|
Of Art
and Hungry Africans
Henry Mzili Mujunga
(Uganda)
In Ouagadougou the
Burkinabe artists were full of debate. Nikiema Peter, as
one of them was called, helped me understand and
appreciate the magnitude of the problem of contemporary
art in Africa. The question I asked him was “For whom
are we producing the art?”
The African in Burkina Faso did not understand Nikiema
Peter or so he believed, they called him lazy and crazy;
they did not buy his art. So now he wants to go to the
West where he hopes to be treated with importance. This
seems to be logical and indeed explains why most African
intellectuals run to the West. After all, their
education prepares them for the West not Africa.
During the Bamako round of debate, I asserted that there
was no Art before the coming of the white man into
Africa. I made this conclusive remark based on the
description of Art in contemporary Africa. If by art one
means the multitude of paintings, sculptures, drawings
and other graphical based sources of aesthetic
stimulants, then such art did not exist in Africa before
the coming of the Westerners.
In pre-colonial Africa there were skilled people who
produced objects to satisfy the spiritual, sexual and
material needs of the people. As long as these needs
were appeased, there was a natural demand for these
objects within the host society.
With the advent of Christianity (and to a small extent
Islam since the Arabs were more interested in trade)
these objects were perceived as a threat to the advance
of Christianity as they occupied a status in society not
so different from that which Christianity desired.
Consequently, they were discarded as satanic and evil.
Prior to this, the African perceived the manufacture and
use of these objects as an integral part of his
day-to-day struggle with life and death.
Art as we know it today was introduced in schools during
colonial times as an extracurricular activity. It has
been practiced mainly in the form of painting and
drawing. The use of the human figure in its naturalistic
form was encouraged in school and so was the reference
to and imitation of nature a point of major emphasis in
most African schools. This practice has persisted up to
today in most institutions of higher learning in Africa.
But at about the time when Art was being introduced to
the African, Europe was being introduced to objects of
spiritual, sexual and material symbolism in form of
masks and icons from West Africa. So there was an
exchange of cultural values, although this exchange was
initiated and controlled by the West. Africa only played
a complimentary role.
Barely a century later, the West began regurgitating,
albeit in a distorted manner, the values in these
objects of spiritual, sexual and material symbolism
stolen from Africa. They concocted such bizarre concepts
like cubism, expressionism and fauvism, in an attempt to
describe what they did not understand and yet wanted to
classify them under broad term art. This began the long
and tiresome line of isms. In fact, the inability to
comprehend these objects could be the partial
explanation for the rejection by Western critics of the
fore runners of modern art (an alarmed journalist called
them fauves or animals). It is a pity that we in Africa
never took a stand in these matters and are now
embracing these distortions stalk and root. Today you
will find us talking passionately about conceptual and
post modern art! The contemporary African artist will
ably explain the emotive, conceptual and technical
aspect of his work using Western language of art
appreciation. These principles and elements of
manufacturing and appreciating art rely mostly on the
sensory rather than the psycho-motive and emotive
interpretative qualities of art. From this point of
view, art becomes an object to be enjoyed visually for
the satisfaction of hedonistic (pleasure seeking)
desires of the individual. It does not attempt to answer
the person’s anxieties about life and death.
I am aware that at one time in Europe art served the
same spiritual needs as it did in Africa. This is
evident in ancient Greek and Roman arts. The Italian
masters of the Renaissance worked under religious
patronage and their nude paintings and sculptures attest
to their spiritual and sexual consciousness. Equally,
the expressionists dwelt on human emotion to generate
content for their artwork. There seems to be a massive
confusion about the real purpose of art. But is it the
purpose that is important or the fact that art is?
Should we seek to explain the meaning of art?
I have been pursuing art for almost ten years and still
do not know what it is all about except that it adds up
within the economic reality of my condition. I can
produce objects which satisfy my intellectual and
creative needs as well as good enough to attract some
one else (usually a Western patron) to buy them. This
way I satisfy my emotional as well as material needs.
That makes a lot of sense to me and I guess it would to
the average African who is barely getting by one day at
a time.
In Ouagadougou we talked of hunger. Nounkouni, a simple
artist, put it squarely that the African is hungry. This
is the reality that we all know but do not confess. I
find it difficult to think straight on an empty stomach,
unless what I am thinking about is relevant to my quest
for food. Empower the African materially and, suddenly
all this confusion will be over.
|
