This thesis attempts to understand the nature of the Greenlandic image "Tupilaq" in traditional Kalaadlit culture and in its modern context. The same term is applied today in Greenland to a variety of images carved as small figures for the tourist or art markets. This thesis examines the ways in which the images and the application of the term have changed. This study describes the traditional context of the TUPILAQ image and establishes a time frame for the inception of carvings labelled "Tupilaq". Data used to support this investigation were drawn from ethnographic records, historical accounts, and museum exhibit reports. It becomes clear that the Tupilaq figure exists as a distinct and new category of material culture which stands apart from its mythic image. An analysis of these carvings and interviews with their carvers show that the content of Tupilaq figures is not what their label implies. The analysis is carried a step further, examining the development of this carving production, the market for these carvings as cultural artifacts, and the concerns of their producers and consumers. This investigation demonstrates that the ways in which East Greenlanders modified and continue to modify this carving production relates directly to their necessity to establish their group's identity in a changing cultural environment. This thesis shows that the label -Tupilaq- is the symbolic link between traditional and contemporary society. In conclusion, interpretation of material culture is discussed as it applies to Tupilaq figures; we need to go beyond the label for a more adequate interpretation of the content and the occurrence of cultural images as material objects. / Arts, Faculty of / Anthropology, Department of / Graduate

Western aesthetic convention represents an accrual of inherited societal perspectives on the artist, the artifact and its consumer. A review of its history and the etymology of its terminology discloses a twofold problem. The first aspect concerns the separation of the manufacture of aesthetic objects from their economic raison d'etre. The second involves the categorization of these artifacts into art or craft. This problem is compounded when considering Western judgements on non-Western aesthetics. Inuit handicraft provides an appropriate model to illustrate the fact that present convention and nomenclature prove inadequate in addressing both intra and especially extra-cultural concerns. A broader and more inclusive orientation is needed.

Although the human head is a common subject in art, the Eskimos have utilized this motif in a most uncommon manner. Sculptures consisting of a number of human heads, and only human heads, have been produced throughout the arctic, but never as consistently as by the Dorset and contemporary artists. In view of the unusual nature of this subject and its flourishing appearance 900 years apart in two distinct Eskimo cultures, one wonders what significance the motif had for the Eskimos themselves and what connection, if any, exists between its role in the art of two different, albeit Eskimo, cultures. Investigation of these problems is complicated by the particular circumstances of both cultures, especially the Dorset. Little has been written about the multiples of either culture. And while the contemporary Eskimos are available for interview—and were very helpful in answering the queries put to them—the Dorsets have long since been replaced by the Thule Eskimos. Our only actual evidence of the prehistoric Dorsets is archaeological. In these circumstances the actual Dorset multiples themselves are especially important—they are our major source of information as to their use and significance. Although they themselves and analogy with other Eskimo cultures may suggest certain interpretations, any tentative conclusions about the multiples created by the Dorsets cannot be definitely substantiated. Research and personal interviews in the north established that the multiples have no ulterior significance for the contemporary Eskimos. The sculpture is made for sale in the south and continued possession of it is not necessary for the Eskimo's well-being. There was no consistent interpretation of the subject. The head motif may be used simply as a design element or the heads may represent any of the following: humans—often in a family group, mythological characters, or spirits. Most artists said the idea for the multiples was from their own head or from seeing other contemporary carvings of this subject. Only a few of the contemporary Eskimos gave any indication of knowledge of the use of this subject by older Eskimos in historical times. However, multiples were made in the 1800's in such places as Alaska, the Ungava District, and at Angmassalik, Greenland. Between these few 19th century examples and the Dorset multiples of about 1000, there seems to be a complete break in the tradition of the subject. Various factors indicate that the majority of Dorset art was probably used in a religious-shamanistic context. The use of heads on other religious objects as well as the occurrence of standardized multiples, with a specific number of faces, over a large geographical area indicate that the multiple was a part of this religious art. It seems likely that the multiple was used by the shaman himself as a magic staff in ceremonies and most likely in those shamanic duties associated with retaining the well-being of his charges; particularly their health. The motif of heads suggests the possible use of the multiple in that popular Eskimo means of divination—head-lifting. In any of these life-associated capacities, the beings represented on the multiple could be: successfully cured humans, the shaman's helping spirits, or even more likely, souls; either souls to be returned to the body during illness to effect the cure, dead souls of others consulted during a illness, or souls conducted away at the death of those not successfully cured. If the Dorset multiple functioned as a religious item, and it seems most likely that it did, the contemporary sculptors have continued the tradition of the original subject but have not retained the original significance. / Arts, Faculty of / Art History, Visual Art and Theory, Department of / Graduate

No description available.