Landscape art and the territorial ontology : a call for landscape restitution

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Goodrich, Andre
Strydom, Richardt

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Art Historical Work Group of South Africa

Abstract

Ingold has used Marx’s distinction between exchange value and use value to distinguish between land and landscape. Land, Ingold suggests, is abstracted, quantitative and interchangeable. Landscape, by contrast, is qualitative and emerges as habitation’s embodiment of the history of inhabitants’ activities, projects and livelihoods. We use this distinction to argue that the 1913 Land Act effectively created a white monopoly on the production of landscape. By closely considering some of the resulting landscapes, we argue that a significant consequence of this monopoly has been the emergence of what we call the territorial ontology. We characterize this ontology as a world in which land and landscape are collapsed into territory – a bounded, possessed collection of qualities value can be extracted from. This is the world of colonial modernity’s racialized relations of production. In the second part of our article, we examine the North-West University’s landscape art collection and using Ingold to illuminate the relationship between landscapes and representations of landscapes, we argue that these representations draw attention to the world and as such form a part of the complex holding the territorial ontology in place. After demonstrating that the territorial ontology has been central to the racialization of the relations of production in South Africa’s colonial modernity, we call for landscape restitution and suggest that universities are the spaces from which to lead this initiative.
Ingold het Marx se onderskeid tussen ruil-/wisselwaarde en verbruikerswaarde gebruik om tussen land en landskap te onderskei. Ingold suggereer dat land is geabstraheer, kwantitatief en verwisselbaar. Landskap daarenteen is kwalitatief en ontwikkel as bewoning – ‚n konsep wat die geskiedenis van die inwoners, hul aktiwiteite, projekte en leefwyse beliggaam. Ons gebruik hierdie onderskeid om te argumenteer dat die Grondgebiedewet van 1913 suksesvol daarin geslaag het om ‚n wit monopolie te skep ten opsigte van die produksie van landskappe. Deur ‚n noukeurige inagneming van sodanige landskappe argumenteer ons dat ʼn unieke gevolg van hierdie monopolie dui op die begin van wat ons die territoriale ontologie noem. Ons beskryf hierdie ontologie as ‚n wêreld waarin land en landskap verval het in ‚n bepaalde gebiedsbesitting van waaruit kwaliteitswaardes afgelei sou kon word. Dit is die wêreld van koloniale moderniteit se rasgebaseerde verhoudings van produksie. In die tweede deel van ons artikel ondersoek ons die Noord-Wes Universiteit se landskapskunsversameling en gebruik ons Ingold om die verhouding tussen landskappe en representasies van landskappe te belig. Ons argumenteer dat hierdie representasies die aandag vestig op die wêreld en as sodanig deel vom van die komplekse instandhouding van die territoriale ontologie. Nadat ons gedemonstreer het dat die territoriale ontology sentraal tot die rasgedrewe verhoudingsproduksie in Suid-Afrika se koloniale moderniteit, rig ons ‚n versoek vir landskapkompensasie en stel ons voor dat universiteite die ruimtes is van waar hierdie inisiatief gelei moet word.

Description

Keywords

Landscape, Territory, Belonging, Sovereignty

Sustainable Development Goals

Citation

Goodrich, A & Strydom, R 2014, 'Landscape art and the territorial ontology : a call for landscape restitution', South African Journal of Art History, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 57-75 . [http://www.journals.co.za/ej/ejour_sajah.html]