Oceanic Art Connoisseurship - Six Factors Explained Oceanic Art ConnoisseurshipSix Factors ExplainedBy Michael Hamson For the majority of my career in Oceanic art, connoisseurship was not something I thought much about, it seemed the realm of wine experts or museum curators assessing some old master painting—picture a bearded gentleman wearing a velvet coat and silk scarf. It had this strong whiff of snobbery and pretentiousness about it. In most realms of art, a connoisseur’s job is to make judgments on an object’s identification, attribution, and quality in the absence of an artist’s signature or other documentary evidence. However, in Oceanic art there are no signatures. There are no definitive dates and the cultural attributions attached are normally either very general or wrong. Frequently all we have is a speculative designation such as “Sepik figure” or “Fijian club” and that’s it. So, with Oceanic art connoisseurship is not a skill rarely used but is something I rely on every day, on every object—not out of a sense of elitism or sophistication—but pure necessity. Why is that? Duccio-Rucellai Madonna 1285-Sienna and Giotto-Ognissanti Madonna-1310-Florence Because for most areas of Western art there is a robust, extensive, centuries-worth of art history to call upon with books, articles and museum exhibitions on individual artists, catalog raisonnes of their work, etc. that amounts to a foundation of knowledge to draw upon. For instance, back in 1995 while in graduate school I took a class in Gothic art and learned not only the names of prominent artists such as Giotto and Duccio working over 700 years ago in northern Italy but was also taught how to recognize their style by closely examining the minute details on dozens of their artworks—the shape of the eye and the folds of their robes. In Oceanic and especially New Guinea art there is no such foundation of knowledge and expertise. We don’t know the name of carvers working in each village along the Sepik River in say 1910 to 1930, or any other period in the last 500 years. We know none of that. All we have is “Sepik figure” that’s it—no name, no date, rarely a village or area, no discussions of quality or of which artist produced such and such masterpiece. Nothing. What if that was the case for Western art? What if all the art we have in Europe for the last 700 years still existed but came without names or history attached? It was all still there in museums, galleries and collections but jumbled together—no Rembrandts, no Vermeer’s, no Van Goghs, no Picassos. The only information we had were basic labels—Dutch, Northern Italian, Spanish, Landscape, Portrait, Abstract, etc. And this is how all this art was displayed in museums, known in collections and came up at auction—would that be great, frustrating, a huge shame or maybe an enormous opportunity? Without that substantial foundation of art history guiding your judgement what would you have to rely upon to assess this mass of art? The same thing we must rely upon every day in Oceanic art—connoisseurship. Because my expertise was built upon my knowledge of New Guinea art the examples that follow are primarily New Guinea but the principles discussed apply throughout Oceania. Three Karawari River Yipwons Take for example these three Karawari River yipwon figures. The form is classic and easily recognizable but are they authentic? Precontact and stone-carved? How many generations old are they—three? Ten? Are they average, good, great, or at the very top of the category? Does this really matter? Three Karawari River Yipwons Priced Yes, of course it does. As you can see by the prices fetched for each, the market applies its own harsh, mercenary connoisseurship—often getting things right but exaggerating subtle differences into huge sways in prices—which reflects the current trend of the Oceanic art market, the laser-like focus on pinnacle pieces—those at the very, very top of each category. Six Factors of Oceanic Art Connoisseurship To help understand, think about and apply connoisseurship to Oceanic art I have come up with six factors that I consider most important: Age Authenticity Attribution Significance Provenance Quality Age There is good reason why people put so much attention to age because older objects often have a much better chance being authentic and of a higher quality. There is usually a direct correlation between age and intent with older objects having a stronger spiritual intent in their creation with precontact pieces theoretically free from both Western religious and economic influences. Yes, there are tons of academic arguments that cry foul to this logic but within the harsh reality of the Oceanic art market what matters is the purity of the traditional spiritual intent and how well the artist conveyed that in the object. Hans with Two Huon Gulf Bowls Judge Age by Style! Not Patina Always, always judge age by style and NOT surface patina. Here are two Huon Gulf bowls held by Hans from Umboi Island. The one on the left with the darker patina is shallow, the carving in low relief with a large, elongated spirit face stretching nearly half the length of the bowl’s underside. On the right is a bowl probably 100 years older, that is very deep, sides that are more straight up and down, the face smaller and in higher relief at the very tip of the bowl. When field collecting, I had the opportunity to climb into the rafters of someone’s house and go through the stacks of nested bowls stored up there. I learned to judge age by the volume of the bowl—the old ones were shaped like cargo ships—deep with straight sides. The patina of Han’s righthand bowl is hard to see as it is covered with decades of dust and mold but underneath that layer is an ancient, thick dark brown patina. So, it is always best to judge an Oceanic object by the style—volumes, carving depth, expression, etc.—NOT PATINA. Sepik Figures Collected in 1900. The Foundation of our knowledge of Style starts with the first collected material—often in German museums. Our understanding of Polynesian art styles dates back to the 1770s but for New Guinea art styles that basis starts not that long ago—often with early German or British collected items around 1900 like this group of Coastal Sepik figures. Such museum objects give us a starting point, something that can serve as a foundation for what comes after—but only hint at what potentially came BEFORE—the great unknown in Oceanic art. Three Coastal Ramu River Figures To judge age you must learn the Style as it changes over time! Look at these three Coastal Ramu River figures to get a sense of how the style has changed over the generations from the huge head, robust volumes and clear expression on the masterpiece at the left dating to 1850 or earlier to the more vertical, somewhat regimented composition of the perfectly authentic and nice figure in the middle dating to around 1920. On the right is a made for sale figure from the 1980s with a basic, standard composition and a gunky fake dark patina. Three Iatmul, Middle Sepik River Mwai masks Again, take the time to learn how style changes over time in the various object types. The left most Iatmul Mwai mask has nice remains of pigments elegantly and precisely applied, the back edge of the mask shows an elegant, curved profile, the projection from the nose connects to the chin with a similarly elegant curve. The bird at the bottom is well carved with a tiny hole in its beak where a string and shell or feather would have been tied. The middle Mwai mask is perfectly authentic with signs of traditional use, but you can see that it is a bit stiffer, less refined. The projection from the nose is nearly straight, the bird at the bottom is a bit crude—I would date this mask to the 1910-1930 era—perfectly fine but just lacking the spiritual juice as the one on the left. The righthand Mwai mask is of marginal authenticity. There are pleasing curves to both the back edge profile and the projection from the nose but there are no remains of traditional pigments and the bird at the bottom is very rudimentary. I don’t see other holes on the mask besides the top ones where the mask was attached to the costume. The mask does have some age and is potentially authentic and dates to the 1940 to 1960 era. Metal Carved versus Precontact One question I get asked all the time is how to tell the difference between a metal-cut piece and a precontact object carved with stone, bone or shell tools. Two Abelam Figures Besides the difference in tool marks the first characteristic to look at is always style—precontact pieces are often more organic, more flowing, with more openwork, softer with rounder edges—and of course the total absence of crisp straight lines—as you can see in the righthand Abelam figure. The one on the left is still quite nice, perfectly authentic but carved with metal tools. The limbs are more angular, less flowing and very little openwork in the composition. Two Long Nose Coastal Sepik Masks Again, notice the differences in style, the more fluid, flowing pre-contact mask on the right where the edges look almost melted, they are so rounded. The mask on the left is still very nice and 100% authentic but you can see that the edges are sharper and crisper from being cut with a steel adze blade. Backside of Two Masks On the left you can see the sharp cuts made by a steel adze. On the right, the surface is smoother, and you can see the long vertical lines caused by shell scraping—a pre-contact technique for smoothing the surface of a carving. Precontact Boiken Figure The quandary we have with something being precontact is that it presents us with a huge unknown. Yes, we can determine if something was carved with non-metal tools prior to contact with the West—but how long before is the far more interesting question—was it carved one generation or ten generations prior? That is what I love about this Boiken piece—pre-contact for sure but its style is so far removed from what is known that it reaches back into an era that is generations and generations before anything we have recorded. Authenticity Authenticity comes down to INTENT—what was the intent of the artist? Thankfully this is often fairly straightforward with Oceanic art. Yes, there are fakes but very few sophisticated ones like in other realms of Tribal art. Fake Karawari Cave Figures There are very few sophisticated fakes in New Guinea Art. Most often you find people blackening pieces in the smoke to create a very superficial dark patina or like these Karawari cave pieces that were put in the river or buried to get a kind of funky weathering that is dodgy and super easy to spot. Pieces carved by Jeff Liversidge There was of course the famous faker Jeff Liversidge and his numerous offspring that produced pretty good fakes for decades in Papua New Guinea but Jeff is now deceased and either way their pieces have a style all their own that once known is easy to spot. Two Barak or “Mosquito” Masks One of the more common fakes I see sometimes leaking into the serious Oceanic art market are the Inland Turubu barak masks commonly known as Mosquito masks. Unfortunately, I am partially at fault for their relative sophistication. One of the main field collectors I employed for years in Papua New Guinea was Patrick Batena who was from the Inland Turubu area and with him at my side we visited ALL the villages in the region looking for these lovely and distinctive long nose masks. To get the best old ones I paid huge prices—well more than what was ever paid in the past. Often in between field collecting trips I spent time at my home along the coast in Wewak and people regularly would come by with their artifacts to sell. These visits started to include an increasing number of barak mosquito masks that looked good from a distance but once in hand I could easily spot what was wrong with them. With my pedantic nature I was always open to discussing these faults with the owner of the mask—pointing out those details that indicated it was not an old, original piece. As time passed more barak masks would show up at my door in Wewak with less and less obvious signs of their inauthenticity. Of course, I was inadvertently schooling these fellows on how to make a sophisticated fake. I did ultimately learn to keep my mouth shut but not in time to prevent some tricky fakes being produced. Understanding Traditional Use The best way to judge authenticity in Oceanic art is understanding an object’s traditional use and thus confirming authentic signs of tribal use. Coastal Ramu River Mask with Bite Stick Most New Guinea masks were not worn straight on the face but were attached to a tall dance costume that rested on a dancer’s shoulders. So, you need to look at how the mask was attached to the costume—usually lashed with fiber or cane through holes around the mask’s perimeter. Sometimes it was also held in place by bite stick. The spirits manifested by the masks were considered alive and would thus be fully decorated with nose and ear decorations. So always look for either remnants of these traditional decorations or if they are missing, the holes at the ears, nose and sometimes forehead where they would have been attached. Without these holes the mask was not decorated as it should have been and thus probably not an authentic piece. Simbai Shield with Arrow holes and Signs of Battle Looking for signs of traditional use on war shields is fairly straightforward. First, you look to see how the shield would have been held and carried. Thus, on this ancient Simbai shield you see the two holes in the middle of the shield where a rope strap would have been tied. The holes should show signs of wear. Or if the shield has a handle that handle should show signs of use. The outer edge of the shield should have some rounding from years of use and handling. But of course, the surest signs of use of a war shield are arrow tips embedded into the surface. A fair amount of old New Guinea shields still have arrow tips stuck into the front. Sepik Suspension Hook Sepik River suspension hooks are equally straightforward in determining authenticity. Suspension hooks were used to hold string bags filled with important ritual and magical materials high up in a ceremonial house’s rafters away from the uninitiated. Thus, there should be a hole or lug on the back of the piece where a rope tied the hook to a section of the rafters. After years, hopefully decades of use, that lug should show a groove of patina. Next, the junction of the hooks also should show wear and patina from where the string bag handle rested. Attribution Figuring out an object’s correct cultural and geographic attribution is of obvious importance in understanding a piece. But equally important I see it as a form of respect to the people who made it. I know the folks throughout the South Pacific take great pride in their culture. For example, in Papua New Guinea, with over 800 languages spoken that sense of cultural identity is often fierce and I can imagine the frustration a member of a particular community might feel when seeing an object from their ancestors attributed to some other people—potentially even to one of their traditional enemies that live just miles away. So, I believe getting an attribution as close as humanly possible is critically important. In fact, that is a major reason why I started producing my catalogs and continue to do so today—to put down in a permanent manner crucial bits of knowledge and to correct attributions contrary to what has already been published. Boiken Figure When I started in this field these angular figures with bent knees and raised arms were always referred to as Arapesh but when field collecting, I came across them in the Boiken area, and early on when I offered one for sale I called it Arapesh even though I knew it was incorrect because I thought people would recognize the name Arapesh but be confused by Boiken. This brings up a very important point about attribution—that they are frequently wrong. I know what I do when I come across something I don’t know or are unsure of—I hit the books, I pull out all the sources on that area and look to see how something like what I have has been identified in the past—I mean this makes sense right? Yes, but you must realize that many published attributions were guesses, rough approximations or downright incorrect from the start. So, when you don’t know and just repeat what has been falsely stated in some book or typed on some museum wall label you just perpetuate incorrect information that ends up strengthening that falsehood. Huon Peninsula Betel Mortar—Rawlinson Range, Morobe Province It was in large part because of this small betel mortar that I decided to do an exhibition and catalog on the art of Morobe Province, Papua New Guinea. When this piece came out of the field, I was a bit stunned. This mortar does not conform to any known art style within New Guinea art. Yet, as an obviously accomplished work, this mortar was not a “one-off” creation, but part of a larger complex of an undocumented style. Collected high in the remote Rawlinson Mountain Range, near to the Pindiu station, this mortar exemplifies the large gaps in our knowledge of New Guinea art and the vast areas unrepresented in the literature and in collections. Sepik Plains Figure—Urimo culture I mean many of you could probably identify this figure as Sepik but how much further can you go? The distinct bridal veil would bring us close to the Middle Sepik River but is that accurate? No, it is not, this comes from the Urimo culture of the Sepik Plains well north of the Lower Sepik River towards the Boiken culture area. Three Wood Yam Masks: Abelam, Bukie & Boiken Attribution is NOT EASY. There are often subtle differences between these three cultures that the market almost always gets wrong—which as a dealer I try to capitalize on. Collector’s eyes tend to glass over and automatically think Abelam, common, and dismiss instead of looking closely, noticing differences, and taking the time to correctly attribute and appreciate their distinctions. Two Boiken pieces You would think that a particular culture would have a pretty definitive and consistent style that you could study and learn—but it is not so easy. Here are two Boiken ancestral figures that are as stylistically different as possible. Two more Boiken figures What about these two? Still Boiken but 99% of the time the left would be incorrectly identified as Lower Sepik or Ramu River. The right probably would just be assumed to be Sepik River—although it too is Boiken. Significance What I mean by Significance is trying to understand, research and communicate how an object was used and regarded within its original context; that ethnographic aspect of the piece which is often hard to find accurate information on but is critical to understand and explain so collectors can appreciate the power these objects had back in their original setting. Collingwood Bay Lime Spatula It would be easy to underestimate the significance of lime spatulas—ostensibly just a tool to transport powdered white lime from a gourd to the mouth of a person chewing betel nut—so not unlike a flat spoon. But in Collingwood Bay, an area with great tapa cloth, excellent pottery but very little wood artifacts, lime spatulas you would think might be considered a minor or auxiliary part of their culture. This would be a mistake. They in fact hold enormous importance. The larger, finer examples were the prerogative of hereditary chiefs and when a chief held meetings with sub-chiefs and the group came to an agreement the top chief would pass his lime spatula around and as each man grasped the spatula that signified his agreement to what was discussed. Lime spatulas also served as deeds to land as often the sole physical evidence of past agreements. Small Eroded Papuan Gulf Bioma Figure This fragmentary Papuan Gulf figure is charming enough on its own with obvious significant age but its form and aesthetics, in my opinion, might not generate a lot of interest or passion. But once you put this figure in its original context of guarding over a Papuan Gulf skull shrine, well that adds a lot. Tolai Lor Skull Mask This is a very rare and very early Tolai “lor” skull mask collected in 1879. Yes, the aesthetics are fantastic as it’s a super lovely example and the provenance is great too but why is this piece significant? First, these lor skull masks are very rare, they were used to bring ancestral presence into the distribution of shell wealth in bride price ceremonies. But more importantly in terms of the market is that when Richard Parkinson arrived in New Britain in the early 1880s and started collecting artifacts these masks were already nearly nonexistent and the locals had started making them for sale. So, significance in this instance is it rarity as being one of the few authentic and super early examples of an extremely hard to find object. Gnau Culture Figure Similar to the Tolai skull mask this rare figure from the Gnau culture of Papua New Guinea’s Torricelli Mountains is significant for being one of the very few extant sculptures from a very remote and unknown area. I mean, this is why I loved field collecting—the incredible opportunity to bring something out that had not been seen before—except a few objects from this area collected by Kenneth Thomas in 1928-1930 in the South Australian Museum. Provenance When I first started, I acquired 100% of my objects from field collecting in Papua New Guinea and couldn’t understand some client’s insistence on early provenance. It seemed to me at the time that they were relying on an early provenance to hide their own shortcomings in either their trust in the dealer they were working with or because they themselves could not recognize an older, authentic, good quality object. Over time my view of provenance has become much more nuanced. Of course, provenance has nothing to do with the inherent quality of the object. The piece is what it is independent upon who collected or owned it. Sure, every one of us would love to have something collected on one of Captain Cook’s voyages no matter how minor or lackluster the piece. In that case its historical significance probably far outweighs any other quality. Provenance can be broken down into different categories. First, some provenances are primarily relevant or valuable because it is especially early—like a 19th century collection. One I come across regularly is from the Pitt-Rivers Museum as a number of objects were sold by Stella Pitt Rivers in the 1970s and 80s. What is great about these pieces is that the Pitt-Rivers Acquisition Journals are online, and you can find wonderful watercolor drawings of the objects with exact dates of when they were purchased and from whom. Abelam Ancestral Figure, ex. Harry Franklin before 1960 It is not known exactly when Harry Franklin acquired this ancient Abelam figure, but it was before 1960 because already by that year it was published as part of an exhibition at Scripps College in Claremont California, and it was subsequently exhibited and published again in an important catalog put out by UCLA in 1967 and again in 2009. So, this long history of early exhibitions and being illustrated is the type of rock-solid provenance that one hopes to find. Pitt-Rivers Museum Gope Board This great Purari River gope board was bought by Lieutenant General Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers from Fenton & Sons auction on May 27th, 1895. Based upon its early style it would have been easy to date this spirit board to the late 19th century, but it is nice to get 100% confirmation on this from the Pitt-Rivers Museum acquisition journals—and the accompanying watercolor of the spirit board is a big plus. Bosher Massim Figure Provenance research is probably the most enjoyable part of my business. It involves tenacious detective work that can add real value to an object. For example, this old Massim figure came up at a small online auction in Virginia after being deaccessioned from Valentine Museum in Richmond. After winning the piece at auction I emailed the museum for information on it—which they said there was none as that is why they could and did deaccession it. Yet when the piece arrived, I noticed an inventory number on the back of the head that had been intentionally scraped off and was mostly illegible. But lower down the body, written faintly in pencil was the number again. When I emailed the museum with this number, they in fact found the record—this Massim figure was donated in 1904 by Ellie Bosher. I then hired a genealogist to research Bosher, and it turns out… Ellie Bosher was considered the belle of Richmond, Virginia and in 1901 she and her family left on a trip around the world. Her father was a wealthy man, president of the large T.C. Williams tobacco company. This Massim figure was a gift to Ellie from one of her father’s business associates she met while in Australia. Three years after this trip in January 1904, Ellie was visiting a friend in New York City when she caught typhoid fever and had to be placed in a sanatorium. Her father, Robert S. Bosher, traveled to New York to be as close as possible to his daughter during her illness. While not allowed to visit Ellie due to her quarantine, he took up residence nearby. It was during this time, ten days after he arrived, that the cool weather took its toll on Robert Bosher, who first caught a cold and then pneumonia from which he died. Besides the 1901 acquisition date none of this relates to the quality of the figure but it does bring the piece to life, putting it in a very human context that makes it a more compelling art object. As I wrote in the introduction to my 2021 catalog: “There is a reason why art has a provenance while virtually everything else does not. Great art captures something enduring and in turn becomes, in some sense, immortal. It lives beyond its owner and, as it passes through the generations, its provenance comes along for the ride with an ever-increasing influence, giving ownership its own tether to art’s immortality.” Andre Breton Coastal Sepik Mask photographed by Man Ray I originally acquired this mask 15 years ago in Providence Rhode Island from a retired professor. He had bought the mask in the 1950s from an auction of a “gentleman’s library.” I almost didn’t buy it as the mask itself was a bit underwhelming—sure it was authentic, fairly early but in reality, maybe a B- in aesthetic quality. In the end I did buy it and shortly thereafter posted the mask at a very reasonable price to my website where it sat unmolested for months getting zero interest. But one day I received an email from a collector in Belgium who said he had valuable information on the mask. Well, he had found it online belonging to Andre Breton, the founder of Surrealism, photographed in 1926 by Man Ray, and exhibited in “Tableaux de Man Ray et Objects des Iles” at the Galerie Surrealiste and illustrated on the back cover of the 1926 catalog. In addition, there is a great photograph of Breton’s wife Simone lounging on their bed circa 1927 with the Sepik mask on the wall behind her. This Andre Breton, Man Ray and the Surrealist movement provenance makes this mask genuinely part of the history of Modern art. Thus, an unremarkable Sepik mask becomes remarkable. Quality This really is the most difficult characteristic—both to judge and value--but side by side comparisons can help. Two Mountain Ok War Shields Ok, both of these Telefomin area shields are authentic, and metal carved, not stone carved. The one on the left is perfectly good with bold colors, classic design, etc. but it cannot compare to the one on the right—whose design is looser, more flowing, more dynamic and by God how can you explain those dashes of blue? This shield comes from an extremely remote mountain village up and across the massive Hindenburg Wall and illustrates the unabashed creativity and artistic latitude New Guinea artists sometimes take in interpreting their traditional designs. In art we cherish the bold, the unexpected and those pieces that redefine our expectations and what we thought possible for a genre. This shield with blue does just that and rockets up the quality scale because of it. Large Plains Arapesh head and Masco Yangoru Boiken piece Again, the one on the left is very nice, huge—about waist high—with good age, good colors, nice volumes, etc. but it just cannot compare to the piece on the right, now at LA County Museum of Art with its saturated reds, perfectly applied pigments, perfect volumes, stone-carved, the pointed nubs of teeth showing. Just an absolute masterpiece—one of my dream pieces. Three Old Abelam Figures Often the hardest part is differentiating between very good, great and the very best. Seen side by side like this it can seem easy, but life rarely work like this. If you come across figures like this at all, they arrive individually, often decades apart. The left Abelam figure is very nice, metal carved but beautiful and well composed. The middle sculpture is pre-contact and has superb harmony of curves and volumes, an absolute top quality Abelam figure. But nothing compares to the one on the right, now in the de Young Museum in San Francisco. The volumes are massive and bold; with a pregnant belly above an erect phallus, its extreme heaviness balanced upon tiny ankles—with a stately demeanor, monumental in form although only about 28” tall. A masterpiece. Three Coastal Ramu River Figures All three of these small Coastal Ramu River figures are pre-contact and stone carved. Even the leftmost is excellent with significant age, use and an intense expression. The middle one is a step above, just more imaginatively carved with these wide thighs, an angular butt mimicking both the angle of the brow and the bottom curve of the nose—a figure that was carved by a creative master. But what about the figure on the right? Nothing compares to the power and monumentality of this sculpture that is less than 6” tall published in the Musee Dapper, “Vision D’Oceanie” in 1993. Passum Figure, Somewhere in the Saruwaged Mountain Range, Morobe Province. We need to get this right. Absent a proper Oceanic art history, we will have to rely on connoisseurship to identify, attribute and appreciate the South Pacific objects that pass through our hands. There is no institution tasked with this endeavor, it is up to us individuals to recognize greatness. The figure above is my all-time favorite pieces of Oceanic art yet who among us could correctly identify it? Yes, it is illustrated in the “Oceanic Art” book by Kaeppler, Kaufmann and Newton so thank God they took the time to record what little is known about the piece. But barring that brief description who in the world would be able to say one word about the age, authenticity, attribution, significance, or quality of this figure? It comes from the Upper Rumu River (not Ramu River) in the super remote Saruwaged Mountain Range of Morobe Province. I laminated this exact photo and carried it around with me as I trekked up and down these steep mountains hoping to find someone who recognized it. I could not. I only covered probably 10% of the range so the folks who produced this masterpiece are still out there. This is why I love Oceanic art—that sense of the unknown and the incredible opportunity it presents. Last Word: I think it would be ridiculous to believe that the great artists like Rembrandt, Van Gogh and Picasso were born only in Western Europe. I would argue that some of the finest artists that ever were lived did so on the islands of the South Pacific, passing their days in small villages built on the sandy coastlines, or along broad, slow-moving brown rivers, or tucked away in the endless green mountain ranges of the interior. Most of their artistic creations probably have not survived the generations, many might be locked away in museum storerooms but thankfully some are still circulating on the private market. So, let’s get it right. Let us give those masterpieces the proper due respect and admiration they deserve. It would be great if we had a comprehensive and robust Oceanic art history that has already discovered these pieces but by and large it hasn’t. In the meantime, connoisseurship is all we have, so let’s use it. Michael Hamson, February 29, 2024
