@article{oai:minpaku.repo.nii.ac.jp:00004134,
 author = {古谷, 嘉章 and Furuya, Yoshiaki},
 issue = {1},
 journal = {国立民族学博物館研究報告, Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology},
 month = {Oct},
 note = {グァテマラの観光地のひとつアティトラソ湖地方の2つのマヤ系のコミュニ
ティーは,「マヤの伝統的生活」を描くインディヘナの油彩画家の存在によっ
て知られている。本稿は,彼らの絵画の生産・流通・消費のプロセスを,「イ
ンディヘナ芸術」と「インディヘナ文化」をめぐる「交渉」(negotiation)の
場として分析する。そこでは,「インディヘナ画家」として「インディヘナ絵
画」を制作・販売することを余儀なくされている彼らが,一方で,西洋近代的
な芸術=文化システムによる「芸術(家)」としての認知を求めつつ,他方で,
そのようなかたちで理解=消化されてしまわない差異を生産している点につい
て,同様に「コンタクトゾーン」で絵画を生産している他の事例をも参照して
考察する。, Two Mayan communities, Santiago Atitlan and San Pedro la
Laguna, are located on Lake Atitlan, one of the most popular tourist
spots in Guatemala. These two communities are famous for their professional
indigenous painters, who produce oil paintings depicting 'traditional
Mayan ways of life.' This paper will discuss the processes of production,
circulation and consumption of those paintings, as sites of
'negotiation' about the meaning of Mayan 'art' and their 'culture
.'
The Western art world has played a dominant role as gatekeeper in
the recognition and disavowal of artists and works of art around the
world. It works within the discourse of the modern 'Art—Culture
System' (Clifford 1988), which has long been hegemonic in the West's
appropriation of non—Western objects. Even in this era of
`Postmodern' dissemination and decentralization this is still the case .
The objects produced in the non-West have been either recognized and
collected as `authentic' artifacts/works of art, or disavowed as 'inauthentic,'
unworthy of collecting. The most salient problem of this whole
system is the lack of reciprocity between dominant players and subordinate
ones, and the fact that this inequality has been naturalized.
Mayan indigenous oil paintings are commodities in two different
markets; they may be consumed either as `works of art' or as `tourist
souvenirs.' The painters try to negotiate with potential buyers about the
price and the artistic value of their work. However, their subordinate
economic position forces them to compromise both artistically and
economically. The most popular subject among the consumers (art
dealers as well as tourists) is costumbre, the Mayan `traditional folk
life,' and the painters cannot help but meet the consumers' demand. At
the same time, painting costumbre is nevertheless the painters' conscious
signifying practice, which produces differences, and as such is indigestible
for the Western discourse of art and artist. Thus, the indigenous
paintings are commodities made for sale and, at the same time, creative
expressions of the producers.
. This situation is not unique to Guatemalan indigenous painters. Artists,
not recognized as such, in the non-West are producing their work
under similar conditions. This paper examines three similar cases:
Australian aboriginal acrylic paintings; African `tourist art' and
`popular art' from Cote d'Ivoire and Zaire; and Balinese peasants'
paintings in the 1930s.
All these paintings are `bicultural products,' born under the unequal
distribution of power in `contact zones.' They are considered lacking in
universal artistic value or are digested as an exotic but intelligible
difference by the Western art world and tourism. Western painting
techniques are borrowed by those painters, who appropriate them to invent
new ways of representing their life, culture, tradition, or history.
Being made for sale, these paintings are subordinated to the market law
of supply and demand, but these transactions are simultaneously cultural
negotiations between contesting signifying practices.
This paper concludes with a few remarks on the importance of giving
a voice to those unacknowledged producers of art, who are
negotiating, on a daily basis, their position as subaltern artists, in order
to explore the fertility of human artistic expression, once it has been
released from hegemonic Western artistic conventions.},
 pages = {35--93},
 title = {芸術／文化をめぐる交渉 : グァテマラのインディヘナ画家たち},
 volume = {23},
 year = {1998},
 yomi = {フルヤ, ヨシアキ}
}