Errington

Primitive art was something that started at the beginning of the 20^th Century as a Western construct, but after some time a focus on what was authentic developed. At first, authenticity was dependent on if the culture was untouched by Western ideas and cultures. Art can be categorized into art by appropriation and art by intention. The former refers to different objects made into art during the times of the museums, while art by intention is art was meant to be purely aesthetic. Art has always been associated with collection, permanence, mobility, and durability. In the 18^th Century during the time of Kant, art was framed off from reality to show it was a representation of real life. Modern artists looked to primitive art for inspiration. Primitive art could be classified as symbolic or decorative, but it was always prized if it was associated with an unfamiliar ritual in Western terms. Everyday functional items were not considered primitive art because rarity was what was prized about the art form. After a while, primitive art’s authenticity relied on how much it looked like modern art, or it’s ‘formal qualities.’ Authentic primitive art now relies on a certain look, and if it would be something modern artists would look to. Now, ethnic (meaning non-Western) arts are popular. As modern art’s look changes, will primitive art change as fast as the look? Do museums determine what is authentic or do buyers of the art?