Notes
Notes INtroductIoN 1. John M. MacKenzie, Orientalism: History, Theory and the Art, Manchester University Press, Manchester, UK, 1995, pp. 10, 14–16. 2. See James Clifford, especially The Predicament of Culture: Twentieth-Century Ethnography, Literature, and Art, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1988; Anne McClintock, Imperial Leather: Race, Gender and Sexuality in the Colonial Conquest, Routledge, London, 1995 3. Clifford, op. cit., pp. 5–6. 4. Bruce E. Hall, Tea That Burns: A Family Memoir of Chinatown, The Free Press, New York, 1998, p. 40. 5. N. Katherine Hayles, “The Condition of Virtuality,” in J. Masten, P. Stallybrass , and N. Vickers, eds., Language Machines: Technologies of Literary and Cultural Production, Routledge, New York, 1997, p. 183. 6. Philip Fisher, Making and Effacing Art: Modern American Art in a Culture of Museums, Oxford University Press, New York, 1991, p. 6. 7. “In l’art pour l’art, the poet for the first time faces language the way the buyer faces the commodity on the market.” Walter Benjamin, “The Paris of the Second Empire in Baudelaire,” in Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings, Volume 2: 1927–1934, Belknap Press, Harvard, Cambridge, 1999, p. 65. 8. Quoted in Clifford, op. cit., p. 11. 9. Philip Fisher, op. cit., p. 18. James Clifford, op. cit., p. 8. 10. Elmer Davis, History of the New York Times, New York Times, New York, 1921, p. 118. 11. Carl Sandburg, Storm Over the Land, Harcourt, Brace and Company, New York, 1942, p. 87. 12. Jean Baudrillard, Symbolic Exchange and Death, Sage Publications, London, 1993, p. 92. T. J. Jackson Lears Fables of Abundance: A Cultural History of Advertising in America, Basic Books, New York, 1994, p. 54. chapter oNe. the polItIcs of chINoIserIe: the dIsappearaNce of chINese objects 1. William Blake, “William Blake’s Annotations to the Works of Sir Joshua Reynolds, 1798,” in the Complete Poetry and Prose of William Blake, ed. by D. V. Erdman; quoted by Edward Said in Culture and Imperialism, Vintage Books, New York 1993, p. 13. 225 226 Notes to chapter oNe 2. According to Ann Gibson in her essay “Avant-Garde,” the two most renowned writers on avant-garde theory, Renato Piggioli and Peter Burger, both agreed that “the term ‘avant-garde’ was originally used to designate the conjunction of revolutionary sociopolitical tendencies and artistic goals,” and “transgressions against anything established as a given.” In Critical Terms for Art History, ed. by Robert S. Nelson and Richard Shiff, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1996, p. 205. 3. Richard Shiff, “Originality,” ibid. p. 150. 4. Quoted in Catherine Lynn, “Decorating Surfaces: Aesthetic Delight, Theoretical Dilemma,” in In Pursuit of Beauty, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rizzoli, New York, 1986, pp. 61–62. 5. Schlotterback, Thomas, “The Basis for Chinese Influence in American Art 1784–1850,” unpublished dissertation, University of Iowa, 1972, p. 2. In Chinoiserie, Phaidon Press, 1993, Dawn Jacobson discusses the evidence that the Puritanism of the colonists did not prevent them from purchases of exotic luxuries from Asia. Boston was the center for the import trade as well as for the reproduction of Chinese techniques such as japanning furniture. The first exhibit of Chinese things occurred just twenty-three years after the founding of the country, in Salem, Massachusetts, when the East India Marine Society created a display of objects from overseas pp. 203–204. 6. Carl L. Crossman, The Decorative Arts of the China Trade: Paintings, Furnishings and Exotic Curiosities, Antique Collectors Club, 1991, p. 21. 7. Arjun Appadurai ed., The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986, p. 41. 8. Edward Said describes this situation of the ineffectiveness of the avantgarde among writers in the late nineteenth century: “Dissenting literature has always survived in the United States alongside the authorized public space; this literature can be described as oppositional to the overall national and official performance. . . . there has always been an opposition—one thinks of anti-imperialists like Mark Twain, William James, and Randolph Bourne—but the depressing truth is that its deterrent power has not been effective.” Culture and Imperialism, Vintage Books, 1994, p. 287. 9. By 1843, the United States was, with the exception of Great Britain, the principal commercial country in the China trade and was granted the status of “most-favored-nation” treatment. However, Earl Swisher points out that this status was granted to the United States, along with all other Western countries trading with China, due to the consideration of Chinese Foreign Minister Ch’i-ying, an expert in...
OR
Buy This Book in Print