CUJAH MENU Grizzly Embracing the Berry Picker: Haida Artistic Expression in Argillite Meghan Williams In 1968, Erna Gunther wrote: “If a small museum in a remote spot has one piece of Northwest Coast art, it is more apt to be a piece of argillite than almost anything else” [1]. Argillite, or black slate, is the preserve of a group of North- west Coast Aboriginals called the Haida, who live on the Queen Charlotte Is- lands, of of the coast of British Columbia. As Gunther’s quote implies, exam- ples of argillite carvings abound. However, they are less known and less under- stood than other popular examples of Northwest Coast art. Ofen regarded as curios, argillite carvings have been deemed less valuable because they were cre- ated not for ceremonial purposes, but for sale to foreigners. An examination of argillite art, in particular Grizzly embracing the berry picker, exposes the impor- tance of these objects as a means of Haida artistic expression. Grizzly embracing the berry picker is a carving in the round made by an unknown Haida artist, and is dated to about 1880 (Fig. 1). The carving’s central focus is the fgure of the woman, the berry picker. She wears a hat that drapes over her hair and down her back. A grizzly bear sits to her lef, holding onto her arm, with his snout very close to her cheek. Another bear fanks the woman’s right side, with his back to her. A bird, possibly an eagle, is perched on the bear’s head. A cub’s head, wearing a skil (or potlatch rings) with six levels, is visible between the bear’s legs. The bear’s tongue is sticking out and frogs are coming out of his eyes. Visible on the reverse side of the sculpture is a small human fgure, emerging from underneath the woman. Although this carving was part of an art form created for foreigners, its design is an outgrowth of previously-established Haida art. Argillite carvings devel- oped from both the sculptural and the two-dimensional Haida traditions. Ac- cording to Peter Macnair and Alan Hoover, Haida sculptors used facial features as the primary distinguishing marks of the fgures represented [2]. This is evi- dent inGrizzly. While the bears are distinguished from the berry picker by the incisions representing fur, it is the facial features of all the fgures that receive the most attention. According to Hilary Stewart, the defning characteristics of a bear in Northwest Coast visual language include ears, large faring nostrils, a wide mouth with bared teeth (possibly including canines) and, ofen, a protrud- ing tongue [3]. InGrizzly, the bear on the lef has a wide mouth with a protrud- ing tongue and the bear on the right has a wide mouth with visible teeth and canines. Both have small ears and fared nostrils. Stewart says that an eagle gen- erally has a beak with a strong downward curve, an evident tongue, and ears [4]. The representation of the bird in Grizzly has a strong beak but no ears or tongue, which makes its classifcation unclear. Human faces, according to Stew- art, generally have distinctive eyebrows, eyes that are not set in ovoids, and no ears [5]. The berry picker’s facial features do not match this description. How- ever, in the story of the berry picker, she transformed into a bear, which ex- plains why her facial features are closer to those a grizzly. Despite the unclear identifcation of the bird, the overall attention paid to the facial features of the fgures in Grizzly indicates the link to the sculptural Haida art tradition outlined by Macnair and Hoover. The second tradition that infuenced argillite carving was two-dimensional art, particularly the fowing calligraphic line called the form line. The form line is a continuous fow of line that outlines the design. While a defnite form line is not evident in Grizzly, the sculpture does have fuidity; all of the fgures merge into one another. A continuous line can be traced around the sculpture, but it is not an evident or defned form line as in two-dimensional art. Macnair and Hoover call the efect of form line one of inherent tension, which is evident in Grizzly because the position of the fgures creates a dynamic tension of push and pull. In addition, the artist used the ovoid—another element of two-dimen- sional art—to create eye sockets for several of the fgures. For Macnair and Hoover, the integration of two- and three-dimensional elements in argillite carving is the mark of a truly accomplished artist. Not all of the carvings em- ploy these two elements as successfully as Grizzly. Nevertheless, the attempts at integration indicate that argillite carvings should be understood not as lesser examples of Haida art but as a diferent means of expressing established tradi- tions [6]. The Haida used these artistic traditions for new creative purposes. Argillite, the material that they used, was also new. The frst argillite carvings are dated to the early 1800s. Popularly called “slate,” the only known quarry for this black shale is found on the Queen Charlotte Islands in British Columbia. The quarry is located near the Haida village of Skidegate, on Slatechuck Creek. Since this is Haida territory, they are the only ones allowed to mine for argillite. In 1941, the quarry was designated Haida Reserve No. 11, and exclusive Haida access was en- sured. What is particular about argillite is that it is sof enough to carve with woodworking tools, and it remains sof, though the common conception is that it hardens with exposure to air. The sofness of the material made it easier to work with and allowed for efcient productivity [7]. Haida ownership of the argillite quarry does not mean that they employed the slate for personal use. Bill Holm speculates that few argillite objects were used by Aboriginals but that the majority was produced primarily for non-Aborigi- nal use [8]. The exact origin of these carvings is unclear. Marius Barbeau tells the story of a Haida, who, while on a Boston whaler, learned to imitate a fellow- whaler who carved objects out of whales’ teeth and ivory [9]. While his story has been contested, we do know that the argillite curios produced by Haida artists were popular with “seamen, traders, missionaries, anthropologists, and tourists from the early years of the nineteenth century to the present day” [10]. The popularity of these early trade objects enabled the growth of the art form. In the days before Aboriginal objects were collected and accepted as art, the highly regarded argillite curios sold for more money than most other North- west Coast objects. Yet, as collectors began to appreciate the intricacy of art from the coast, ceremonial objects gained preference, and argillite objects were dismissed as tourist objects and acculturative craf [11]. Despite selling to foreigners, the Haida used argillite carvings to create impres- sive and telling works that form a complex history. These were not simple tourist curios. Over time, the subject and form of argillite carvings evolved. There are at least sixteen types of objects that follow a recognized chronologi- cal sequence [12]. These types are also grouped into periods, which have difer- ent labels depending on the archaeologist. For Carol Sheehan, the frst period, or “Haida non-sense,” 1800-1835, consists of unrecognizable distortions of crest fgures or non-crest creatures. The second period, or “White man’s non-sense,” 1830-1865, consists of confused Haida responses to Euro-Americans. The third period, “Haida sense,” 1870-1910, consists of images with distinctly Haida mo- tifs, like Grizzly. The fourth period, 1910 to the present, is marked by a decrease and then a rise in the quality of the art produced—mostly with Haida motifs [13]. A comparison between Grizzly and other argillite carvings reveals the develop- ment of the art form. Artists from the frst period primarily made pipes. The frst recorded argillite carvings are termed by Macnair and Hoover as, “ceremo- nial pipe forms” [14]. The form and design of these pipes appear to have closer ties to two-dimensional art than to the Grizzly fgural group. Figure 2 shows an example of a ceremonial pipe. In terms of content, the pipe is an amalgama- tion of creatures or crests, while Grizzly is an illustration of a section of a myth. Further diferences are evident in the sculptures’ forms. The pipe is carved in low relief, creating a fat surface. In the upper right of the pipe, the bird has large ears with a prominent split U-form. What appear to be wings are created using ovoids and U-forms. These components of two-dimensional art are not evident inGrizzly. Small lines, not ovoids and U-forms, are used on the bird to indicate feathers. Line is used to add detail and dimension to the form that is established by modelling. The basic shape of the eyes is similar in both works, but the later one has deeper relief to emphasize depth. Ship panel pipes are a type of carving from the second period. They have more modelling than the early pipes, but are not as intricate as the Grizzly fgural group. Figure 3 shows a pipe with three human fgures on top of a bear or dog- like creature. As with other objects from this era, the Euro-American content is diferent from the traditional Haida content of period three. It is easier to iden- tify the fgures in this pipe than in the previous one because the negative space has been hollowed out.