Customer Reviews

Cave Paintings and the Human Spirit: The Origin of Creativity and Belief

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

As an aerchaeologist working for the State of California and as a CRM specialist, I have been to (and worked at) many of the rock art sites discussed in Whitley's book. Also, I have spent much of my life among different Native American communities, so his discussion of shamanism resonated with me. I have been teaching anthropology courses at night at a local Community College and found his insights useful in explaining human beliefs in rock art (so-called for lack of a broad enough and accurate enough defining term...). I read his book and others he has published in tandem with three related recent publications by David Lewis-Williams (the Mind in the Cave, Inside the Neolithic Mind, and Conceiving God) and recommend that those people wishing to learn about cognitive archaeology, religion, first art, shamanism or other "near-the-mark" topics read these four books as a group, in order of publication date. Very enlightening.

If you have ever looked at a prehistoric painting on rock or a carving into rock, this book is a must read. Whitley takes the reader on a journey that will delight. For those who love big thoughts and big ideas, backed up by real writing and detailed research, this book is a must. For those who love mysteries that are unraveled through careful thought and twists in a story, this book is a must. For those like to sink their teeth into details that nobody else has written about, let alone done painstaking research, this book is a must. But most importantly, it is just a fun read.

CAVE PAINTINGS AND THE HUMAN SPIRIT: THE ORIGIN OF CREATIVITY AND BELIEF offers a college-level discussion of ancient art and religion by one of the world's foremost experts on cave paintings. Archaeological evidence and analysis blends with insights in evolutionary psychology and neuroscience to provide a new understanding of shamanism and its connections with early myth and religion. While this could have been featured in our 'spirituality' section, it's reviewed here for its importance to college-level science holdings, as well.

I profoundly disagree with Mr. Bissett's review in which he dismisses David Whitley's core premises of shamanic Paleolithic cave art. It is obvious that he has either never read or chosen to ignore the meticulous research and carefully constructed arguments by Whitley, Jean Clottes, Norbert Aujoulat, David Lewis-Williams and other giants in this field. That he still credits Whitley with four stars for his book is a testament to the author's great talent as a writer.

I will admit that the chapters involving Coa and the dating scandals, while interesting from the standpoint of professional infighting, tended a bit too heavily toward the scientific intricacies of chemical analyses for the non-professional reader. Once Whitley moves into Part 3, "Meaning and Madness in the Upper Paleolithic", the book picks up considerable steam as he presents the core of his ideas; that shamanism and the resulting brilliant cave art originated as the expression of unique individuals who endured the tortures of mental disorders, particularly bipolar illness. He carefully lists the evidence from ethnographic materials reporting on traditional shamanic behaviors as it dovetails with modern psychiatric evaluations and demonstrates their congruency. This by itself sheds a fascinating light on the esoteric subject of shamanism. Yet he goes on to validate his point even further through the very frank admission of his own experiences with deep depression. By this admission he immediately moves the discussion out of the realm of removed science into a sincerely personal quest, one based on a lifetime of research, both personal and professional. Whitley's sensitive and well-reasoned exploration of shamanism from the standpoint of mental illness has not only given me a new appreciation of the art created by brilliant people of the era and the terrible struggles that may have preceded these expressions, but has helped me personally to better understand an issue in my life that has provoked fear, anxiety and emotional confusion. Envisioning mood disorders as magnificent springboards of creativity opens entirely new channels of understanding and tolerance and, certainly appreciation. Without the raging madness of a Van Gogh, Poe or others of their artistic caliber, the world would be a much less colorful place.

Life is difficult and was even more difficult in the Paleolithic. But it is through struggle and suffering that we are challenged to transcend. I am very grateful that David Whitley has done that.

Edit, Oct. 18, '09:

Since writing the review below, in which I question the notion that cave paintings have a religious significance, an interesting news story has come to my attention. Titled "Ancient figurines were toys not mother goddess statues, say experts as 9,000-year-old artifacts are discovered" by David Dergyshire in Mailonline, it contradicts the received wisdom with level-headed science.

Here's a quote from the article: "In the 1960s, some researchers claimed the more rotund figures were of a mysterious large breasted and big bellied "mother goddess", prompting a feminist tourism industry that thrives today. But modern day experts disagree. They say the 'mother goddess' figures - which were buried among the rubbish of the Stone Age town - are unlikely to be have been religious icons."

Ascribing a particular meaning to ancient artifacts in the absence of evidence has always seemed inappropriate to me. My idea is that cave art was the block buster movie of the day. Similar to the giant landscape paintings that entertained audiences in the eighteenth hundreds. Artists like Church and Bierstadt were celebrities who attracted thousands to view just one epic painting. I have no hard evidence for this idea, but it seems possible, even likely, based on observation of human behavior. Certainly more satisfying and reasonable than the religious interpretation.

I suspect certain personality types are in need of reinforcement for their own intellectual constructs of a religious or spiritual nature. Projecting that mind set onto people who lived many thousands of years ago is probably reassuring and comforting, but has little to do with science.
________________________________________________________________________

30,000 years ago accomplished artists left amazingly accurate and sophisticated depictions of a world long gone. The Chauvet Cave drawings referred to in this book are far older than those at Lascaux. Whitley attempts to explain the origins of art and religion by citing the latest archaeological evidence and findings of neuroscience. He suggests a new understanding of shamanism, artistic creativity, myth and religion.

Lots of mammals were considered interesting enough to record way back then. Cave bears, ibexes, lions, horses, but no people. Seems odd to us. Wildlife art is still popular, but 'Art Business Today' tells us that it is only number eight out of the top ten best-selling subjects. The top three are landscapes, local views and semi-abstract landscapes. Number four is abstracts, followed by dogs, figure studies and number seven: seascapes, harbor and beach scenes. Next is wildlife, then impressionistic landscapes and finally nudes. Notably absent is religious art.

Why do Whitley and his fellow academics insist that cave drawings must have some religious significance? Religious art today is nothing more than a niche market. It says far more about Whitley's modern mind set and world view than it does about the cave artists themselves.

The last ice age ended about twelve thousand years ago. Prior to that it was cold and winter lasted a long time. Since archaeologist have not found enough burnt wood to prove long term occupation they tell us the caves were used only for ceremonial events. Therefore, the cave drawings had to have been religiously motivated. Does that make sense? Caves would have offered by far the best chance to make it through the winters unless they went south. Bear in mind that around the world people still live very comfortably in caves all year.

Here in north Idaho we heat with wood. It's common knowledge that the best way to start a fire is to use the burnt wood from the previous fire. In a thousand years when they dig up our fireplace and date the charcoal will they conclude we only used it briefly and therefore it was ceremonial?

Notice how they took advantage of the suggestive defects in the rock. We have all seen animals in clouds, natural rock and elsewhere. The cow jumping over the moon is a well known example. Don't we love to point out pareidolia to others? My suspicion is that those long ago artists were a lot like artist today. They did artwork for their own amusement and to amaze others. Cave paintings appear to be embellished pareidolia. A pleasant, interesting way to pass the long winters. A nice change from telling stories around the camp fire.

Soon as a child can stand and hold a crayon, what do they do? That's right, they draw on the wall! Does anyone teach them to do that or do they mimic adults? Nope, completely instinctive. In fact, it's usually a struggle breaking them of it! [...].

What do 37,000 year old paintings show about their painters? What was the motive for the paintigs? Whitely speculates that the painters were shamans, half-crazed spiritual leaders. The book reproduces many cave paintings, saving the reader travel and crawling to almost inacessible sights.

This is the sort of book that says more about the mind of an archaeologist than it does about what he is studying. The paleolithic cave art of Europe is undeniably old and some of it is undeniably large. And much of it contains identifiable images of kinds of animals, something I suspect many of today's artists couldn't make. But most of it is a disorganized mess, and it can't be called great art even by today's very relaxed standards that would admit, say, Andy Warhol's "Campbell's Soup Can."

Why stone-age men put all those graffiti on cave walls is of course unknowable, but that hasn't stopped people from thinking they know, hunting magic through sexual imagery to the latest theory, shamanism. Whitley, a North American archaeologist who specializes in rock art, supports the shamanism idea, based on what he knows, or thinks he knows, about the origins of rock art over here. A connection with cave art is the presence on the walls of, besides the famous animals, various patterns such as cross-hatches, arrays of dots, zigzags, and spirals that are the sort of visions a shaman sees during a trance and the rest of us see under the influence of certain drugs or at the onset of a migraine headache. If I were to see such things on a cave wall, I'd think of a third-grader's doodles during a boring arithmetic lesson. An array of handprints on a wall, made by coloring the palm with ochre and pressing is against the wall, is to him clearly the result of a "ritual" process; I'd be more likely to think of an unsupervised six-year-old with finger paints and a nice clean wall.

Aside from the author's visits to Chauvet and the Volp caves in France, there isn't much in this book about the title subject, cave paintings. The bulk of the book concerns a controversy over the date of some surface petroglyphs in Portugal, petroglyphs in California, and the author's musings about shamanism as the original religion.--Bill Mixon