What is it about?

This article examines the antinomies arising due to the deployment of the concept of African aesthetics in three essays by African scholars namely, Okot p’Bitek, Rowland Abiodun and Kofi Agawu. The three essays highlight unique features of various art forms, practices and the associated discourses among the Acholi of northern Uganda, the Yoruba of Nigeria and the northern Ewe of Ghana. They also advocate the use of conceptual paradigms which are either derived from the local discourses concerning the arts in specific cultural communities or developed in relation to the specific artistic practices of these communities in Africa. This article argues that the use of the concept of African aesthetics in these essays is at odd with the aesthetics relativistic arguments they advocate. In many ways, the specificity and plurality of aesthetic communities defended in the essays subvert any unified conception of African aesthetics, a concept that presupposes a large community far beyond an ethnic group which is the focus of each of the essays in question. The article also re-examines the adoption of the concept of aesthetics in relation to the arts of Africa and discusses the antinomies associated to its deployment in these critical essays.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

This article examines the antinomies arising due to the deployment of the concept of African aesthetics in three essays by African scholars namely, Okot p’Bitek, Rowland Abiodun and Kofi Agawu. The three essays highlight unique features of various art forms, practices and the associated discourses among the Acholi of northern Uganda, the Yoruba of Nigeria and the northern Ewe of Ghana. They also advocate the use of conceptual paradigms which are either derived from the local discourses concerning the arts in specific cultural communities or developed in relation to the specific artistic practices of these communities in Africa. This article argues that the use of the concept of African aesthetics in these essays is at odd with the aesthetics relativistic arguments they advocate. In many ways, the specificity and plurality of aesthetic communities defended in the essays subvert any unified conception of African aesthetics, a concept that presupposes a large community far beyond an ethnic group which is the focus of each of the essays in question. The article also re-examines the adoption of the concept of aesthetics in relation to the arts of Africa and discusses the antinomies associated to its deployment in these critical essays.

Perspectives

This article examines the antinomies arising due to the deployment of the concept of African aesthetics in three essays by African scholars namely, Okot p’Bitek, Rowland Abiodun and Kofi Agawu. The three essays highlight unique features of various art forms, practices and the associated discourses among the Acholi of northern Uganda, the Yoruba of Nigeria and the northern Ewe of Ghana. They also advocate the use of conceptual paradigms which are either derived from the local discourses concerning the arts in specific cultural communities or developed in relation to the specific artistic practices of these communities in Africa. This article argues that the use of the concept of African aesthetics in these essays is at odd with the aesthetics relativistic arguments they advocate. In many ways, the specificity and plurality of aesthetic communities defended in the essays subvert any unified conception of African aesthetics, a concept that presupposes a large community far beyond an ethnic group which is the focus of each of the essays in question. The article also re-examines the adoption of the concept of aesthetics in relation to the arts of Africa and discusses the antinomies associated to its deployment in these critical essays.

Prof. Imani SANGA
University of Dar es Salaam

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Antinomies of African aesthetics and the impulses of aesthetic relativism: reading p’Bitek, Abiodun and Agawu, African Identities, February 2017, Taylor & Francis,
DOI: 10.1080/14725843.2017.1291327.
You can read the full text:

Read

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page