In the last class of Contemporary Art History, the questioning of authenticity brought us to question what if anything is original. This lead to wondering what it means to be original in the very meaning of the word. It was then that I brought up Terry’s Tanuki figures.
I argued that the Tanuki has been around longer than most of us and has gone through several variations. Its figure constantly changing from artist to artist, yet Tanuki itself remains the same in both concept and representation, albeit that too changes from person to person. Enter Kensuke, who argued the fact that the mold Terry made was original even though Tanuki looks nothing like how Terry fashioned his version of the mythical beast.
Kensuke then went on to describe how Tanuki should look like. I know that he is from the culture in which Tanuki was essentially created and that he has every right to say what he wants, but what gives him the authority to say how the Tanuki should and should not look? The following are my thoughts on the matter as I would have stated them in class provided that the course of discussion didn’t swiftly take another turn.
Tanuki is similar to the yeti of Nepal or any country with snow covered mountains. The culture has described what it may or may not look like in art pieces and stories that have found their way around the world, changing in the process. The yeti, we are told, is a giant white man-ape of some kind. But who says that it cannot be a different color than white? Maybe it is more of a lighter brown or even gray. Some would argue this by saying that a brown yeti is really “Big foot” from North America (who was recently spotted in Malaysia last I heard anything about him/her). But even Bigfoot is up for debate on if it is really brown or black or even some other color we haven’t even thought it could be. For all we know, Bigfoot could have spots on its furry coat, which even that could end up being not fur at all!
So what gives Kensuke the authority to say how something is suppose to look? Is it because it is within his culture? That may have some part to do with it. But I live in America, and if I told someone that had no idea what Bigfoot looked like my version of how I think the creature looked like, does that mean that I have the authority to say that anyone that creates a different version is wrong? I am an American, last I checked. And Bigfoot is a part of the American mythos similar to Tanuki is to the Japanese culture. So why can’t I say that Bigfoot is probably hairy with black fur that has brown spots on it like a cheetah?
The only answer that I can give to my own question is the fact that I’m not the original source. I’m not where the idea of Bigfoot came out of. I’m not the creator of the myth or the legend or even the facts surrounding Bigfoot. I’ve read up on the creature, but even the books I read are probably not even accurate. The same can be said about Kensuke and his description of what Tanuki is suppose to look like. He may be part of the culture, but he doesn’t have the authorship rights to say how Tanuki is suppose to look like even though he knows more than me about the creature. He didn’t create Tanuki. And neither did Terry in his art work around the Tanuki.
As someone who is very much interested in the mythical worlds of dragons and magic and even realistic fictions like alchemy and Bigfoot, these are things I have to acknowledge. Whenever I read something about one of these mythical beings, I have to remember that no matter how true the legends are, they are and have been changed over the course of time through seemingly original thoughts. And the added information, no matter how realistic they may sound, could be just as false as the creature itself. On top of that, I have to also remember that myths and legends may also really be facts, similar to how lies and gossiping could turn out to be factual if one does enough digging and research.
In the end, to prevent myself from talking in circles, he is wrong and I am wrong. This whole argument falls back upon the fact that everyone is both correct and incorrect at the same time. Even now, what I wrote is both correct and incorrect in some fashion or another. After all, who am I to say that someone has no authority to say what they want?
No comments:
Post a Comment