Tourist Art Analysis: Plastic Floral Lei and Petroglyph Pottery - Essay Example

Tourist art analysis: Plastic floral lei and petroglyph pottery TIM 321 Homework #2 5 February Tourist Art Analysis: Plastic Floral Lei and Petroglyph Pottery Aboriginal cultural heritage has been closely connected to the production and consumption of its cultural symbols and tools through tourism arts. Tourism arts enable local people, or other artists and business people, to copy cultural tools and symbols and to sell them to locals or visitors. Scholars have different perspectives on how tourism arts affect the meaning and relevance of native culture. On the one hand, tourism art can reduce the meaning of aboriginal art, because it commoditizes aboriginal tools and beliefs (Simons, 2000). On the other hand, tourist art can also serve as the means to preserve and to revive aboriginal art, as well as to negotiate new cultural meanings with locals and visitors in the modern world (Markwick, 2001). This essay will analyze two tourist art items from Hilo Hattie and ABC Store catalogues: the plastic floral lei and the petroglyph pottery. These tourist art objects serve different purposes and targets different audiences, but they both serve economic and symbolic functions that may stereotype native cultures, and they may also help promote local history and culture to locals and visitors. The first to be analyzed is the plastic floral lei. It is a product that seems to be intended for visitors and not the locals, because locals can use their natural resources to create their own floral lei. The locals also already know enough of the culture to demand authentic or natural floral lei, unlike visitors (Graburn, 1984, p.400). Visitors may not know or are not interested in authentic materials (Graburn, 1984, p.400), especially when they want a preserved souvenir. Furthermore, the plastic floral lei is produced as a souvenir for tourists. It is not part of traditional art, because it is used as an accessory by native women. The native tribe that uses natural lei has no “cultural stake” in creating plastic floral lei (Graburn, 1984, p.400). Traditional art is part of the cultural heritage and history of the aborigines. Though floral lei can be seen as a cultural symbol, it does not have deep cultural meaning as a form of art. It is not even prepared with high craftsmanship in mind. This item is also a souvenir because it is evidently a “new form” of the natural lei; it is made from plastic, a modern external resource that can produce inexpensive souvenirs (Graburn, 1984, p.400). Plastic is also related to mass production of cultural items. This modern material further commoditizes the idea of flower lei, which is far from its original use, where it is “made” for personal satisfaction, and not mass produced and mass consumed. The plastic floral lei, furthermore, produces ethnic stereotyping. As a flower product, it emphasizes the femininity of aboriginal heritage. Flowers are feminine symbols. The plastic floral lei feminizes the native culture and appropriates it as weaker to the dominant commercial, modern, and urban culture. In addition, the plastic floral lei can also decrease the relevance of nature to native communities. It appropriates nature as a commodity to aboriginals, instead of being a sacred element of their existence (Markwick, 2001, p.31). In terms of uses, the consumer will normally use the plastic floral lei to take pictures with, because it can prove to others that they have been to an aboriginal place, and/or to show that they appreciate native resources. As a souvenir, it is sturdy because it is made of plastic. From this vantage, it can be argued as a quality product, because of its durability. It is also colorful and can represent the liveliness of the native culture that uses it. As for craftsmanship, the souvenir is very simple and is not that complex. It does not seem to be appropriate to call it “crafty” because it is a simple, plastic flower necklace. It can even be produced by westerners themselves for mass production and consumption. This reduces the authenticity of the floral lei as something culturally important to the native cultures that use it. The next to be analyzed is the petroglyph pottery. This art is intended for both locals and visitors. It is produced for locals who know authentic petroglyph pottery enough to demand authentic replications, as well as visitors who want “cultural” artifacts as souvenirs and as a form of appreciation for aboriginal craftsmanship (Graburn, 1984, p.400). The petroglyph pottery is a reproduction of traditional art, since it has petroglyph writing that supposedly comes from prehistoric times and people. Native people have a “cultural stake” in producing this art that represents their history, language, and beliefs (Graburn, 1984, p.400). It is also seen as a reproduction of traditional art, because the process of making pottery can be considered as a cultural performance also (Graburn, 1984, p.400). The writings on the pottery may have special meaning or functions to the locals who made it (Graburn, 1984, p.400). Even when this form of pottery is not made to be used as pots by tourists, its writings serve to portray native culture and to inform the public of its cultural expressions (Graburn, 1984, p.400). In this sense, petroglyph pottery can serve as the means to preserve and to revive aboriginal art. It can also negotiate new cultural meanings with locals and visitors in the modern world by showing culture as something that can be reinterpreted by outsider experience (Markwick, 2001). The level of authenticity of petroglyph pottery increases if it is made by aboriginals and bought from their local communities. The aborigines, as the artists, can improve the authentic “image” of the pottery and the location of purchase can also impact its “authenticity.” Some tourists are quite sensitive in knowing who made it and where it was made, as well as how and what the materials used were. This knowledge is critical to verifying the authenticity of the pottery. However, if the petroglyph pottery is made by outsiders and mass produced for the public, its authenticity drops. Westerners and outsiders who make tourist art commonly have a dominant economic, instead of a symbolic goal, when making these pots, which decreases the authenticity of the pottery as something that has a symbolic meaning. Pottery is not normally intended to be considered as fine art or treated as collection, especially with simple writings and materials. It is normally used as traditional storage materials, such as wine and food. Buyers, however, tend to use it as a part of their collection and display them for personal and/or public satisfaction. Original pottery must have some organic materials, while this one may come from pure clay or recycled clay. Original pottery also has certain crudeness in the writing and designs. They often have a higher level of craftsmanship too, especially for old pottery that are designed for royalty and upper-class groups. The replica lacks this craftsmanship and it also has a modern look. It is easy to say that it is not an original petroglyph pottery, because craftsmanship is lower and it looks “produced” for visitors. It is possible that this pottery is mass produced, although not in the same quantity as the plastic floral lei. It matters because mass production adds to the commoditization of aboriginal culture. Mass production also reduces the “authenticity” of the petroglyph pottery, because it becomes an economic means, instead of a cultural means of expression. Finally, consumers are more likely to use this pot as decoration or it may be treated as an art collection. Though it may not be considered as fine art by the aborigines, it can be seen as fine art by visitors, thereby changing the meaning and use of petroglyph pottery. Tourist art serves to inform the public about cultural values, practices, and beliefs. These tourist art forms, the plastic floral lei and the petroglyph pottery, have different and similar functions. They are different because the plastic floral lei is made as a souvenir and for visitors. It can also be easily mass produced and has low levels of craftsmanship. The petroglyph pottery is intended for both locals and visitors. It is also a reproduction of traditional art, since it has petroglyph writing that supposedly comes from prehistoric times and people. It does not have the same craftsmanship as the original, but it can be accepted as traditional art by both the aborigines and visitors. This essay shows that there are advantages and disadvantages to tourist art. Tourist art can promote local history and culture, but it can also decrease its meaning and alter its uses. Tourist art, nevertheless, is here to stay and it will continue affecting how and why aboriginal arts are produced, distributed, and consumed. References Graburn, N.H.H. (1984). The evolution of tourism arts. Annals of Tourism Research, 11, 393-419. Markwick, M.C. (2001). Tourism and the development of handicraft production in the Maltese islands. Tourism Geographies, 3 (1), 29-51. Simons, M.S. (2000). Aboriginal heritage art and moral rights. Annals of Tourism Research, 27 (2), 412-431. Read More