Talk:Masks among Eskimo peoples

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Arctic Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arctic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arctic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArcticWikipedia:WikiProject ArcticTemplate:WikiProject ArcticArctic articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discussion copied from ...

User talk:Lithoderm#Thanks!

You obviously know something about Inuit art, for which I am grateful. There is a huge contradiction in the first paragraph of the body -- did the Thule produce much art or not? I am not in a position to knwo which sentence or reference is correct. Are you able to comment or amend? BrainyBabe (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I meant Dorset. BrainyBabe (talk) 17:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both cultures produced a great amount of art, but their productions are of very different character. The art of the Dorset is generally more highly regarded; I believe that this is because the Dorset produced many artifacts that have no functional purpose, but were rather for shamanistic use. The Thule were more practical-minded, and produced functional objects decorated with relatively uninteresting zigzag patterns. There are even examples of Dorset-created shamanistic objects (such as a straw for sucking spirits out of the possessed) that were reworked into functional objects by the Thule (a needle case, in the previous example). The nomads that the first paragraph refers to are not the same as the Dorset, which is currently unclear; these nomads were the pre-dorset or ASTT. Flying bears were a dorset motif, not thule, and were not masks in any case... I've been meaning to work on this article for a while, but it would be nice to organize a couple users who could collaborate. Maybe WP:VA or WP:IPNA would be of assistance. Right now I'll take some of the obvious errors to task; thanks for the notice. Lithoderm (talk) 23:55, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:BrainyBabe#Inuit art

The link to Masks among Eskimo peoples was removed from this page because that tradition, as far as I can tell, is exclusively Alaskan. Inuit is used to describe the inhabitants of the Canadian arctic, while Eskimo refers to the inhabitants of Alaska and the Aleutian islands. Overall Masks among Eskimo peoples is not a very good article; it is too general. It may need to become an article on Eskimo art, while the Inuit canadian elements it mentions could be moved into Inuit art. Any thoughts on that front? Lithoderm (talk) 13:51, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved this to the bottom of my userpage, so that new sections flow chronologically.

I can accept the removal of Masks among Eskimo peoples from the text of Inuit art if that is necessary (I am not convinced it is, but will let it pass). However, I think it does a disservice to readers not to include it somewhere in the article, and the obvious place is the "See also" section. The use of the term "Eskimo" is fraught with historical and geographical overlap, political sensitivities, and plain inaccuracies, as I'm sure you realise. To wit, some of the sources in the Masks among Eskimo peoples article refer to Greenland, Canada, and the Inuit. (I am going only by the titles; as I've said before, I am no expert and do not have access to the books.) I'm glad you added the image of the mask in the Canadian Museum of Civilization to the Inuit art page -- strictly speaking it is Dorset, as you point out, but it fits well into a historical overview.

I don't think Masks among Eskimo peoples is a bad article, although yes it could be strengthened. It has lots of sources, for one thing. I would oppose splitting the overall subject into Inuit art and Eskimo art (which currently redirects to Inuit art); that's equivalent to imposing a US/Canada border divide on an entwined cultural history. If you want to discuss this further, I suggest we take this to the article talkpage, so others can join in or at least see this. BrainyBabe (talk) 08:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at Inuit#Inuit, Yupik, and First Nations People it's only the Yupik, for sure the Alaskan Yup'ik and one would assume the Siberian Yupik as well, that don't consider themselves Inuit. The Alaskan Inupiat are Inuit. For political purposes the Inuit Circumpolar Council includes the Yupik as well (ICC Alaska). If the Masks among Eskimo peoples is intended to be only about the Yupik then it might be better to move it to Masks among Yupik peoples, with a seperate page for Inuit masks (especially the Greenland mask culture) and another for Dorset culture masks, as they were neither Eskimo or Inuit. Rather curious as to why the Paleo-Eskimo link, in Masks among Eskimo peoples, goes to Thule people and not Dorset, see my comments at Talk:Ellesmere Island#dorset = paleoeskimo?. I don't think that the masks should really be included in the Inuit/Eskimo art article as they were not designed as art, but for a specific purpose. Right now Masks among Eskimo peoples is fairly small and I think would be best as is with suitable redirects. At a later time, if it gets larger, it could be split into seperate articles discussing the various groups. I also think that this section and the bit at User talk:Lithoderm#Thanks! should be copied over to Talk:Masks among Eskimo peoples. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 16:23, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like a wiki-muddle of who said what just above, but good to see you again, CBW (and how IS the weather up there?)! I bow to the expertise of the two of you, and others, as to what role masks have in various cultures etc. My self-chosen role here is to add clarity for the layperson. Please do copy over this discussion and then let's go from there. BrainyBabe (talk) 17:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Starting the substantive discussion

If I proposed starting an Inuit culture article, would it get shot down? HAs anything similar been tried before, under other titles perhaps? I don't have much to contribute, aside from organisational skills: no specialist knowledge at all. BrainyBabe (talk) 08:44, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked and there doesn't appear to have been one before. Sounds good to me. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 16:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What material will you start it with? And no, there is nothing similar to it. Lithoderm (talk) 16:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New section

First, a clarification: by Alaska I mean the relatively temperate coastal regions surrounding the Bering Sea, not the arbitrary state boundary, which does include tundra that is geographically contiguous with the tundra of the Canadian arctic. I realize this sounds picky but-

These are significantly different cultures. After the Pre-Dorsets move into Canada in 3000 B.C., many more eskimo (for lack of a better word) remained in the Bering sea/Bering strait region. From there the cultures develop seperately. The Dorset gradually develop in the Canadian arctic, and in Alaska, several regionally distinct sequences of cultures take place. For one instance take the Northern Maritime Tradition cultural sequence: The Okvik, or Old Bering Sea I,II,and III(300bc-600ad), which produced figurative walrus-ivory carvings decorated with schematic incisions; the Birnik culture (500 AD-), which gave rise to the Thule culture that we know so well, their art is of the same decorative nature; the Punuk (900AD-), which introduced variations in the shape of harpoon heads, as well as metal artifacts that possibly originated from trade with Siberia. Besides that cultural continuum there are the the Ipiutak, which become distinct in 350 AD. They introduce elaborate ivory carvings of knots and openwork, as well as bear figures, which also show direct Siberian influence. This distinguishes them, at least historically, from the Inuit of the Canadian arctic. I haven't even begun to talk about southern Alaska and the Aleutian islands. In the modern development of native art in the area there is also a reason to seperate Canada and Alaska; different government programs, different developments: while ivory carvings have been mainly replaced by soapstone carving in Canada, they are still common in Alaska. In Alaska there is also not such a prerogative on printmaking, and if prints are produced they are WOODCUTS; you will never see soapstone used for relief prints in Alaska. This is a direct result of the programs of the Canadian government, specifically the initiative that sent Houston up to survey the possibilities of Inuit art. In sum, Alaska is culturally distinct not only because of isolation from the rest of the canadian arctic, the difference in natural materials, and Siberian influences, but the programs of the Canadian and US Governments differently influenced the developments of the cultures in their areas of sovereignty.

Second, I will admit that perhaps my judgment was hasty, as I can find no consensus among my sources on "Inuit" vs "Eskimo".

"I am using the name Eskimo interchangeably with Inupiaq and
Yup'ik, which are favored today because these words mean "the people" in their own native languages... In Canada the term Inuit is appropriate because all speak the same language. In Alaska, however, the Inupiat speak a language that is unintelligible to the Yupiit. Therefore, when we speak of Alaskan Eskimos as a whole, it is more economical to say "Eskimo""

However,

"the term Inuit has come to refer to the Canadian Eskimos"

would imply that the "Eskimo" applies to the entire range of cultures.

It would probably be confusing, and certainly misleading, for the general reader to concieve of them as two seperate groups, so in hindsight I agree that seperate Eskimo art and Inuit Art articles would be a bad idea. However, Eskimo would seem to be a blanket term for the entire group; perhaps an article on the cultures I described above could be called Native Alaskan culture or Alaskan Eskimo culture, or some variation upon that. BrainyBabe is right about masks; I have found examples of full-size Dorset-culture masks made of driftwood, and there is evidence that the Inuit made masks out of sealskin, although they have not survived; so it is NOT exclusively Alaskan, contra what I said before. My apologies.

Really the most important thing to do now is to focus on the Inuit culture and Inuit art articles. I have contacted de:Benutzer:Ansgar Walk, and he has expressed interest. I don't mean to be over-assertive about the above points, and will continue to work on these articles. I will soon start an article on the aforementioned cultures, but will defer until there is consensus on a name for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lithoderm (talk • contribs) 15:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved this to a separate section so it doesn't look like it was part of the discussion on user talkpages.

Wow! I had no idea I had the knowledge to be correct about a point of detail! I guess it was just instinct....

And yes, of course US & Cdn gov't interventions have changed the course of art development (in Canada, mostly post WWII). I meant the similarities of centuries and millenia before that.

I'll let you experts get on with the main stuff, and will chip in if I think I can be helpful. BrainyBabe (talk) 19:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yup'ik masks

The Yupik masks (tr:Yupik maskeleri) on the Turkish Wikipedia --Kmoksy (talk) 19:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Masks among Eskimo peoples. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090123172349/http://www.uaf.edu/anlc/index.html to http://www.uaf.edu/anlc/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Masks among Eskimo peoples. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080306132554/http://www.uaf.edu/anlc/yupik_inuit.html to http://www.uaf.edu/anlc/yupik_inuit.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:15, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]