Viewing page 50 of 57

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

1
Mr Gebhard says "There is a myth to be destroyed, that contemporary S. W. Indian art is a direct & logical outgrowth of its own prehistoric past." This is no myth - to be destroyed. For Art is a fluid thing, and alive, and subject to change, and as Andre' Malraux says "Every great art unearths or rediscovers its perfection, just as it discovers its ancestors; but this is always a perfection of its own, and varies from one period to another."
 
Our interest is in art as Art, and in the artist as an artist whether Indian, European, Oriental African, and it is with the working artist that we have to deal, and pigeon-holing

2

him is not beneficial to any artist. We who have known Indian Art for several decades are not worried about names for its various forms. We are troubled, offended might be the word - over the present commercial trend. Commercial bothers invade all art movements. But this one was no outgrowth of the work done at Santa Fe Indian School. I was there at the very beginning and know the devotion of Dorothy Dunn to the sacred principle of encouraging pupils to follow their own bent, their own intuitive wisdom, and to follow true to the Indian Culture. They were given no mid-west instruction. When Mr. Faris and I had gathered together the artists to paint