Relatively few investigators bring the tools of the art historian to quarry the riches of pre-Columbian art, as does the writer of this work. Until now, none has devoted a publication entirely to the sculpture of ancient western village cultures in Mexico. This handsome book is, therefore, doubly welcome.
John L. Alsberg, author of the text, approaches his material from more or less common viewpoints concerning visual perception developed by theorists such as Conrad Fiedler, Egon Kornmann, and Rudolf Arnheim. After stating premises and defining terms, Alsberg devotes his essay mainly to techniques, artistic evolution, and regional characteristics. He illustrates his thesis by well-chosen, seldom-seen artifacts. The otherwise fine reproductions are occasionally marred, however, by ambiguities of lighting.
By applying established criteria of visual perception, Alsberg provides the sculpture with an often convincing aesthetic rationale and a critique of stylistic evolution. With Max Raphael he seems to argue that when the material conditions of a primitive society change, man’s emotional reactions—including his aesthetic reactions—also change. At the same time, like Alois Riegl and his followers, Alsberg places great emphasis upon “will-to-form.” One aspect of Gestalt criticism, however, he largely neglects: the influence of so-called haptic sensations.
When the author is unconvincing the explanation appears to lie in a misconception of major proportions. “The village people of western Mexico were isolated,” he states, “cut off from the rest of Mexico by high mountains” (p. 3). Actually they were less isolated than the Olmecs, whose culture penetrated much of highland Mesoamerica during the pre-Classic era.
Are we, then, to believe that on geographical or other grounds these village people developed completely independent of Teotihuacán, Monte Albán, El Tajín, and other such cultural centers? Ought we to be certain, like Alsberg, that the literary material (colonial and modern) on the Taraseans can throw no light on their predecessors in western Mexico? Is the sculpture of the latter to be fully understood without reference to the art of Jaina and Remojadas?
Strengthened by Mesoamerican cross-references, Alsberg’s chart on the “evolution of artistic form in . . . western Mexican clay sculpture” (p. 68), although entirely plausible, would carry more weight. His chart contrasting “evolved” stone and clay art (p. 40) in terms of “society,” “beliefs,” “architecture,” etc. is an unreliable guide to the sculpture of ancient Mexico. Among well-known works, for example, the Olmec “Wrestler” of stone and the Maya head of stucco from Palenque fit badly into his schema.
If the author is reluctant to view his material within the context of relevant Mesoamerican cultures, he is nonetheless eager to press comparisons with Egypt, China, and Altamira and to invoke constantly the authority of Picasso. Such analogies and apostrophes are often apposite, but sometimes forced and gratuitous.
This book, in short, has flaws. Measured against the purpose and achievement of the authors, however, they are venial. By and large, this is an impressive publication.