Why is black art so limited in scope? - No, I’m not saying black people suck.

Literally all black art in America is either real bland or real racist (both ends of the spectrum). You got some real impressive shit in actual Africa such as:
1655181705608.png

And then you look what a few hundred years does to a muthfucka in America:
1655181747179.png
 
This is a bit disingenuous, reading this forum boils down to why American Blacks Red Necks art so limited in scope.
Doesn't take much digging for Blacks artist with merits.
Personally, like Kara Walker before BLM ruined her art.
My personal favorite
1655183499900.png
 
OP's question might seem a bit disingenuous. Though I agree much of black American pop-art of the last couple of decades has been very subpar, identity obsessive and insistent upon itself, the general question of why black American art focuses so much on black American culture is like asking why 19th century French art is so... French in scope. They're reflecting the environment they live in, plus the aforementioned publishing incentives to do so which have been elaborated upon by other users here. An ethnic group is naturally going to create art centered around that group and its place relative to the populations around it - not solely, mind, but it's definitely going to be present much of the time.

That being said, it also is deeply unfair to say that black Americans are incapable of creating a wide range of art. Much of American cultural development, particularly in the realm of music, owes itself to primarily Black artists. Yes, the horrendous and toxic lyrical content of certain strands of rap and hip-hop largely developed out of the late 20th-century urban black cultural milieu, though musically it was more heavily influenced by German electronic groups like Kraftwerk - Afrika Bambaataa and the Soul Sonic Force expressed their appreciation of the electronic pioneers from Dusseldorf by sampling their 1976 track Trans-Europe Express for Planet Rock in 1982, which is widely credited as one of the first hip-hop tracks. However, before rap and hip-hop, black Americans were instrumental in the development of Gospel (which developed out of old negro plantation spirituals, and still has some residual influences from West Africa such as call-and-response techniques), Ragtime, Bebop, Swing, Jazz, Blues, RnB, Rock n' Roll, Zydeco, Soul, Funk, and Fusion - so there's hardly a dearth of creativity there. When people think of quintessentially 'American' music, outside of Country, Western, Appalachian, American Folk and Bluegrass, or orchestral composers like Aaron Copland or Leonard Bernstein, they usually think of music which was developed primarily by black Americans.

Black Americans also had a strong literary tradition, particularly during the late 19th and early 20th century with figures like Booker T. Washington, Elizabeth Keckley, Paul Lawrence Dunbar, Frances E.W. Harper, Claude McKay, Zora Neale Hurston, Dorothy West, Countee Cullen, Ralph Waldo Ellison, etc. I would argue that it's totally expected that many black American writers at this time would create works exploring their place in the broader American culture. Some of them were born into slavery (Washington and Keckley) and it was still within living memory until around the 1920's. Jim Crow was at its height and black Americans were largely left to their own devices to develop independently, so this also included a lot of existential soul searching.

In terms of visual art, I recommend checking out the works of Henry Ossawa Tanner.

Henry Ossawa Tanner Tutt'Art@ (62).jpg

Henry Ossawa Tanner Tutt'Art@ (57).jpg


tanner.jpg


Yeah black American Modern (big M) Art is really ugly because Modern Art is often ugly in general. This has no racial bias. But you also have some really creative projects by contemporary black artists, like the ingenious use of textiles in Bina Butler's work.

contemporay-textile-artists-bisa-butler-1.jpg

NMAAHC-2021_38_001.jpg

WOOS-Det1-1.jpg


As for dance, you need not look past the brilliant artists who came of age during the Harlem Renaissance, and Swing eras. Cab Calloway, the Nicholas Brothers, Bill Bailey, John W. Sublett, Bill Robinson, Alice Whitman etc.

You do not have the broad concept of classic Americana culture without very, very significant contributions by brilliant black American artists in all fields.

Edit: Spelling
 
Last edited:
A constructive way to approach this question is to see how Blacks discussed this question back during the Harlem renaissance.
It's digestible, the essay, but to sum it up.
Locke feels Blacks should create beautiful art; creating "Black focus art" shouldn't be the only focus, but by making beautiful art, he hopes the whole society will accept Blacks.
"Propaganda itself is preferable to shallow, truckling imitation. Negro things may reasonably be a fad for others; for us they must be a religion. Beauty, however, is its best priest and
psalms will be more effective than sermons."

DuBois says Black focus art should be promoted because being Black is beautiful.

" I stand in utter
shamelessness and say that whatever art I have for writing has been used always for propaganda
for gaining the right of black folk to love and enjoy."

The problem I feel most have in this discussion is why there is such a push by Corporations and Actives to push beautifying "Blacks Red Neck Culture." Being "Hood" and celebrating the cultures of Black Ghettos is toxic to Blacks. Hood Blacks make every effort to keep aspiring Blacks within reach bogged down to the Hood. They will use social pressure and emotional manipulation. Classic is "Come on, help a Nigga out" bullshit. Schools are shit, shops close down, and you have riots in the communities. Like the crab mentality, I will take you with me if I am going down. Their "Art" is a byproduct of this.
 
Afrika Bambaataa sampled boys sexually way more than he made music.
Not disputing that, but his personal character is irrelevant to the point of his place in the history of late 20th century developments in American music. It's like shitting on Wendy Carlos for being a troon when discussing his tremendous influence on the innovative use of the Moog synthesizer in early electronic music. Aaron Copland's awful pro-socialist views do not negate the fact that Fanfare for the Common Man is one of the finest, most quintessentially American pieces of music ever composed.

 
  • Like
Reactions: SCSI
Not disputing that, but his personal character is irrelevant to the point of his place in the history of late 20th century developments in American music. It's like shitting on Wendy Carlos for being a troon when discussing his tremendous influence on the innovative use of the Moog synthesizer in early electronic music. Aaron Copland's awful pro-socialist views do not negate the fact that Fanfare for the Common Man is one of the finest, most quintessentially American pieces of music ever composed.

We know child rape and music in the 21st century go together. It's never in spite of either, it's almost like degenerate people and promotion in the music industry are connected. Walter Carlos is another case of a sad autistic man being preyed upon by predatory psychologists. It's why he largely disappeared from public life afterward.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: IAmNotAlpharius
Anything that is advertised with the creator's race will typically be limited to a small scope of shitty over explored topics. This ends up being true for works from any minority where the campaign surrounding it blasts you with that fact.

Cyberpunk was made by this based dude.
1655214447762.jpeg

If someone is advertising their race they’re going to be focusing on SJW subjects.
 
oh, the mali empire certainly was black
One of my biggest pet peeves as an American with other Americans is how we tend to group people together just by skin color and we ignore or minimize culture, religion, language, political affiliation, etc. I suspect it’s because many Americans don’t deal with a true foreign other or have lived abroad.

Africa is a big ass continent and it’s disingenuous to assume everyone there is the same because of skin color. Just like it’s stupid to think that Western, Northern, Eastern, and Southern Europeans are identical because they’re lighter skinned. Or thinking that the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans are totally the same.

This comment is from here.
3EF47B19-CA55-46BA-8650-B9C1E4764B30.jpeg
 
OP's question might seem a bit disingenuous. Though I agree much of black American pop-art of the last couple of decades has been very subpar, identity obsessive and insistent upon itself, the general question of why black American art focuses so much on black American culture is like asking why 19th century French art is so... French in scope. They're reflecting the environment they live in, plus the aforementioned publishing incentives to do so which have been elaborated upon by other users here. An ethnic group is naturally going to create art centered around that group and its place relative to the populations around it - not solely, mind, but it's definitely going to be present much of the time.

That being said, it also is deeply unfair to say that black Americans are incapable of creating a wide range of art. Much of American cultural development, particularly in the realm of music, owes itself to primarily Black artists. Yes, the horrendous and toxic lyrical content of certain strands of rap and hip-hop largely developed out of the late 20th-century urban black cultural milieu, though musically it was more heavily influenced by German electronic groups like Kraftwerk - Afrika Bambaataa and the Soul Sonic Force expressed their appreciation of the electronic pioneers from Dusseldorf by sampling their 1976 track Trans-Europe Express for Planet Rock in 1982, which is widely credited as one of the first hip-hop tracks. However, before rap and hip-hop, black Americans were instrumental in the development of Gospel (which developed out of old negro plantation spirituals, and still has some residual influences from West Africa such as call-and-response techniques), Ragtime, Bebop, Swing, Jazz, Blues, RnB, Rock n' Roll, Zydeco, Soul, Funk, and Fusion - so there's hardly a dearth of creativity there. When people think of quintessentially 'American' music, outside of Country, Western, Appalachian, American Folk and Bluegrass, or orchestral composers like Aaron Copland or Leonard Bernstein, they usually think of music which was developed primarily by black Americans.

Black Americans also had a strong literary tradition, particularly during the late 19th and early 20th century with figures like Booker T. Washington, Elizabeth Keckley, Paul Lawrence Dunbar, Frances E.W. Harper, Claude McKay, Zora Neale Hurston, Dorothy West, Countee Cullen, Ralph Waldo Ellison, etc. I would argue that it's totally expected that many black American writers at this time would create works exploring their place in the broader American culture. Some of them were born into slavery (Washington and Keckley) and it was still within living memory until around the 1920's. Jim Crow was at its height and black Americans were largely left to their own devices to develop independently, so this also included a lot of existential soul searching.

In terms of visual art, I recommend checking out the works of Henry Ossawa Tanner.

View attachment 3386447
View attachment 3386448

View attachment 3386449

Yeah black American Modern (big M) Art is really ugly because Modern Art is often ugly in general. This has no racial bias. But you also have some really creative projects by contemporary black artists, like the ingenious use of textiles in Bina Butler's work.

View attachment 3386452
View attachment 3386455
View attachment 3386456

As for dance, you need not look past the brilliant artists who came of age during the Harlem Renaissance, and Swing eras. Cab Calloway, the Nicholas Brothers, Bill Bailey, John W. Sublett, Bill Robinson, Alice Whitman etc.

You do not have the broad concept of classic Americana culture without very, very significant contributions by brilliant black American artists in all fields.

Edit: Spelling
Yeah, I probably should’ve worded the OP better. I meant to ask why is all the black art being pushed on us all about “the black experience”. For all I know there could be a black George RR Martin or a black Stephen King, but they aren’t pushed as much as others that all deal with themes of racism or oppression.
 
One of my biggest pet peeves as an American with other Americans is how we tend to group people together just by skin color and we ignore or minimize culture, religion, language, political affiliation, etc. I suspect it’s because many Americans don’t deal with a true foreign other or have lived abroad.

Africa is a big ass continent and it’s disingenuous to assume everyone there is the same because of skin color. Just like it’s stupid to think that Western, Northern, Eastern, and Southern Europeans are identical because they’re lighter skinned. Or thinking that the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans are totally the same.

This comment is from here.
View attachment 3386932
the whole "white" thing is really dumb. my family immigrated from russia and over there, everyone with light skin is considered white unless they're obviously a russian east asian minority or black lol.

americans have a really weird obsession with race and ethnicity.
 
One of my biggest pet peeves as an American with other Americans is how we tend to group people together just by skin color and we ignore or minimize culture, religion, language, political affiliation, etc. I suspect it’s because many Americans don’t deal with a true foreign other or have lived abroad.

Africa is a big ass continent and it’s disingenuous to assume everyone there is the same because of skin color. Just like it’s stupid to think that Western, Northern, Eastern, and Southern Europeans are identical because they’re lighter skinned. Or thinking that the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans are totally the same.

This comment is from here.
View attachment 3386932
I'm with you here. Africa is a freakishly diverse continent and a Xhosa from South Africa is about as similar to a San Bushman or a Ghanaian Ashanti as a Finn is to a Turk or Algerian.

The U.S. is a bubble and (speaking as an American myself) partially because of its superpower status and the way public education works, many Americans tend to view things through a very distilled, America-centric lens. Americans generally don't travel overseas much. It's a sort of exceptionalism-of-perspective and has lead to everything from simple generalization along racial lines (rather than the nuance of ethnicity - if a black American were to move to Ghana and claim to be a true-blue African they would be laughed out of the room in many cases) to massive foreign policy blunders by assuming that the American model of culture and government is what all nations and peoples desire.
 
Why is the theme of “the black experience” so prevalent in black works of art? Is the color of their skin really that big of a part of a majority of black artists’ identities? Are these racially-centered works just more visible; being pushed more often and harder?

Yes.
 
Honestly, what you're talking about is pop art, which is heavily commercialized and mostly approved by marketing departments to get as much exposure and make as much money as possible.

It's like asking, 'why do LGBT creators focus only on the LGBT experience?' When American Psycho, based on a book written by a gay man and directed by a gay woman have nothing to do with that. And both the movie and the book might not have been able to be told by a straight man/woman.

Functionally, what you are talking about is not black art, but the commercialization of art in general. Contrary to popular belief, most black people don't want to be boiled down to a skin tone. There are large amounts of black authors who write, design and do art completely unrelated to the black community.

Black men have been weebs for as long as white men with naruto, one piece, DBZ and Yughio. Plenty of fan art and cosplay has been done by them.

These sort of things are pushed to the side because they distract from the money making machine about the 'black experience'. And don't get me wrong there's a fuckton of amazing creations based around this (12 years a slave and fences come to mind).

So even with that there are degrees. The real problem is the pre-packaged commercialization of pop art for rich liberal progressives who cannot understand how to design a story. And simply to black creators, it is easier to get produced, made and paid for than a more pop culture piece that beats you to death with its message than a cerebral project that requires thought and characters with flaws and challenges. I can't even imagine the bullshit they must go through.
 
People want to be part of a 'community' not just a globo-, cosmopolitan citizen of the world, consumer. Why are all Hallmark movies about some stressed out boss bitch who does it all and is strong and independent but then finds true love in some man who's 'not like the other men'? Theyre speaking to an audience.

And I agree with the above post, it is about selling shit, in a certain way--and artists do want to make money. Its compartmentalization and shorthand of experiences; you can make art that anyone can relate too but it's far more impactful if someone relates to it or likes it or engages with it more than just looking at it and moving on. Stephanie Meyers for instance, JK Rowling, made billions selling a benign experience that teenagers and young adults relate to.

You have galleries full of classic works that most people see as boring and benign because even if theyre technically fascinating and were meant to be impactful. You could show people a gallery full of like Ukiyo-e woodblock prints and those were pretty influential, The Great Wave of Kanegawa is an iconic print, but it doesnt mean much to people but then you have guys like Takashi Murakami who makes weird anime pop art and its more modern and relatable to people or people relate things together, they know the figures, shit like that, and whether you like his art or not, hes pretty famous and a successful artist.

Literally all black art in America is either real bland or real racist (both ends of the spectrum). You got some real impressive shit in actual Africa such as:View attachment 3385861
And then you look what a few hundred years does to a muthfucka in America:
View attachment 3385863
Well if youre going to critique art and bring shit like that in it, these two statues are two totally different things and you can separate the meaning of the artist and influence of the artist and say I like one over the other but the first one is an African artist almost emulating those old neoclassical sculptures of powerful people, and the other is an American artist making a callback to centuries old tribal, precolonial sculptures or ritual figurines (although I dont think any one in particular). I dont know why its got lions as Fu dogs though.

Context, scale and placement and shit matter too. The top one is a large statue made of probably expensive materials and if you told me it was at a place where some famous figure was born or some city hall or something, Id believe it. A statue like that in Africa is probably quite novel or at least carries more weight than it would in America where its just 'Oh another statue of some guy' and you just pass it. The bottom one is depicting something more stylized and maybe ritualistic, primitive, and if you told me it was in the courtyard of the Smithsonian or something, Id go 'Sure yeah theyd have something like that', its novel in America. And in a world where AI can now just generate 'classical' art, AI portraits, realist works, like Leonid Afremov or Thomas Kinkade shit, you have a bunch of people who find the weird, niche, highly 'cultural' shit to be more appealing.

Hell even Piss Christ could be argued in favor of being Spanish art connected to the culture, viewed through the lens of Spanish Catholicism.

If you wanted to get real pretentious about it you could argue that the elongated head is probably symbolism but partly may have been a deliberate choice so that the statue doesnt get swallowed up in scale by the tall buildings around it. If you took the scale and subject of the top sculpture and kept everything the same, but placed it in the courtyard in the bottom image, it would look and feel more like the Fountain of the Four Rivers in Rome, youd imagine there to be a small pool or something on that concrete slab with people coming up and throwing pennies in or something.
 
Last edited:
Back