Periodising Nigerian Art History: Thoughts on the Words Modern and Contemporary
By Professor
Frank A. O. Ugiomoh
By Victor Ehikhamenor |
In Bruno Latour’s book entitled -We Have Never
Been Modern, (6th printing, 2001),
he explicitly declared that Europe never had
a modern culture. He says that “Modernity
[noun, only] point, in one way or
another, to the passage of time. The adjective modern designates a new regime,
an acceleration, a rupture, a revolution in time” (p 10). The origin of the
word Modern from the Latin Modo and means “here and now.” The word
Contemporary is of Latin (L) origin; Con is standing for ‘same’ in English and Tempus (L) standing for ‘time.’ In
concrete reality, ‘contemporary’ (noun),
means same time.
Painting by Yusuf Grillo |
The use
of the two terms in the development of culture has remained contentious. Latour
observes that “the word is always being thrown
into the middle of a fight, in a quarrel where there are no winners and
losers.” However, that the word presents a contrast
with “an archaic or stable past” (p 10). There will always be an archaic
and a stable past that interfaces with individual
transactions, either with culture or nature. The continuous relevance of the
past in the present where the new is also relevant is catered for by the term
contemporary. The term explicitly refers to a co-existence in time. Very old and
relevant cultural engagements and realities have persisted from time in the
present as well as new realities. A dynamic mix of the above nature undergirds
the essence of cultural productions and transactions. What is new can be
suspicious while the old and stable past inspires confidence.
Installation by By Peju Olatise |
The
Enlightenment culture in Europe
structured its cultural epochs into Ancient, Middle and Modern periods about
the 17 &18 centuries. However, we know that
every ‘here and now’ is modern. The time lapse since the eighteenth century has
witnessed multiple ‘here and now.’ Such multiple ‘here and now,’ continue to
erode the foundations of the 18-century modernity. By 1950-1970 nothing of that
landmark was realistic anymore. They had become archaic. For such archaic
presence that continued to lay claim to modernism, cultural historians devised
the term postmodernism. The implication of being postmodern is really “you can
hang on to that irrelevant term so that we can make progress. The postmodern
indeed recognises the contemporariness of every ‘here and now’ as a blend of
historical realities.
By Bruce Onobrakpeya |
In Nigeria, regarding periodisation initiatives in its art
history, a trending reference has been to take Aina Onabolu up to 1970 as
modern and the period after as contemporary. The question is, modern as ‘here
and now’ about what, and contemporary within what context?
By Ndidi Emefele |
A convenient approach may be to take cultural productions in
Nigeria within conventional durational epochs such as the decades or centuries.
By this, we refer to the 1960’s, 1980’s, 20th or 21st, centuries. Thus, new
artworks that come with the style of the old still in vogue and otherwise
ruptures with the past will always be sorted out. In cultural history trends
and styles that are no longer useful will naturally experience discard and may
resurrect when needed as new styles. So the circle of what is new and what is
archaic becomes contentious unless we recognise that contemporariness is the
ground that funds memory as culture continues to be produced.
No comments:
Post a Comment