Sixteen Experimental Investigations from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory, Hugo Münsterberg [top fiction books of all time TXT] 📗

for as

the product of practical considerations alone. It may therefore be

dismissed as offering no especial points of interest for this inquiry.

 

[2] Cushing, F.H.: ‘Pueblo Pottery and Zuñi Culture-growth,’

Rep. of Bur. of Ethnol., 1882-3, p. 473.

 

Next in the order of primitive development are the arts of binding and

weaving. The stone axe or arrowhead, for example, was bound to a

wooden staff, and had to be lashed with perfect evenness,[3] and when

in time the material and method of fastening changed, the geometrical

forms of this careful binding continued to be engraved at the juncture

of blade and handle of various implements. It should be noted,

however, that these binding-patterns, in spite of their superfluous

character, remained symmetrical.

 

[3] Haddon, A.C.: ‘Evolution in Art,’ London, 1895, pp. 84 ff.

 

On the great topic of symmetry in weaving, monographs could be

written. Here it is sufficient to recall[4] that the absolutely

necessary technique of weaving in all its various forms of

interlacing, plaiting, netting, embroidering, etc., implies order,

uniformity, and symmetry. The chance introduction of a thread or withe

of a different color, brings out at once an ordered pattern in the

result; the crowding together or pressing apart of elements, a

different alternation of the woof, a change in the order of

intersection, all introduce changes by the natural necessities of

construction which have the effect of purpose. So far, then, as the

simple weaving is concerned, the æsthetic demand for symmetry may be

discounted. While it may be operative, the forms can be explained by

the necessities of construction, and we have no right to assume an

æsthetic motive.

 

[4] Holmes, W.H.: ‘Textile Art in its Relation to the

Development of Form and Ornament,’ Rep. of Bur. of Ethnol.,

1884-5, p. 195.

 

The treatment of human and animal forms in weaving is, however,

indicative of a direct pleasure in symmetry. The human form appears

almost exclusively (much schematized) en face. When in profile, as

for instance in Mexican and South American work, it is doubled—that

is, two figures are seen face to face. Animal figures, on the other

hand, are much used as row-ornaments in profile.[5] It would seem that

only the linear conception of the row or band with its suggestions of

movement in one direction, justified the use of profile (e.g., in

Peruvian woven stuffs), since it is almost always seen under those

conditions, indicating that a limited rectangular space is felt as

satisfactorily filled only by a symmetrical figure.[6] Moreover, and

still more confirmatory of this theory, even these row-pattern

profiles are immensely distorted toward symmetry, and every

‘degradation’ of form, to use Professor Haddon’s term, is in the

direction of symmetry. (See Fig. 1.)

 

[5] Reiss, W., und Stubel, A.: ‘Todtenfeld von Ancon,’ Berlin,

1880-7, Bd. II.

 

[6] Hein, W.: ‘Die Verwendung der Menschen-Gestalt in

Flechtwerken,’ Mitteil. d. Anthrop. Gesellsch. in Wien, Bd.

XXI.

 

[Illustration: Fig. 1.]

 

The shape of primitive pottery is conditioned by the following

influences: The shapes of utensils preceding clay, such as skins,

gourds, shells, etc., which have been imitated, the forms of basket

models, and the conditions of construction (formation by the hands).

For all these reasons, most of these shapes are circular. The only (in

the strict sense) symmetrical shapes found are of unmistakably animal

origin, and it is interesting to notice the gradual return of these to

the eurhythmic form; puma, bird, frog, etc., gradually changing into

head, tail and leg excrescences, and then handles and nodes

(rectangular panels), upon a round bowl or jar L, as shown in the

figures. In fact, in ancient American pottery,[7] at least, all the

symmetrical ornamentations can be traced to the opposition of head and

tail, and the sides between them, of these animal forms. But beyond

this there is no degradation of the broad outline of the design. The

head and tail, and sides, become respectively handles and nodes—but

the symmetry becomes only more and more emphasized. And as in the case

of textiles, the ornaments of the rectangular spaces given by the

nodes are strikingly symmetrical. Many of these are from animal

motives, and nearly always heads are turned back over the body, tails

exaggerated, or either or both doubled, to get a symmetrical effect.

Although much of the symmetrical ornament, again, is manifestly from

textile models, its symmetrical character is so carefully preserved

against the suggestions of the circular form that a direct pleasure in

its symmetry may be inferred. (See Figs. 2-7.)

 

[7] Cushing, F.H.: op. cit.; Holmes, W.H.: three articles on

pottery, Rep. of Bur. of Ethnol., 1882-83, p. 265, p. 367, and

p. 443.

 

[Illustration: Fig. 2]

 

[Illustration: Fig. 3]

 

[Illustration: Fig. 4]

 

The subject of drawing can be here only touched upon, but the results

of study go to show, in general, two main directions of primitive

expression: pictorial representation, aiming at truth of life, and

symbolic ornament. The drawings of Australians, Hottentots and

Bushmen, and the carvings of the Esquimaux and of the prehistoric men

of the reindeer period show remarkable vigor and naturalness; while

the ornamentation of such tribes as the South Sea Islanders has a

richness and formal beauty that compare favorably with the decoration

of civilized contemporaries. But these two types of art do not always

keep pace with each other. The petroglyphs of the North American

Indians[8] exhibit the greatest irregularity, while their tattooing is

extremely regular and symmetrical. The Brazilian savage [9] draws

freehand in a very lively and grotesque manner, but his patterns are

regular and carefully developed. Again, not all have artistic talents

in the same direction. Dr. Schurtz, in his ‘Ornamentik der Aino,’[10]

says: “There are people who show a decided impulse for the direct

imitation of nature, and especially for the representation of events

of daily life, as dancing, hunting, fishing, etc. It is, however,

remarkable that a real system of ornamentation is scarcely ever

developed from pictorial representations of this kind; that, in fact,

the people who carry out these copies of everyday scenes with especial

preference, are in general less given to covering their utensils with

a rich ornamentive decoration.”[11] Drawing and ornament, as the

products of different tendencies, may therefore be considered

separately.

 

[8] Mallery, Garrick: ‘Pictographs of the North American

Indians,’ Rep. of Bur. of Ethnol., 1882-3, p. 13.

 

[9] Von den Steinen, Karl: ‘Unter den Naturvôlkern

Zentral-Brasiliens,’ Berlin, 1894.

 

[10] Internal. Archiv s. Ethnog., Bd. IX.

 

[11] Cf. Andrée, Richard: ‘Ethnographische Parallelen,’ Neue

Folge, Leipzig, 1889, S. 59.

 

The reason for the divergence of drawing and ornament is doubtless the

original motive of ornamentation, which is found in the clan or totem

ideas. Either to invoke protection or to mark ownership, the totem

symbol appears on all instruments and utensils; it has been shown,

indeed, that practically all primitive ornament is based on totemic

motives.[12] Now, since a very slight suggestion of the totem given by

its recognized symbol is sufficient for the initiated, the extreme of

conventionalization and degradation of patterns is allowable, and is

observed to take place. The important point to be noted in this

connection is, however, that all these changes are toward symmetry.

The most striking examples might be indefinitely multiplied, and are

to be found in the appended references (see Figs. 8 and 9).

 

[12] Haddon, op. cit.; Frazer, J.G.: ‘Totemism,’ 1887;

Grosse, Ernst: Anfänge der Kunst,’ Freiburg i. B. u. Leipzig,

1894.

[Illustration: Fig. 5.]

 

[Illustration: Fig. 6.]

 

[Illustration: Fig. 7.]

 

We may distinguish here, also, between the gradual disintegration and

degradation of pattern toward symmetry, as seen in the examples just

given, and the deliberate distortion of figures for a special purpose.

This is strikingly shown in the decorative art of the Indians of the

North Pacific coast. They systematically represent their totem

animals—their only decorative motives—as split in symmetrical

sections, and opened out flat on the surface which is to be

covered[13] (see Fig. 11). Dr. Boas argues that their purpose is to

get in all the received symbols, or to show the whole animal, but,

however this may be, every variation introduces symmetry even where it

is difficult to do so, as in the case, for instance, of bracelets,

hat-brims, etc. (Fig. 10). This may in some cases be due to the

symmetrical suggestions of the human body in tattooing,[14] but it

must be so in comparatively few.

 

[13] Boas, Franz: ‘Decorative Art of the Indians of the North Pacific

Coast,’ Bulletin of Am. Mus. of Nat. Hist., Vol. IX.

 

[14] Mallery, G.: op. cit.; Haddon, A.C.: op. cit., p. 257;

‘Decorative Art of British New Guinea,’ Cunningham Memoir X., Royal

Irish Acad., 1894, p. 26.

 

[Illustration: Fig. 8.]

 

[Illustration: Fig. 9.]

 

[Illustration: Fig. 10]

 

The primitive picture has for its object not only to impart

information, but to excite the very definite pleasure of recognition

of a known object. All explorers agree in their accounts of the

savage’s delight in his own naïve efforts at picture making. All such

drawings show in varying degrees the same characteristics; first of

all, an entire lack of symmetry. In a really great number of examples,

including drawings and picture-writing from all over the world, I

have not found one which showed an attempt at symmetrical arrangement.

Secondly, great life and movement, particularly in the drawings of

animals. Thirdly, an emphasis of the typical characteristics, the

logical marks, amounting sometimes to caricature. The primitive man

draws to tell a story, as children do. He gives with real power what

interests him, and puts in what he knows ought to be there, even if it

is not seen, but he is so engrossed by his interest in the imitated

object as to neglect entirely its relation to a background.

 

[Illustration: FIG. 11]

 

Now, this very antithesis of ornament and picture is enlightening as

to the dawn of æsthetic feeling, and the strongest confirmation of our

hypothesis of an original impulse to symmetry in art. In the

ornamentation of objects the content or meaning of the design is

already supplied by the merest hint of the symbol which is the

practical motive of all ornamentation. The savage artist need,

therefore, concern himself no more about it, and the form of his

design is free to take whatever shape is demanded either by the

conditions of technique and the surface to be ornamented, or by the

natural æsthetic impulse. We have found that technical conditions

account for only a small part of the observed symmetry in pattern, and

the inference to a natural tendency to symmetry is clear. Pictorial

representation, on the other hand, is enjoyed by the primitive man

merely as an imitation, of which he can say, ‘This is that animal’—to

paraphrase Aristotle’s Poetics. He is thus constrained to reproduce

the form as it shows meaning, and to ignore it as form, or as his

natural motor impulses would make it.

 

To sum up the conclusions reached by this short survey of the field of

primitive art, it is clear that much of the symmetry appearing in

primitive art is due (1) to the conditions of construction, as in the

form of dwellings, binding-patterns, weaving and textile patterns

generally; (2) to convenience in use, as in the shapes of spears,

arrows, knives, two-handled baskets and jars; (3) to the imitation of

animal forms, as in the shapes of pottery, etc. On the other hand (1)

a very great deal of symmetrical ornament maintains itself against

the suggestions of the shape to which it is applied, as the ornaments

of baskets, pottery, and all rounded objects; and (2) all distortion,

disintegration, degradation of pattern-motives, often so marked as all

but to destroy their meaning, is in the direction of geometrical

symmetry. In short it