Dear ARLIS-folks--
At the University of Wisconsin, Madison, we
have Native American art in both E and N classes.
So I asked one of our original catalogers about
the distinction.
He contributed the following, including the fact
I found especially interesting--that E's preceded
N's:
************************************
>I did a little quick research on this. My suspicion is that this is an
>historical accident. The original version of the E-F schedules was
>published in 1901. The N schedule didn't come along until 1910. I would
>guess that a place was added to the E schedule because the author(s)
>wanted Indian traditional art put there. When N came along it was
>decided to leave "traditional" Indian art in E. Other "primitive" art
>didn't have preexisting class numbers, so it was included in N.
>
>Now that Native Americans produce "non-traditional" or "modern" art,
>those works and artists are classed it N.
***********************************
I thought the time-lapse point telling as
an explanation of why Native American art might
be treated differently than, say, African or
other non-Western traditions. I can believe
that the need for the Library of Congress to
deal with Native American holdings might easily
have arisen early and urgently, because of the
obvious geographical factor.
Hope this contribution is useful.
Best,
Linda Duychak
Kohler Art Library
Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison
__________________________________________________________________
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask]
For information about joining ARLIS/NA see:
http://www.arlisna.org//membership.html
Send administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc)
to [log in to unmask]
ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance:
http://lsv.uky.edu/archives/arlis-l.html
Questions may be addressed to list owner (Kerri Scannell) at: [log in to unmask]
