We have already indicated that the artistic value of an object is not
due to the form alone, but that the method of manufacture gives to the
surface an artistic quality, either through its smoothness or through a
patterning that results from the technical processes employed. However,
the treatment of the surface is not controlled solely by technical
processes. We may observe that in the art products of people the world
over other elements occur that are due to the attempt to emphasize the
form.
[Illustration: Fig. 48. Pottery vessels: _a_ Finland; _b_ Ica, Peru.]
The application of marginal patterns is one of the most common methods
employed for this purpose. In many cases these are technically
determined. When, for instance, a woven basket is finished off, it
is necessary to fasten the loose strands and this leads generally to
a change of form and surface pattern in the rim. The strands may be
turned down, wrapped and sewed together, they may be braided, or woven
together and left standing as a fringe. In a bark basket the rim must
be strengthened by a band, to prevent splitting of the bark, and the
band and the sewing set off the rim from the body. A thin metal disk
may have to be strengthened by rolling in the outer rim.
[Illustration: Fig. 49. Birchbark vessels; _a_, _b_, Amur River; _c_,
Shuswap; _d_, _e_, Alaska.]
The birchbark basketry of western North America and of Siberia
presents an excellent example of a marginal pattern originating
through technical necessity and regularity of motor habits. Necessary
protection of the rim is obtained by sewing on a hoop. The grain of
the bark runs parallel to the rim and if the stitches were all passing
through the same grain the whole rim of the basket would tear off.
It is therefore necessary to make the holding stitches of different
lengths. This is done in the most effective way by beginning with
a short stitch which passes through the bark immediately under the
strengthening hoop, by making the next stitch a little longer and
the following still longer. In this way the distance from the first
short stitch has become long enough to permit a repetition of the new
short stitch and by continuing in this way a marginal pattern of right
triangles develops. The same result may be attained by alternating a
few short stitches with a few long ones. From this results a different
type of pattern. The same method is used by the Golds of southeastern
Siberia (fig. 49[39]).
[39] See for a fuller description the remarks by F. Boas in James Teit
“The Shuswap”, Publications of the Jesup North Pacific expedition,
Volume II, page 478-487.
[Illustration: Fig. 50. Pottery vessels; _a_, _b_, Chiriqui, Costa
Rica; _c_ Ontario.]
In woodwork, pottery and in most kinds of metal work these technical
motives are not present. Nevertheless marginal patterns are widely
distributed, although they cannot be explained on the basis of
technical considerations. It would be quite arbitrary to claim that
all these marginal patterns were primarily suggested in those types
of technique in which a distinctive treatment of the margin is a
necessity, for these are relatively few in number and of highly
specialized character, while rim patterns are well nigh universal. It
is instructive to observe that in coiled pottery the whole body of the
vessel is generally polished off and that sometimes the impressions
of the modelling fingers are left on the rim. There is no technical,
compelling reason that requires this mode of treatment, but it is
intelligible as an attempt to emphasize the form. Examples of this
mode of treatment are very numerous. Rows of small pellets, moulded
rims or incised lines along the rim of pots (fig. 50), small marginal
curves along the rim of bronze disks, lines accompanying the rims of
flat dishes and spoons such as are used by the Alaskan Eskimo, incised
lines on the rim of a soapstone pot of the Hudson Bay Eskimo, and on
their ivory combs (fig. 51), the spur line decoration of all the Eskimo
tribes (see fig. 78, p. 86), the jutting out of the rims of dishes from
Oceania, or on pots from ancient Europe are of this kind. As F. Adama
van Scheltema has justly pointed out, we cannot reduce this world-wide
tendency to any other ultimate cause than to a feeling for form, in
other words, to an esthetic impulse that prompts man to emphasize the
form of the object that he has made.
[Illustration: Fig. 51. _a_, Part of soapstone kettle; _b_, _c_, _d_,
Ivory combs, Eskimo.]
In a number of cases the form is not so much accentuated as rather set
off, closed in and separated from the surrounding space by a formal
limitation, a marginal line, thickening of the rim or a sharp crest,
by which means the individualization of the object is attained. Quite
often these limiting bands develop into decorative fields and serve
the double purpose of limitation and of decoration. They may attain an
individuality of their own.
When the surface itself is decorated, these lines or ornamental bands
serve the additional purpose of limiting and closing the decorative
field. Examples of this kind are very numerous. We find them in
borders of our rugs, in architectural decoration, when the corners
and roof lines of a building are formed by ornamental stone work, in
book binding,—in short in practically all forms of modern decorative
art, but no less in primitive art. Blankets of the Alaskan Indians
(see figs. 269 et seq., pp. 259 et seq.), bronze work of ancient
Scandinavia, prehistoric pottery of Europe and of Central America,
gable boards of New Zealand houses, belts from New Guinea, baskets from
British Guinea (fig. 81, p. 90) and wooden cups from the Congo region
illustrate this tendency (fig. 52).
[Illustration: Fig. 52. Wood carving, Bambala, Congo.]
There are, however, many cases in which the decoration is so closely
adapted to the form of the object that the stimulus for developing a
closing outline is not felt. The decoration of the field appears as
a picture fitted into the object. In still other cases the smooth,
undecorated marginal field serves as a border setting off the central
ornamented area. In basketry with radial decoration, we find often a
lack of border designs and a tendency to let the ornament run right up
to the rim where it seems cut off.
Another characteristic trait of decorative art must be mentioned.
Not only is the general form emphasized and limited, but its natural
divisions are determining elements in the application of decorative
patterns and bring it about that the decoration is arranged in distinct
fields. This is very apparent in pottery in which a neck is set off
from a body or in which the body is divided by a sharp angle into an
upper and a lower part. Such types are found in prehistoric European
art as well as in America (fig. 53).
On pouches of American Indians (fig. 54) body and flap are treated as
separate units. In moccasins, the uppers form a field separate from the
rim (fig. 55). In clothing, the patterns on collars, pockets or sleeves
are often considered as separate units. Wissler has called attention to
the influence of the structure of garments upon their decoration[40].
[40] Clark Wissler, Structural Basis to the Decoration of Costumes
among the Plains Indians, Anthrop. Papers Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. 17,
pp. 93 et seq.
[Illustration: Fig. 53. Pottery vessel, Molkenberg type, Megalithic
period.]
[Illustration: Fig. 54. Pouch, Arapaho.]
[Illustration: Fig. 55. Embroidered moccasin, Apache.]
The tripartite division of the decorative field of Alaskan woven
blankets is determined by the position of the blanket. The wider middle
field is on the back of the wearer, the narrower, lateral fields are in
front of the body (see figs. 269 et seq., pp. 259 et seq.).
In garments made of single pieces of fabric, or in sewed basketry (fig.
56) we find the seams sometimes decorated so that the seam becomes a
decorative element. In other cases seams are accompanied by decorative
bands. In leggings and shirts of American Indians the seams are often
emphasized by the attachment of fringes.
In other objects prominent places are elaborated by the addition of
decorative elements.
[Illustration: Fig. 56. Birchbark vessels; _a_, _b_, _c_, Eastern
Indians; _d_, Koryak.]
[Illustration: Fig. 57. Pottery vessel, Arkansas.]
In clay pots, the handles are so treated (fig. 57). On shields the
central knob becomes an object of decoration. The handles of canes
or other knob-like terminations are often elaborated as decorative
elements.
Sometimes fields without natural breaks, such as wall surfaces, are
treated as units. Examples of this kind are our modern wall papers, or
the painted walls of ancient Egyptian buildings. Often the tendency to
break up the decorative field is so strong, that even where a natural
division is not given it may be broken up into smaller parts. We may
notice particularly that the marginal lines which emphasize or limit
the form, develop exuberantly and thus encroach more and more upon the
body of the object. In baskets from the interior of British Columbia
the marginal pattern has grown to such an extent that it occupies the
whole upper half or even more of the basket and is itself subdivided
into a number of fields that follow the outline of the margin (fig.
58). Similar conditions are found on the margins of blankets of the New
Zealanders (see Plate VIII, p. 182) and on the bronze work of ancient
Scandinavia.
[Illustration: Fig. 58. Imbricated basket, Chilcotin, British Columbia.]
Thus we reach the conclusion that a number of purely formal elements,
some of which are more or less closely connected with technical
motives, others with physiological conditions of the body and still
others with the general character of sense experience are determinants
of ornamental art. From this we conclude that a fundamental, esthetic,
formal interest is essential; and also that art, in its simple forms,
is not necessarily expressive of purposive action, but is rather based
upon our reactions to forms that develop through mastery of technique.
The same elements play also an important role in highly developed art
forms. If it is true that these elements are in part not purposive,
then it must be admitted that our relation to them is not essentially
different from those we have towards esthetically valuable phenomena of
nature. The formal interest is directly due to the impression derived
from the form. It is not expressive in the sense that it conveys a
definite meaning or expresses an esthetic emotion.
It might be thought that this condition prevails only in the domain of
decorative art, and that representative art, dance, music, and poetry
must always be expressive. This is to a great extent true so far as
representative art is concerned, for the term itself implies that the
art product represents a thought or an idea. It is also necessarily
true in poetry, in so far as its materials are words that convey
ideas. Nevertheless a formal element may be recognized in these also,
a form element quite analogous to the one we found in decorative art.
It determines certain aspects of the characteristic style. So far as
representative art is ornamental, the formal principles of decorative
art enter into the composition and influence the representative
form. In dance, music and poetry, rhythm and thematic forms follow
stylistic principles that are not necessarily expressive but that have
objectively an esthetic value. We shall discuss these questions more
fully at another place[41].
[41] See p. 301.