Module 3

Interdisciplinary Approaches to Philippine Arts and Culture

Monica FA W. Santos

Introduction
The module provides an overview of analytical tools used to understand arts in general, and
the possible applications of these to Philippine arts and expressive cultures. These analytical
tools are drawn from different fields, such as anthropology, philosophy, linguistics,
performance studies, and the humanities, and they focus on the following distinct, and at
times, intersecting dimensions: aesthetic judgement, semantics, and cultural difference. The
discussion of these analytical tools will show you how seemingly universal standards and
taken for granted values used to ‘judge’ and label art works and expressive cultures are, in
fact, culturally and socially particular. These values are learned and cultivated by various
social institutions, such as the state, schools of connoisseurship, and the academe, among
others.

Learning Objectives
After accomplishing this module, you should be able to:
1) Describe the different approaches to studying arts and expressive cultures;
2) Use any of these approaches in analyzing different forms of arts and expressive cultures in
the Philippines as well as the practices associated with their (re)production; and
3) Demonstrate reflexivity in your analysis of arts and expressive cultures.

1.0 Aesthetics and Culture

What do we feel when we see a painting or a picture? Or when we watch a play, a musical, or
a ballet performance? Or when we witness rituals different from our own? What lenses,
filters, and values do we use to explain or justify our judgement? Are these values universal?
This topic addresses these questions by exposing you to particular expressive forms and

Page 1 of 6
discussing the sources of our judgements of artistic experiences. How do our social positions
and cultural background influence our aesthetic judgement and appreciation of things?

Activity 1 (60 minutes)

A. Read the following essays:

Bauman, Richard. “Verbal art as Performance.” In American Anthropologist, vol. 77, no.2,
(1975), 290-311.
Price, Sally. “Chapter 1: The Mystique of Connoisseurship” and “Chapter 6: Objets d’Art
and Ethnographic Artifacts.” In Primitive Art in Civilized Places. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1989. 7-22, 82-99.
Sharman, Russell. The Anthropology of Aesthetics: A cross-cultural approach. Journal of
the Anthropological Society of Oxford vol. 28, no. 2, (1997), 177-192.

B. Use the following study questions as a guide to the readings:

1. What does Bauman say about ‘verbal art’ across cultures? What are the different forms of
verbal art? Are the aesthetic standards used to identify forms of verbal art the same across
different cultures?
2. How does Price describe the process of valuing art? Are the standards used by art
connoisseurs universal? Who determines the standards used by connoisseurs?
3. According to Sharman, can the concept of aesthetics be used or applied outside of
the arts? In what ways?

Discussion
These readings illustrate how the definition of ‘art’ or what constitutes as art are social
constructs and are culturally specific. As such, the idea of ‘aesthetic standards’ is critiqued
and not viewed as universally applicable. The idea of aesthetics is also expanded to include
cultural practices that are not normally considered ‘art,’

Page 2 of 6
 Activity 2 (180 minutes)

1. Watch an artistic performance (for example, a ballet, an concert, a ritual) OR visit a

museum or a piece of public art.

2. Take note of your reactions and responses by doing fieldnotes. Fieldnotes consists of
detailed descriptions of what you saw as well as your own thoughts and feeling about
what you observed.

3. Prepare a short essay (500-750 words) discussing the following:

a. A summary of what you saw and your responses or reactions as you watched the
show or viewed the display: Did you like the performance or exhibit or art
work? Why or why not?
b. The basis for your judgement. What are the aesthetic standards that you used to
evaluate the show or display? Where did you learn these standards?
c. A general reflection on who determines the standards for valuating art works?
What are the bases for such standards? How do these standards become
standards?

NOTE: Be ready to share the content of your essay at your next class session.

Discussion
The activity is meant to help you understand how aesthetic standards are socially constructed
and culturally defined. Personal reactions and responses to artistic works are used to examine
specific aesthetic standards used to evaluate particular forms of art, and how and where these
standards were learned.

2.0 Semantic Analysis in Expressive Cultures

What do people mean when they say ‘music or dance is universal’? Are art works understood
and appreciated in the same way across cultures? Do they have the same social and cultural
significance? These questions are the focus of semantic analysis of expressive forms.
Drawing on theories in linguistics and linguistic anthropology, the semantic approach
searches for embodied meanings within art forms, art works, art practices, and performances.
These meanings are culturally and socially specific, and requires analysis of the context and
conditions of display, practice and performance. Note that while our discussion focus on
dancing, the principles articulated in the reading materials below may be applied to other art
and expressive forms.

Page 3 of 6
 Activity 3 (60 minutes)

1. Read the following essays:

Williams, Drid. “Body Languages.” In Anthropology and the Dance: Ten Lectures. 2d ed.
Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004. 149-73. (Guide to reading: Williams
explains how human body movements are culturally meaningful.)
Ness, Sally. “Originality in the Postcolony: Choreographing the Neo-ethnic Body of
Philippine Ballet.” Cultural Anthropology vol. 12, no. 1, (1997), 64-108. (Guide to
reading: Ness presents a critical review of Agnes Locsin’s use of ‘ethnic movements’
in her choreographic work.)
Locsin, Agnes. “Transforming Ethnic to Neo-Ethnic.” In Philippine Neo-Ethnic
Choreography: A Creative Process. Manila: University of Santo Tomas Publishing
House, 2012. 39-64.

2. Watch a video of Agnes Locsin’s Igorot*, which is discussed in Ness’ article, and a
video of community dancing in the Cordillera**

Answer the following questions:

1. How did Locsin use ethnic movements in her work?
2. Do you think she used the movements ‘correctly’? Why/Why not?
3. Do you think it is all right to transform ethnic dances on stage? Why/Why not?
4. Do human body movements have universal meaning? Why/Why not?
4. Are dances symptoms or symbols/signs of emotion? What is the difference between the
two?
5. What is the value of doing ethnography in understanding the meanings of human body
movement (or any art or expressive work)?

Discussion
Your responses to Locsin’s work and your observations on the authenticity of movements
vary. Indeed, seemingly similar movements may actually have different meanings and these
meanings are emergent — that is, they are contingent upon the moment of performance.
However, this does not mean that the appropriation of movements is not problematic. Aside

Page 4 of 6
from issues relating to intellectual property rights, the politics of aesthetics also involve
discussions about how the meaning of movements may be different for the choreographer, the
dancer, and to the audience, and how these are informed by particular aesthetic values. Use
Ness’ article (assigned for this topic) as a guide to understanding issues on cross-cultural
readings of choreographic works.

References
Bauman, Richard. “Verbal art as Performance.” In American Anthropologist, vol. 77, no.2,
(1975), 290-311.
Bourdieu, Pierre. “Introduction” and “Chapter 1: The Artistocracy of Culture (excerpt).” In
Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Jaste (trans. R. Nice). Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1996. 1-7.
----------. “Chapter 1: The Artistocracy of Culture (excerpt).” In Distinction: A Social Critique
of the Judgement of Jaste (trans. R. Nice). Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996.
11-18.
Clayton, Michael. Comparing Music, Comparing Musicology. In The Cultural Study of
Music: a Critical Introduction by M. Clayton, T. Herbert, R. Middleton. New York:
Routledge, 2003. 57-68.
Hobsbawm, Eric and Terence Ranger. “Introduction: Inventing traditions.” In The Invention
of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. 1-14.
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Judgement. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007 [1952].
Langer, Susanne. “The Dynamic Image: Some Philosophical Reflections on Dance.” In
Problems of art: Then Philosophical Lectures. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons,
1957. 1-12.
Locsin, Agnes. “Transforming Ethnic to Neo-Ethnic.” In Philippine Neo-Ethnic
Choreography: A Creative Process. Manila: University of Santo Tomas Publishing
House, 2012. 39-64.
Mintz, Sidney. “Cuisine: High, Low, and Not at All.” In Tasting Food, Tasting Freedom.
Boston: Beacon Press, 1996. 92-105.
Ness, Sally. “Body, Movement, and Culture: Kinesthetic and Visual Symbolism in a
Philippine Community.” Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992.
Price, Sally. “Chapter 1: The Mystique of Connoisseurship” In Primitive Art in Civilized
Places. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989. 7-22.

Page 5 of 6
----------. “Chapter 6: Objets d’Art and ethnographic artifacts.” In Primitive Art in Civilized
Places. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989. 82-99.
Reyes, Soledad. From Darna to Zsazsa Zaturnah. Essays on Literature and Popular Culture.
Pasig City: Anvil Publishing Co., 2009.
Santos, Ramon Pagayon. “Bâ’diw, Bayol: Poetry and Oratory as Filipino Musical Culture.” In
Tunugan: Four Essays on Filipino Music. Quezon City: University of the Philippines
Press, 2005. 95-124.
Sharman, Russell. The Anthropology of Aesthetics: A cross-cultural approach. Journal of the
Anthropological Society of Oxford vol. 28, no. 2, (1997), 177-192.
Soler, Jean. “The Semiotics of Food in the Bible.” In Food and Culture: A Reader. C.
Counihan and P. Van Esterik, eds.. New York and London: Routledge, 1997. 55-66.
Vaughan, Christopher. “Ogling Igorots: The Politics and Commerce of Exhibiting Cultural
Otherness, 1898-1913.” In Freakery: Cultural Spectacles of The Extraordinary Body.
Rosemarie Garland Thomson, ed. New York and London: New York University Press,
1996. 219-233.
Williams, Drid. “Body Languages.” In Anthropology and the Dance: Ten Lectures. 2d ed.
Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004. 149-73.

Page 6 of 6