To the Editor:
The Dartmouth's review of the Hood's current exhibition, "Our Land: Contemporary Art from the Arctic," reflects an embarrassing lack of knowledge of non-Western art historical scholarship ("New Hood exhibits emphasize anthropology over aesthetics," April 2).
Before criticizing the Hood's current exhibition by writing that the show "seems more artifact than art," the review should have considered the possibility that the exhibit is intentionally challenging the rigid distinction between "art" and "artifact." The work of scholars like Susan Vogel has explored why artistic objects produced by non-Western cultures are often viewed as "just" artifacts, as if they are inferior to art simply because they are functional. The notion of "art for art's sake" is such a recent historical development that much Western art would be viewed as "artifacts" if viewed with the same anthropological lens with which we view the work of non-Western cultures.
The challenge facing any exhibit featuring works of art outside the Western canon is to play with the strict "art/artifact" binary. The Hood ought to be lauded for embracing this challenge.
