| OCR Text |
Show 142 Bodmer's images, then, repeatedly performed two separate functions. They were scientific documents of Plains Indian culture (and, consequently, documents of the societies that interpreted them) and they were works of art, examples of nineteenth-century travelbook illustration (and also models used for contemporary reproductions). These two functions, scientific documentation and illustrative art, are not necessarily incompatible. The purposes of each must be closely defined, however. It was this problem of definition that was ultimately addressed in this paper. Through the preliminary examination of Tableau 25, Idols of the Mandan Indians in chapter one, the initial questions were raised. How have Bodmer's images been used in the past? The issue quickly became one of "document versus art." As documents, Bodmer's aquatints have been used to interpret events; as art, the images are representative of the best of European travelbook illustration. However, the uses to which these images have been put does little to provide an adequate definition of them, because of the ambiguous position they occupy: they are both. Clarity of definition can only be achieved, if the different purposes and inherent limitations of the two separate media are acknowledged and taken into account. If the uses to which the aquatints have been put are incompatible, how can this problem be overcome? To do so, it becomes necessary for the ethnologist and the art historian to look outside their respective fields, since-if the aquatints are both document and art-answers cannot be found solely in one discipline. The examination of Tableau 27, Scalp Dance of the Minataries. demonstrated that a composite reconstruction of an event was possible, if |
