Othering
3.2 Marginalization of non-European art
3.3 Specific marginalization of African art
3.4 Decolonization of the Canon
4. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Key Themes
This essay explores the postcolonial facets of the existing art history canon, specifically investigating how the systematic underrepresentation of non-European and non-North American artists reflects ongoing colonial structures and identifying potential strategies for decolonization.
- The theoretical exploration of canonization and its role in maintaining hegemony.
- The impact of colonial strategies, specifically "othering", on art historical discourse.
- Mechanisms of marginalization concerning non-European and specifically African art.
- Practical approaches and measures for decolonizing the art historical canon within the German context.
Excerpt from the Book
3.2 Marginalization of non-European art
The discourse around human races as well as the practice of othering was also reflected in the visual arts - an artistic practice perceived as 'different' was needed in the colonized territories in order to define the self: Thus, art schools emerged in the colonies, but the African artists learning there were regarded as "naïves who had to be taught new techniques". Non-European cultures were assigned a place at "early stages of development" and were assumed to be primitive – consequently, their art was also discussed as 'primitive art'. Greve also notes that while assessing art, generalizations and simplifications "that are considered unscientific for European art", are permissible for non-European art. If non-European art is assessed by the white art system, this is usually accompanied by an equation of the artists with their works and occurs especially "when the artists' own marginalization is the central theme of the works and thus can function as a legitimization of difference to the white system".
The marginalization of non-European art and Black people is also reflected in art theory: The discipline of art history was institutionalized at the end of the 19th century "at the height of colonialism and imperialism [...] and is by the historical context of its foundation scientifically and mentality-wise rooted in a racist colonial culture". To this day, it seems self-evident at many German-speaking institutions that 'art history' means Western European art alone – only the University of Heidelberg calls the subject 'European art history'. Thus, the term itself is marked as an umbrella term, where disciplines like 'East Asian art history' or 'African studies' branch as subgroups but still are rooted in European colonialism. This lack of differentiation goes back to European ignorance, which Greve calls "imperious non-knowledge" and contrasts it with a specialized knowledge about European art, such as about "detailed issues and questions in the work of a Dutch artist". She criticizes that this non-knowledge, however, is not seen as a lack of knowledge in the white knowledge system.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Presents the postcolonial perspective on the art canon and highlights the urgency of addressing colonial legacies in German art history.
2. Canon and Canonization: Explores how institutions define the 'canon' and how this process reinforces social identity and exclusionary mechanisms.
3. Colonialism and its impact on the Canon: Examines the colonial history and ideologies that shaped, and continue to shape, the exclusion of non-European perspectives.
3.1 Coloniality and Othering: Analyzes the colonial strategy of 'othering' and how race was constructed to maintain power dynamics and hierarchy.
3.2 Marginalization of non-European art: Discusses how non-European art was historically categorized as 'primitive' and subjected to lower standards of academic rigor.
3.3 Specific marginalization of African art: Focuses on the historically stereotyped and exoticized reception of African art and the challenges faced by contemporary African artists in Western-dominated systems.
3.4 Decolonization of the Canon: Offers potential strategies for decolonization, including the sensitization to Euro-centrism and the diversification of perspectives in teaching and curation.
4. Conclusion: Summarizes findings and emphasizes the necessity of treating decolonization as a long-term, ongoing commitment to dismantle structural racism in the arts.
Keywords
Postcolonialism, Canon, Canonization, Decolonization, Othering, Euro-centrism, Art History, Marginalization, Structural Racism, African Art, White Perspective, Colonial Legacy, Cultural Identity, Art Education, Hegemony.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper examines the intersection of colonial history and the contemporary art history canon, focusing specifically on how colonial structures continue to marginalize non-European art.
What are the primary thematic areas explored?
The main themes include the definition and mechanism of canonization, the concept of 'othering', the historical marginalization of non-European and African art, and practical methods for institutional decolonization.
What is the ultimate research objective?
The paper aims to identify how the art canon can be decolonized to address its failure to represent diverse global perspectives and to dismantle implicit Eurocentric norms.
Which scientific approach is utilized?
The author employs a postcolonial theoretical framework, analyzing institutional literature and art historical discourse to highlight exclusionary practices in the German-speaking art world.
What does the main body of the work cover?
It covers theoretical definitions of the canon, the historical construction of 'othering', case studies on the marginalization of African art, and specific recommendations for re-evaluating art education and exhibition practices.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
The most characterizing keywords are postcolonialism, canonization, marginalization, 'othering', and Euro-centrism.
How does the paper define the role of 'white' perspective in art history?
The paper argues that the 'white' perspective is often mistakenly treated as an objective, universal norm, rather than one subjective viewpoint among many, which hinders the inclusion of non-European art.
What specific challenges do contemporary African artists face according to the text?
Artists are often treated as 'autodidactic' or exoticized, with their work being judged through the narrow lens of 'Western normality' rather than as part of a sophisticated, self-determined global art trajectory.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Patricia Reisyan (Autor:in), 2022, The postcolonial canon and steps towards decolonization, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1473415
