Jan 30th

Anderson

Anderson's writing examines the use of art by Eskimos. The inuits used art an many different ways. They would make art out of ivory and bones among other things and took great pride in there work. An example of this is how the parents would extensively decorate there children's toys( if supplies are available). Women would get tattoos not for religious reasons but instead just to be aesthetically pleasing. They used art to explain there transcendental views and show how the supernatural world, social world and natural world come together. It was also used to show the social relationships that they had. An example is how when a man became a shaman, he then wore a special belt to show his position.
After Anderson examines the Inuits meaning of aesthetics, he provides a thesis. "Art is culturally significant meaning, skillfully encoded in an affecting, sensous medium". I guess I feel as if the question of "what is art?" is over discussed. Regardless of what point you prove, there will be someone disagreeing with you.


Suzuki

Suzuki is comparing tea and the art of zen. Both of these aim at achieving peacefulness. He compares tea and zen by saying they both have the same common goal of achieving the elimination of unneccessities. After this he compares tea to a Buddhist as wine is to a Christian. Reading this writing really has not done much for me. I feel as if he is overanalyzing tea.


Oguibe

Oguibe wrote about how when artists come from other cultures, they are expected to produce that type of work. I don't really agree with this stereotype. Although cultures have a huge influence on the type of artists, it should not be expected that everyone from a specific culture should produce there cultures artwork.