Rock Art Aesthetics and Cultural Appropriation

Author(s): Thomas Heyd

Source: The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 61, No. 1 (Winter, 2003), pp. 37-
46
Published by: Wiley on behalf of The American Society for Aesthetics
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1559111
Accessed: 09-06-2016 21:39 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley, The American Society for Aesthetics are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism

This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 THOMAS HEYD

Rock Art Aesthetics and Cultural Appropriation

Marks on rocks, painted, engraved, or sculpted, human beings find useful and to transform it
can be found worldwide, wherever there are suit- for their own use in ways that other species
able surfaces. In modem times, archaeologists supposedly cannot even imagine.2
and anthropologists increasingly have begun To appropriate something is to make it one's
studying such marks in relation to their material property, which entails a right to privileged use
and social contexts, insofar as available. Fre- and to restrict access to it. Generally, this right
quently, such marks, moreover, display values is claimed on the basis of transfer in the course
such as representational realism, abstraction of of legitimate purchase, gift, profit or earnings,
figures, attention to line and paint application, traditional ownership, and, ultimately, through
concern with the quality of the surfaces upon original acquisition from "the storehouse of
which paintings or engravings are placed, com- nature."3 When appropriation is seen as morally
position, and so on, any of which values may problematic, this is because it is perceived as
elicit aesthetic appreciation. 1 not legitimate, not fair, or, in general, not atten-
Although apparently benign, such attention to tive to the rights and needs of those with prior
marks on rocks from the aesthetic point of view claims to the items appropriated. Notoriously,
may become subject to criticism, because it the appropriation of indigenous peoples' lands
may be supposed to entail a (problematic) form in the Americas and Australia, on the basis of a
of cultural appropriation. In the following, I begin false application of the concept of terra nullius,
by briefly reviewing the notion of cultural is a case in point.
appropriation and the circumstances under
which it may be seen as problematic. After this, ii. Cultural appropriation and its problems. In
I take note of claims to the effect that rock art the 1990s, the appropriation of culture, that is,
aesthetics entails problematic cultural appropri- cultural appropriation, came into the spotlight
ation and show that, given proper care, the in countries such as Canada, the United States,
alleged problems can be avoided. I conclude by and Australia in the context of the acquisition
arguing that a strong case can be made for the and transformation by members of mainstream
aesthetic appreciation of marks on rocks. society of ideas, images, and art styles originally
generated by indigenous peoples and other
minority groups. Criticisms have been raised,
I. APPROPRIATION AND CULTURAL APPROPRIATION for example, with regard to stories adopted (and
adapted) from certain Canadian First Nations
i. Appropriation. As of late, appropriation as groups; paintings reflecting imagery found on
such has been treated as problematic on the West Coast Native totem poles; and music, such
basis that it is equated with an illegitimate bor- as the blues, originally created by African
rowing or taking of a valued item. Nonetheless, Americans.4
until recently, appropriation had been considered Cultural appropriation may be seen as prob-
in a positive light, and even as a telltale mark of lematic in at least three ways. First, when
humanity. It was understood to be a special cultural appropriation is perceived as the illegit-
capacity to separate out from nature what imate taking of a cultural good, it constitutes
The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 61:1 Winter 2003

This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
38 The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism

a straightforward moral problem. For instance, 2. Borrowed ideas, images, and art styles from
if cultural appropriation leads to a loss of potential indigenous and minority groups may end up
income for the originary group, as may occur being used in ways that make difficult any
when a musical style such as the blues, jazz, further use of such cultural goods by repre-
and hip hop, or when Native North American sentatives of the original culture. The swas-
images on T-shirts, are marketed by outsiders tika sign, for example, cannot ever more be
to the originary groups, it may be perceived used naively, at least internationally, since
as unfair. The unauthorized taking of ideas, its adoption by the National Socialist (Nazi)
images, and art styles from First Nations people Party of Germany. Such borrowings cumula-
and other minority groups has been seen as a tively may erode a people's capacity for self-
continuation of European colonial appropriation representation.
of land and other resources, or, alternatively, as 3. Insofar as the cultural appropriation is per-
a continuation of the subjugation into slavery formed by people with different standards
of African American people. As such, cultural than those prevalent in the original culture,
appropriation has been perceived to entail the application of those alien standards to
something equivalent to theft.5 their cultural goods may entail a subversion
Second, cultural appropriation may also be of the original culture's voice.7
seen as a cognitive problem, which itself may 4. In cases in which cultural goods, such as
lead to a moral problem. Insofar as cultural certain images, function as insignia that cus-
goods go through cultural appropriation they tomarily are subject to authorization for use,
may undergo certain changes, which may and that define the identity of a group, unau-
threaten their perceived authenticity.6 It has thorized use is equivalent to "the assumption
been proposed, for example, that the blues of a right," and in these cases, cultural appro-
played by white people will fail to have certain priation may literally be the appropriation of
essential features because white people lack the identity.8
necessary experiences of suffering that are
particular to African American history. The iii. Discussion. Criticisms of cultural appropri-
inauthenticity of the appropriated art form may, ation such as these have themselves become
moreover, lead to a moral problem insofar as subject to objections. Where some see cultural
individuals both within and outside the origin- appropriation as theft, others see it as a legit-
ating culture may end up with cultural experi- imate, common (or even necessary) ingredient
ences of lesser value than they might have had. in cultural creation (and re-creation). Where
Third, cultural appropriation is also said to cultural appropriation is seen as leading to the
bring about a perceived ontological problem by deprivation of income legitimately belonging
possibly threatening the identity of members of to the groups that originally produced the cul-
the originary groups of the cultural goods in tural good, it is also seen as a propitious way of
question. In this way, it may also entail a moral generating interest in the source group, thereby
problem, since it may undermine the survival of likely increasing its fortunes and standing.
such groups as distinct cultural collectivities Where some see cultural appropriation as lead-
and, ultimately, their standing as capable of ing to inauthenticity, others see valuable cultural
self-governance. The threat may be seen to arise development. Where some see threats to the
in at least four ways. identity of indigenous and minority groups
in such appropriations, others see cultural
1. The appropriation of cultural goods by out- appropriations as ways in which hybrid cul-
siders to the original culture may lead to tures come about, which themselves may
faulty portrayal of the members of that become reappropriated by the original groups
culture through misrepresentation. As a as leavening for their own cultural renais-
result of such misrepresentations, peoples sances. In general, where some see harms to
from small-scale societies may alternatively indigenous, minority, and even mainstream
enter our imaginations in a caricatured cultures, others see overall benefits, which, on
fashion as "savage,"" "noble," "childlike," consequentialist grounds, supposedly justify
and so on. cultural appropriation.9

This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Heyd Rock Art Aesthetics and Cultural Appropriation 39

We cannot hope to fully address these issues not to say, however, that factual knowledge and
here, but may observe that the discussion science have nothing to contribute to aesthetic
crucially revolves around the question whether appreciation; on the contrary.
cultural appropriation is harmful or beneficial, When aesthetically appreciating something, it
taking note of its effect both globally, with seems obvious that we would pay close atten-
regard to humanity in general, and locally, with tion to the immediate "sensory givens." This is
regard to the groups from whom cultural goods relevant with regard to aesthetic appreciation of
are being borrowed or taken.10 Although, as just the natural environment and of works in the
noted, cultural appropriation often may be prob- visual arts, for example, but not with regard to
lematic, there are examples that show that works in literature, which may equally be
appropriation may be rather benign, innocent, rendered via diverse media (such as through
or beneficial. Consider, for example, the appro- sound recordings, tactile script, oral performance,
priation by rap musicians of stale mainstream handwritten, and so on) and, if printed, via
songs, bringing those songs back to (a new) life; diverse fonts, formats, or kinds of paper, and
or the appropriation, both by professional and so forth. Aesthetic appreciation in the case of
amateur dancers worldwide (even in Japan), of literature requires imaginative participation
traditional, Gypsy flamenco dance styles; or the above all. In fact, the role of the imagination is
appropriation (and redeployment) by visual essential even in the case of the aesthetic appre-
artists, such as de Chirico or Mimmo Paladino, ciation of the visual arts. For instance, aesthetic
of classical imagery long relegated to the museums. appreciation of a landscape painting relies on
The self-conscious copying of historically "great our imaginative attention to the way actual
art" in the 1980s, by artists such as Sherrie Levine, landscapes have appeared to us in the past to
Elaine Sturtevant, and Mike Bidlo, labeled perceive the particular ways in which the artist
"appropriation art," is an extreme example of challenges, complements, or twists our set ways
appropriation for the sake of a revitalization of art. of seeing.
Given that at least some cultural appropri- Aesthetic appreciation also calls for factual
ations may indeed be innocent, and possibly knowledge, since, to be fully appreciated, things
even useful, either globally or to the indigenous need to be understood within their context.
or minority groups affected through the stimu- Notably, a painting with paint drips all over has
lus that they may provide to cultural develop- a different aesthetic value if created in the
ment, we may (roughly) distinguish between Quattrocento than if made in the twentieth
"problematic" and "unproblematic" appropri- century (for example, by Jackson Pollock); the
ation. So, is the aesthetic appreciation of marks former likely is the result of an accident, whereas
on rocks, commonly called rock art, a form of the latter finds a particular significance in the
cultural appropriation, and is it to be considered history of painting styles. So, insofar as it calls
problematic? for sensory acquaintance with, imaginative par-
ticipation in, and knowledgeable consideration of
things, aesthetic appreciation requires informa-
II. AESTHETIC APPROPRIATION OF MARKS ON ROCKS tion (possiblK including information supplied
by science).'
i. Aesthetic appreciation. Aesthetic interest in Nonetheless, even while aesthetic appreci-
marks on rocks is on the increase among non- ation may be guided by factual information, it is
indigenous as well as indigenous laypersons and evident that appreciation is deeply culture-
rock art researchers. While scientific interest in bound. Since it has to do with the way things
rock art entails a focus on theory-dependent appear to each of us as persons grounded in par-
interpretation of observational givens, aesthetic ticular cultural milieux, aesthetic appreciation
appreciation entails a focus on the appearance will be conditioned by the modes of perceiving,
of those givens. While in order to arrive at satis- imagining, and thinking that individuals have
factory explanations, scientific research tends to acquired over time and in their particular cul-
abstract from the way things seem to us, aes- tural contexts. This fact has important conse-
thetic appreciation makes the way things appear quences for the appreciation of manifestations
to us its subject matter. As we will see, that is across cultures, especially when those cultures

This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
40 The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism

are remote from each other in structure, geog- ii. Aesthetic appropriation and its problems.
raphy, or time, since in those cases it is likely that Most marks on rocks that are considered "rock
ways of aesthetically appreciating will be quite art" were made by people with very different
different. ways of perceiving, imagining, and thinking
Notably, while large-scale societies, such as from those of people rooted in mainstream his-
have been constituted by Chinese, Indian, and toric European cultures.14 In this paper, I shall
European peoples, have developed distinct and not attempt to determine whether these marks
explicit categories for things produced by rec- on rock justifiably may be called "art." 15 It is
ognized artists primarily for the sake of aes- certain, in any case, that, insofar as contempor-
thetic pleasure, and a vocabulary for the critique ary people of European cultural descent see
and appraisal of such items as art, small-scale marks on rocks as related to what they consider
societies may have more integrated ways of cat- art, they bring into play deeply entrenched ways
egorizing, producing, critiquing, and appraising of perceiving what most likely would be alien to
aesthetically interesting objects. Regarding the both prehistoric and non-European makers of
question "whether a people possess the concept marks on rocks.16
of art," Stephen Davies comments, "What mat- For example, as Pippa Skotnes has pointed
ters is not that they separate art from other out, few rock art researchers of European cultural
important concerns but that they make items background have taken note of the possible vari-
presenting humanly generated aesthetic proper- ance in orientation from standard Renaissance
ties, which are essential to the main purposes expectations of South African Bushman (San)
served by those items." 12 rock art images. On her view, "In many cases
For example, among the Yolngu of Northern paintings made on ceilings of caves, high out of
Australia, particularly skilled individuals make normal reach, or on walls of caves so shallow
designs with a brilliant shimmer (bir'yun). For that the only possible viewing position is on
the Yolngu, the brilliance of their paintings is one's back" are such that, "re-orienting the paint-
a manifestation of ancestral power, and painters ings in reproduction according to Western (pre-
are distinguished by their skill in achieving this Modem) notions of the Vasarian frame may be
effect. Bir'yun may be called an aesthetic prop- robbing the originals of an important component
erty, since it is assessed by the appearance of of meaning." She makes exemplary reference to
the paintings according to certain conventional a panel from Sevilla in the Western Cape region
standards, but to the Yolngu the property of of South Africa that, on her account, has features
bir'yun is relevant only by way of its effective- that bring about "a circular composition contrast-
ness in eliciting ancestral power.13 ing strongly with the kind of orientation all
To properly appreciate the aesthetic proper- reproductions of it suggest." 17
ties exhibited in manifestations by people of More broadly, it has been argued that philo-
another culture, it may be necessary to acquire sophical aesthetics, along with the corresponding
an understanding of the specifities of how the practice of appreciation, is an eighteenth-century
appreciation of aesthetic properties is integrated European invention and, hence, idiosyncratic to
into their mentality and their practices. The con- our own culture.18 Larry Shiner, furthermore,
sequence is that proper aesthetic appreciation of has suggested that, since the notion of "art" is
items offered for aesthetic appreciation across rooted in the cultures of modem European
cultures constitutes a considerable challenge, peoples, calling something from outside those
not to be underestimated on the basis of the ease cultures "art" constitutes a ploy enabling our
with which we may "recognize" certain familiar artworld to control the cultural margins.19 Conse-
motifs, styles, or techniques. (Some prehistoric quently, focusing on marks on rocks originating
rock art may appear like twentieth-century in prehistoric and non-European cultures from
abstract art; some African art may remind us of the aesthetic point of view may be perceived as
Picasso's cubism; but such similarities surely a taking or borrowing of images, a kind of
can only set the stage for a questioning of appropriation of culture. But, is it a problematic
the validity of our conventional categories for form of cultural appropriation?
the assessment of the aesthetic import of those First, is it an illegitimate taking of a cultural
works.) good, thereby constituting a straightforward moral

This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Heyd Rock Art Aesthetics and Cultural Appropriation 41

problem? Aesthetic appreciation of marks on of the item according to certain practice-internal

rocks certainly is not a literal taking of a good. standards.
It is, rather, more like the investment in a point As noted already, the size of a society may
of view, which may have repercussions because make a difference with regard to the degree of
of the attitudes and actions that it may seem to specialization versus the degree of integration
legitimize. For instance, some rock art enthusiasts of aesthetics, both its productive and its recep-
may treat it as their right, and perhaps even tive aspects, but not with respect to the very
as their duty, to view rock art sites, even if existence of art or aesthetic interest. We also
thereby conflicting with the limitations set by the have documented evidence among many non-
original makers or present traditional owners of European peoples from both small- and large-
such sites.20 scale societies for the use of terms clearly
Moreover, as sites with marks on rocks are expressive of aesthetic choices. These facts
progressively being opened up to the public for seem best explained by supposing that people
its appreciation, cultural appropriation through from around the globe share a sense of aesthetic
tourism may bring about problematic effects appreciation, even if it is expressed differently
because of the widespread commercialization in different societies.23 Clearly, the aesthetic
of rock art images. In the process, whole point of view per se is not an idiosyncratic
industries specializing in T-shirts, jewelry, and European invention. It seems, rather, that the
other assorted products displaying images bor- mode of aesthetic appreciation developed by
rowed from rock art sites have sprung up.21 As European peoples simply represents one particu-
of late, such derivative activities have become lar mode of aesthetic appreciation among
the focus of critique by indigenous peoples many.24
who decry the exploitation of their cultural Second, does taking the aesthetic point of view
heritage by outsiders, all the while without with regard to rock art pose a cognitive problem
being recipients of compensation for this use by threatening the authenticity of those cultural
of their cultural resources.22 The perception manifestations? To some people, the aesthetic
of panels of marks on rocks as valuable art point of view seems to imply that we focus on
objects sadly may, moreover, lead to the literal things in abstraction from the immediate func-
removal of rock art panels from their original tions that those things may have, or have had, in
locations. their original circumstances.25 So, while to the
Aesthetic appreciation itself, however, can- aesthetic appreciator a certain rock art panel
not fairly be blamed for cultural appropriation may be of interest because its harmonious
through uninvited visitation of restricted sites; composition or delicacy of execution gives it
tourism and the ensuing commercialization of standing as art, the image may have had a
rock art images; or the removal of rock art significantly different function in the lives of its
panels. These are, rather, problems that call for original makers. It may have served religious or
attention to proper cross-cultural etiquette and political aims by, respectively, indicating the
reflection on the larger implications of one's presence of the spirit beings or by marking
perhaps innocent-seeming actions. some important communal event. So, it may be
Furthermore, even if the European cultural argued that the effect of taking the aesthetic
perspective on aesthetics is idiosyncratic, this point of view is a distortion of the original
does not mean that to engage in aesthetic appre- meaning of such marks on rocks.
ciation of marks on rocks necessarily is the We may observe, however, that, contrary to
imposition of an alien point of view. As has what we may suppose, aesthetic appreciation
been shown by various authors, people around generally will be hampered if it does not take
the globe may lavish great care on the appear- note of the function that the things appreciated
ance of both special and common utilitarian have in their original contexts.26 This is evident
objects in their environment. When asked about in the aesthetic appreciation of artworks in the
the point of their care, they direct us to the European tradition as well. For example, the
importance of appearance for the effectiveness convention of giving extraordinary size to
of the item, to the pleasure that the appearance certain figures, such as the image of the Virgin
may generate, or the rightness of the appearance Mary, in pre-Renaissance European paintings

This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
42 The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism

makes better aesthetic sense if seen as intended those who were initially expected to view the
to highlight the relative religious importance of images.
the various figures represented than if we were This is evident with regard to the arts in the
to suppose that this phenomenon were the result European tradition as well. Sophisticated aes-
of arbitrary choice. Similarly, one can come to a thetic appreciators of Renaissance paintings,
better aesthetic appreciation of the expressive for example, will seek to become aware of the
power of certain Australian rock art panels, and specific training and intentions of their makers,
of the custom of periodically repainting them attempt to use the images only in such a way
("freshening them up"), if one is cognizant of that they are recognized for the value they have,
the fact that, according to Aboriginal people, seek to determine the standards that their makers
these panels show Ancestral Beings who expected as appropriate for their evaluation,
"painted themselves on the rock," than if one and, in general, try to accord the works and their
ignored it.27 makers the respect they deserve on the basis of
Third, does the aesthetic appreciation of marks the value present in the art. Insofar as aesthetic
on rocks suppose an ontological problem by appreciation of rock art or other artworks from
threatening the identity of the members of the art- remote times and places requires intercultural
ists' originary group? As noted, the appropriation knowledge and sensibility it should contribute
of cultural goods by outsiders may threaten the to, rather than hinder, the development of inter-
identity of a people if there is serious misrepre- cultural perceptiveness and goodwill.
sentation; if their images, motifs, and art styles
become associated with problematic ideologies; iii. Discussion. Aesthetic appreciation of images
if their representations are judged by extraneous on rock does not necessarily entail a problem-
standards, alien to those according to which they atic form of cultural appropriation. It is, of
were fashioned, thereby subverting their voice; course, very difficult to become fully aware of
and, in cases in which cultural goods, such as the imprint of one's own culture on one's mode
images, function as insignia definitory of the of aesthetic appreciation. Moreover, it may be
makers' group, cultural appropriation may be difficult to adequately supplement that cultural
equivalent to the literal theft of the group's iden- outlook, especially in the case of rock art mani-
tity. The threat to a group's identity becomes festations, since very little information may be
a moral issue, on the assumption that members of available about the original makers' standards
groups only function as such if they can find for aesthetic appreciation or the functions of
ways of substantiating their identity through their works.
cultural markers. For instance, the long-time association in
The possibilities of misrepresentation, mis- European peoples' thinking of prehistoric and
use, misjudgment, and unauthorized use of rock non-European people with warlike behaviors
art images are real enough. For instance, prob- can have confusing effects in the appreciation
lems may arise through the development of the of rock art panels that display what appear to be
tourism industry, which quickly turns into logos representations of battle scenes. Only by study-
images that were never meant for mechanical ing contemporary Aboriginal societies were
reproduction. Such problems, however, are not researchers able to show that, in most cases,
a direct function of aesthetic appreciation. They certain Northern Australian panels, which at
arise if aesthetic appreciation is accompanied first seem to be battle scenes, actually are repre-
by lack of intercultural knowledge and lack of sentations of dancers in full ceremonial attire
willingness to follow standards of intercultural holding their weapons upraised. This fact, how-
etiquette and respect. There is no reason, though, ever, has an important impact on aesthetic
to suppose that such threats to the identity of the appreciation of the marks, since it changes their
makers of rock art are inevitable. Satisfactory meaning and, just as in the appreciation of art-
aesthetic appreciation itself, as already noted, is works in the European traditions, the meaning
highly dependent on attentiveness to the cultural intended is as relevant as the formal aspects
context of images, the intentions of their makers, exhibited.
the standards of aesthetic judgment within the Moreover, if it were suggested that we limit
community of origin, and their significance for ourselves to the scientific analysis (in narrow

This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Heyd Rock Art Aesthetics and Cultural Appropriation 43

archaeological or anthropological terms) of ii. The uniqueness of rock art. Rock art is
marks on rocks, we may note that this is not integrated into the natural world in a way that
a sure way to avoid problematic appropriation, few other humanly made objects are. Rock art
since it is unlikely that the rock art makers panels usually are located in remote locations,
would have shared our particular scientific out- relatively unimpacted by contemporary indus-
look and interests. That is, to take a scientific trial, urbanizing, or "recreational" activities. In
perspective on rock art may be as culturally contrast to most other art, rock art sites are
appropriative as to take the aesthetic perspective. not dependent on extraction of materials from
Nonetheless, despite the difficulties in properly nature for the creation of new artefacts somewhere
appreciating rock art, and despite the possibilities else.32 Instead, pictographs and petroglyphs are
of problematic aesthetic appropriation, there are made on location and generally are intended to
strong, independent reasons for aesthetically remain on site. Marks on rocks, that is, become
attending to marks on rock. Not to consider integrated into the natural site. As such, rock art
marks on rocks from the aesthetic point of view, panels also offer us a special opportunity for
when they are offered as such, constitutes a learning about their makers' aesthetic appre-
kind of neglect.28 As potential appreciators, we ciation of nature, insofar as it is reflected in the
may miss out on valuable aesthetic experiences, content of the images, the choice of surfaces,
and, given the high value accorded to the aes- and the choice of locations in the land.33
thetic point of view in most (or perhaps all) Marks on rocks are also valuable counter-
societies, it may indicate an unjustified (ethno- images to the growing aesthetization of the every-
centric) discrimination of the rock art makers' day as found in the societies of industrialized
cultures. countries. While in contemporary, consumption-
oriented societies all aesthetic appreciation is
increasingly being trained onto objects intended
III. THE CASE FOR ROCK ART AESTHETICS to tie us ever more into the reproduction of
AND CONCLUSION exploitative relationships with other human
beings, nature, or even ourselves, the aesthetic
i. Cross-cultural aesthetics. A number of grounds appreciation of rock art offers a paradigm of
offered in the literature for engaging in cross- resistance.34 Marks on rocks, exposed to the
cultural aesthetics apply equally well in the case environment, generally are subject to (humanly
of rock art aesthetics. Notably, it has been uncontrolled) decay, mostly do not fit main-
proposed that attending to the products of peoples stream aesthetic tastes, often deal with our
from other cultures from the aesthetic point of connection to other parts of the natural (and
view will enrich our understanding of those supernatural) world, are arduous to find and
peoples, while honoring their achievements.29 reach, and usually are difficult to make sense of
Such appreciation may also more generally enrich without careful preparation.
our own capacity to aesthetically appreciate, as Nonetheless, such marks on rocks can be a
has been well illustrated by the path-breaking source of great aesthetic pleasure. The aesthetic
new aesthetic and artistic perspectives acquired appreciation of marks on rocks, in other words,
by Pablo Picasso, Paul Gauguin, and others, offers us an alternative model for the enjoyment
which, at least partially, were due to such cross- of human creativity, little tied to the ever more
cultural appropriations.30 emaciated values of the "entertainment" indus-
It has also been proposed that cross-cultural tries, highly dependent on respect for cross-
aesthetic appreciation may contribute to a cri- cultural values, and attentive to a notion of cultural
tique of our own narrow conceptions of art and productivity governed by natural context and
aesthetics, and of the mostly exclusionary spiritual concerns.
practice of art galleries, focused on European
models of art.31 In addition to these reasons for iii. Conclusion. At first blush, the aesthetic
engaging in aesthetic appreciation we may take appreciation by people of European cultural
note of some that have to do with the unique descent of marks on rocks may appear necessarily
character of marks on rocks among the diversity to lead to a problematic form of cultural appro-
of existing cultural manifestations. priation, given that the aesthetic perspectives

This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 44 The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism
developed among European peoples likely are
specific to those people. In other words, it may
seem that aesthetic appreciation would bring
with it the imposition of an alien perspective,
lead to distortion in the understanding of rock
art, and cause the subversion of the identity of
its makers.
I grant that cross-cultural aesthetics, as is
required by the appreciation of rock art,
constitutes a significant challenge. Nonetheless,
given proper care to respect and consider the
cultures of origin, aesthetic appreciation of
marks on rocks need not be problematic in the
senses just noted. Since there also are prima
facie strong, independent reasons for engaging
in aesthetic appreciation of this cultural phe-
nomenon, I conclude that the aesthetic approach
to marks on rocks is both eminently appropriate
and generally desirable.35
THOMAS HEYD
Department of Philosophy
University of Victoria
Victoria, British Columbia V8W 3P4, Canada
INTERNET: heydt@uvic.ca
1. One result of such appreciation is that these marks
generally are known under the rubric "rock art," even when
there is some debate regarding the question whether they
properly should be called "art." Here, I will follow conven-
tion by making reference to these marks as "rock art," but
see Thomas Heyd, "Rock Art Aesthetics: Trace on Rock,
Mark of Spirit, Window on Land," The Journal of Aesthet-
ics and Art Criticism 57 (1999): 451-458, for an argument
that supports it.
2. See Tim Ingold, The Appropriation of Nature: Essays
on Human Ecology and Social Relations (University of
Iowa Press, 1987). The exclusive attribution of the capacity
for appropriation to human beings is not quite correct,
though, since we know of diverse other species (certain
birds and apes) that also appropriate nature, even with the
use of tools.
3. See John Locke, Two Treatises on Government (1689).
4. On cultural appropriation, see Bruce Ziff and Pratima
V. Rao, eds., Borrowed Power: Essays on Cultural Appro-
priation (Rutgers University Press, 1997); Richard Fung,
"Working Through Cultural Appropriation," Fuse 16
(1993): 16-24; James 0. Young, "Should White Men Play
the Blues?" Journal of Value Inquiry 28 (1994): 415-424;
Joel Rudinow, "Race, Ethnicity, Expressive Authenticity:
Can White People Play the Blues?" The Journal of Aesthet-
ics and Art Criticism 52 (1994): 127-137.
5. We may add here the physical appropriation of
culturally significant items, such as the Parthenon frieze (the
so-called Elgin Marbles) or, more recently, the acquisition
This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
of masks and pottery from looted sites by collectors and
museums. These concerns have been discussed in the
context of the repatriation of cultural property. See, for
example, J. H. Merryman, "The Retention of Cultural
Property," U.C. Davis Law Review 21 (1988): 477-513;
and John Moustakas, "Group Rights in Cultural Property:
Justifying Strict Inalienability," Cornell Law Review 74
(1989): 1179-1227.
6. For a careful, introductory discussion of various
forms of authenticity and inauthenticity, see Elizabeth
Burns Coleman, "Aboriginal Painting: Identity and
Authenticity," The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism
59 (2001): 385-402. For a critique of authenticity as a form
of ideology, see Larry Shiner, "'Primitive Fakes,' 'Tourist
Art,' and the Ideology of Authenticity," The Journal of Aes-
thetics and Art Criticism 52 (1994): 228-230. For a critique
of the way in which the concept of authenticity has been
applied to constitute the art of small-scale non-European
societies as "traditional" or "primitive," see James Clifford,
The Predicament of Culture: Twentieth Century Ethnog-
raphy, Literature, and Art (Harvard University Press,
1988), esp. pp. 196-200.
7. "Cultural appropriation" is sometimes equated with
"voice appropriation," tout court, but it seems more apropos
to specifically reserve the latter expression for those cases
in which legitimate forms of self-assertion or -expression
are thwarted.
8. This is Coleman's argument with regard to the unauthor-
ized use of Aboriginal art designs by non-Aboriginal people.
(See p. 396 for the quoted words.)
9. For objections such as those listed, especially see
Young, "Should White Men Play the Blues?"; Rudinow,
"Race, Ethnicity, Expressive Authenticity: Can White
People Play the Blues?" and James 0. Young, "Against Aes-
thetic Apartheid," Rendezvous: Idaho State University Journal
ofArts and Letters 30 (1995): 67-77.
10. It is relevant to note here that, with regard to the
morality of cultural appropriation, it is not simply a matter
of toting up local harms and lining them up with global
benefits in a consequentialist manner, since, at least in some
cases, there also are issues of cultural property rights and
cross-cultural etiquette involved.
11. This is a point argued implicitly by Kendall Walton,
"Categories of Art," Philosophical Review 79 (1979):
334-367; and explicitly, in different contexts, by Paul Ziff,
"Reasons in Art Criticism," Philosophical Turnings, Essays
in Conceptual Appreciation (Cornell University Press,
1966); and Allen Carlson, "Appreciating Art and Appreciat-
ing Nature," and passim, in his Aesthetics and Environment
(New York: Routledge, 2000).
12. Stephen Davies, "Non-Western Art and Art's Defin-
ition," in Theories of Art Today, ed. Noel Carroll (University
of Wisconsin Press, 2000), pp. 199-216.
13. Howard Morphy, "From Dull to Brilliant: The
Aesthetics of Spiritual Power among the Yolngu," in Anthro-
pology, Art and Aesthetics, ed. Jeremy Coote and Anthony
Shelton (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), pp. 182-208.
14. There are also marks on rocks, some of which are
appreciated for their aesthetic values and some of which are
considered graffiti, made by European peoples in the histor-
ical period. Even though, to my knowledge, such marks are
seldom made the subject of serious study, they fall into the
category "rock art," and their study might generate valuable
 Heyd Rock Art Aesthetics and Cultural Appropriation 45
understanding of the phenomenon in question. See Sven
Ouzman, "'Koeka kakie, hents op bokkor of ik schiet!'
Introducing the Rock Art of the South African Anglo-Boer
War, 1899-1902," The Digging Stick 16 (1999): 1-5.
Throughout the paper, I use terms such as "the cultures of
people of European descent" to make reference to the
mainstream cultures commonly called "Western," which
ultimately have their roots in Europe but are now expressed
on diverse continents. I choose not to use the term "Western,"
since it is geographically ambiguous. (Notably, Europe is
West of Jerusalem and Mecca, but so is all of Africa,
whereas Australia more properly is east of both Europe and
Jerusalem and Mecca.)
15. But see Heyd, "Rock Art Aesthetics," for discussion.
16. This is not to say that art is the prerogative of contem-
porary people of European cultural descent; for discussion
see, for example, Howard Morphy, "Aesthetics in a Cross-
Cultural Perspective: Some Reflections on Native American
Basketry," Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford
23 (1992): 1-15. Also see John Halverson, "Art for Art's Sake
in the Paleolithic," Current Anthropology 28 (1987): 63-89,
for an account of the origins of art that precisely appeals to
Paleolithic rock art as its first instance. See also the references
to the discussion in the philosophical context, below.
17. Pippa Skotnes, "The Visual as a Site of Meaning:
San Parietal Painting and the Experience of Modern Art," in
Contested Images: Diversity in Southern African Rock
Art Research, ed. Thomas A. Dowson and David Lewis-
Williams (Witwatersrand University Press, 1994).
18. See Joanna Overing, "Aesthetics as a Cross-Cultural
Category: Against the Motion" in Key Debates in Anthro-
pology, ed. Tim Ingold (New York: Routledge, 1996),
pp. 260-266; see also Alfred Gell, "The Technology of
Enchantment and the Enchantment of Technology," Anthro-
pology, Art and Aesthetics, pp. 40-63.
19. Shiner, "'Primitive Fakes."'
20. Notably, some sites were meant to be seen only by
initiated individuals, or by members of one particular gen-
der, for example.
21. See, for example, Thomas Dowson, "Off the Rocks,
Onto T-Shirts, Canvasses, etc.," and Peter Welsh, "Com-
modification of Rock Art: An Inalienable Paradox," both in
Rock Art Ethics: A Dialogue, ed. William D. Hyder
(Tucson: American Rock Art Research Association, 2000).
22. See, for example, Adrienne Tanner, "B.C. Natives
Put Stop to Commercial Use of Ancient Artwork: Trade-
mark Petroglyphs," The National Post (Canada) February
14, 2000.
23. See, for example, Jeremy Coote, "Aesthetics as a
Cross-Cultural Category: For the Motion," in Key Debates
in Anthropology, pp. 266-271; Morphy, "Aesthetics";
Howard Morphy, "Anthropology of Art," in Companion
Encyclopedia of Anthropology, ed. Tim Ingold (New York:
Routledge, 1994), 648-685; Morphy, "From Dull to Bril-
liant"; Anthony Shelton, "Predicates of Aesthetic Judgment:
Ontology and Value in Huichol Material Presentations";
and Jeremy Coote, "'Marvels of Everyday Vision': The
Anthropology of Aesthetics and the Cattle-Keeping
Nilotes," in Anthropology, Art and Aesthetics, respectively,
pp. 181-208, 209-244, and 245-273. Evelyn Payne
Hatcher, Art as Culture: An Introduction to the Anthropol-
ogy of Art (Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey, 1999),
pp. 197-207, provides a useful discussion on the issue of
This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
the universality versus the particularity of aesthetic values.
F. D. McCarthy, "Theoretical Considerations of Australian
Aboriginal Art," Journal of the Proceedings of the Royal
Society of New South Wales 91 (1957): 3-22, moreover,
comments on the aesthetic values in Australian Aboriginal art.
24. See Davies, who argues for a transcultural aesthetic
based on a universal human interest in certain properties of
things. See also Denis Dutton, "But They Don't Have Our
Concept of Art," also in Theories of Art Today, pp. 217-238,
who furthermore argues that the differences between the
aesthetic manifestations of European and other peoples
generally have been exaggerated. Also relevant in this context
is Denis Dutton, "Tribal Art and Artifact," The Journal of
Aesthetics and Art Criticism 51 (1993): 13-22, where he
argues against Arthur Danto, "Artifact and Art," in the
catalogue ART/artifact (New York: Center for African Art,
1988), pp. 19-32, by claiming that, outside of the twentieth-
century artworld of European peoples, items considered "art"
do show perceptible differences from those not so considered.
25. See, for example, Overing; also see Silvia Tomdskovd,
"Places of Art: Art and Archaeology in Context," in Beyond
Art: Pleistocene Image and Symbol, ed. Margaret W. Conkey
et al. (California Academy of Sciences/University of
California Press, 1997), pp. 265-287, who rejects the aes-
thetic point of view on rock art.
26. On this point, also see Morphy, "Aesthetics."
27. Christopher Chippindale, The Archaeology of Rock-Art
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), empha-
sizes the importance of combining "informed" and "formal"
methods in rock art interpretation, when possible. Informed
methods rely on information gathered ethnographically,
whereas formal methods rely on what is given in the
representations themselves.
28. I want to emphasize that rock art, insofar as art made
by particular people for their own purposes, in principle, is
not a free good like the light of the sun. There may be good
reasons from the perspective of intellectual and cultural
property rights, and for reasons of cross-cultural etiquette,
not to visit or photograph or describe certain sites if they are
not offered as such by their makers or guardians.
29. Especially see Morphy, "Anthropology of Art."
30. Diverse authors in the rock art and cultural appropri-
ation literatures comment on the significance of cross-
cultural aesthetic influences for the enrichment of aesthetic
perspectives. See, for example, Skotnes, and also Ronald
DeWitt Mills, "Acculturated Art Forms of Three Central
American Indigenous Groups and Observations Concerning
Research Methodology in the Study of Contemporary Art,"
Rendezvous: Idaho State University Journal of Arts and
Letters 30 (1995): 35-49.
31. See Morphy, "Aesthetics"; S. Price, Primitive Art in
Civilized Places (University of Chicago Press, 1989).
32. Although, as Sven Ouzman (personal communication,
2000), notes, rock paintings often depend on paint materials
that may have been mined at locations distant from the
painted sites: "In southern Africa, the majority of San rock-
paintings are made from exotic ferric oxide that was mined
20km-400km from where the rock-painting occurs."
33. For further details on the uniqueness of and perspectives
offered by rock art, see Heyd, "Rock Art Aesthetics"; also see
Thomas Heyd, "Aesthetics and Rock Art: Art, Mobile Peoples,
and Aesthetic Appreciation in Australia," Arqueologia 25
(2000): 9-18; "Rock Art and the Aesthetic Appreciation of
 46 The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism

Natural Landscapes," News95 International Rock Art
(Pinerolo, It.: Centro Studi e Museo d'Arte Preistorica, 1999);
and "Northern Plains Boulder Structures: Art and Foucauldian
Heterotopias," in Foucault and the Environment, ed. eric
Darier (New York: Routledge, 1998), pp. 152-162.
34. Concerning the importance of cross-cultural aes-
thetics in potentially countering the aesthetization of the
everyday, see James F. Weiner, "Introduction," in Key
Debates in Anthropology, pp. 251-254. On general strat-
egies of resistance to commodification in contemporary
society, see, for example, Hal Foster, "Readings in Cultural
Resistance," in his Recodings: Art, Spectacle, Cultural
Politics (Seattle: Bay Press, 1985), pp. 157-179.
35. I am indebted to Sven Ouzman and John Clegg for
careful comments on an earlier draft of this paper, as well as
to an anonymous referee of the JAAC.

This content downloaded from 144.32.128.70 on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:39:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms