Did Tiki come from Africa way back when?

Does anyone ever wonder about this?

Here is a random example of African Art:
http://img.alibaba.com/photo/10873179/African_Art_Tribal_Masks.jpg

I was wondering about migration patterns of humans, homos, Neanderthals, etc.
A friend suggested the "Out of Africa Theory," which I first thought was a joke based on the movie, but as it turns out, it is a theory begun by a professor at the University of Hawaii.

In a nutshell, it suggests:

1. Homo sapiens idaltu, found at site Middle Awash in Ethiopia, lived about 160,000 years ago and are the oldest known anatomically modern human and classified as extinct subspecies.

2. The next oldest fossil of modern humans outside of Africa are those of Mungo Man found in Australia and have been dated to about 42,000 years ago, so they are not the oldest in time.

3. According to the hypothesis, all 6.7 billion people alive today have inherited the same Mitochondria from one woman who lived in Africa about 160,000 years ago.

4. All men today have inherited their Y chromosomes from a man who lived 60,000 years ago, probably in Africa. He has been named Y-chromosomal Adam.

[ Edited by: christiki295 2009-04-22 10:16 ]

And... I suppose as used here, Tiki art is not based on our "pop" Tiki mug collection, but the Oceanic Art found, for example, at the DeYoung in San Francisco:

http://www.tikicentral.com/viewtopic.php?topic=29278&forum=2

I personally think that as this topic has been written it is really tip toeing the line on people's personal religious beliefs since generally all religions have a direct belief as where we come from.

Rule 1 on TC is : No discussing religion or politics. Tiki Central is not the place for this kind of discussion.

Where art comes from is one thing...where people descend from is another . You may want to edit your post so that it focuses more on the art theory.

[ Edited by: leleliz 2009-04-22 00:28 ]

Nah, it is an art history question.
I could care less if Neanderthals, etc., were all created on Day 6.

Tiki art supports the theory of relativity...

Wait for it...

I've got lots of tiki art and my relatives don't!

(So sorry... I can't sleep... just a little messed up.)

Seems a reasonable theory to me.

The science of DNA tracking is likely to be a better indicator of human origins than tracking artwork, although studying the heritage of languages and artwork can certainly be used to show influences of how various cultures influenced one another. Personally, I think studying artwork might be more fun than studying DNA combinations. And some of us ignore even those things, and are happy just to study the migration routes of tiki drink mixology recipes, as discussed in Beachbum Berry's Sippin Safari book.

Most scientists agree that we all share a African ancestor, who lived about 65,000 years ago - see the DNA Ancestry project for more information
http://www.dnaancestryproject.com/ydna_intro_ancestry.php

Here is a study that seeks to identify the geographic region where most Polynesians derived from (on a more recent timescale, not going back 65,000 years) Most indicators point to Southeast Asia, particularly Taiwan.
http://www.zoology.ubc.ca/~etaylor/413www/gibbons.htm

Vern

I personally believe that Tiki is a GAME we play, and that all "scientific" theories about it, here and in general, are brought forth with a good sense of irony, in a playful manner. The mythical ancestor Tiki was a joker and prankster, and a lot of people all over the world, in all religions, would benefit from adapting a measured sense of humor and self-irony about themselves and their beliefs. Tiki is the antithesis to political correctness. And that is Tiki's "religion".

I agree with Leleliz...this is a slippery slope as far as a topic goes. If it could offend someone perhaps if doesn't belong here.

KK

But that's the whole point! TIKI was the FIRST MAN in Polynesian mythology! If we cannot playfully discuss the origins of humanity here, where does it end? The problem is that way too much in this country has been "religionized" in the past years, and peoples freedom of speech has been restricted because of it. If anybody is offended by the above, than they also should be offended by Tiki, and they don't belong here.

Tiki is not a restrictive, sedating, denying "movement", but it is expansive, inspiring, and all-inclusive.

Nah, not me.

I am a descendant of a fish. :)

Bigbrotiki's point is valid and relevant....my opinion

This thread should really be moved to Beyond Tiki. The topic doesn't bother me, other than the fact, it doesn't necessarily fit into the General Tiki forum...We've been down similar roads. The general area of discussion quote, "is a place to celebrate the classic Tiki Bars of the mid-century and the design aesthetic they established", period. I just have a gut feeling some people are going to get their toes stepped on with this in the main forum, especially when it can be viewd as religiously or politically charged(I know Christiki probably didn't start the discussion in that light, but others may carry it in that direction?)....No censorship called for...Just a thread moving request...Just my two cents.

With that said, I'd gamble to say that almost all primitive art looks similar, and could also show the progression of each human's internal clock and same speed learning based on timeframe of art, and location.
I would dare to say we all came from one giant continent before the Teutonic plates shifted and moved masses of land to how the earth's continents now look.

The Earth evolved,shifted and moved, while taking humans along for the ride. I don't think art is genetic, and it would have had to be inherited or tought AFTER the plates shifted, which would debunk the title question of this thread, in my opinion.

[ Edited by: Tom Slick 2009-04-22 10:05 ]

If one looks at Tiki as the representation of man in art, various aspects of African Art seem to share the same qualities.

It is well accepted that Hawaiians came from the Marquesas (French Polynesia-Tahiti) and Dr. Joanna Tilburg of UCLA has written that the first Tiki originated on Rapa Nui - Easter Island.
http://www.tikicentral.com/viewtopic.php?topic=7725&forum=1&16

So, the question becomes: where did those people from the Marquesas & Rapa Nui come from and did they originate from the same groups as are responsible for what we now refer to as African Art?

As the Out of Africa migration theory (and also the Multiregional theory) suggests that all man came from Homos (erectus, sapien, whatever) in Africa, than those Homos form the groups that learned to build voyaging canoes and populated the South Pacific?

And, did those early star-gazing Voyagers take Tiki with them from Africa?

Or are the similarities in the art coincidental as both groups independently expressed themselves in art the same way?

For all of you who think that this topic is somehow overtly religious and is going to step on the toes of those who practice Astrozorianism, Catholicism, Hiduism, Islamism, Judiasm, Wicca, or whatever (or encourage others to practice such religion), you need to chill and have a Mai Tai.

[ Edited by: christiki295 2009-04-22 10:12 ]

On 2009-04-22 07:44, bigbrotiki wrote:
But that's the whole point! TIKI was the FIRST MAN in Polynesian mythology! If we cannot playfully discuss the origins of humanity here, where does it end?

Nice turn of phrase. I modified the question accordingly.

As an academic exercise, this could be an interesting topic. But I agree it should be relocated to Beyond Tiki.

Remember...

"The Tiki that Tiki Central focuses on is a mid-century American invention that is Polynesia-inspired."

I am just sensitive to this over-fear of offending everyone nowadays, that is part of why the world we live in today has become so generic. Tiki should be a haven from exactly that.

For example: Does it strike anybody as absurd that nowadays there is no nudity on menu covers, matchbooks and paintings in restaurants, while 50 years ago, during a time that was much more restrictive, it was not uncommon--so that nowadays we have to oooh and aaah at the examples of this more liberal past?

I am not denying everyone the right to choose if they approve of nudity or not, but both views should be able to co-exist.

And to the question that is the header of this thread, it seems a little too far-fetched in my personal opinion. We all know that Tiki Style did not just pop out of nothing in the 50s, but as far as I am concerned, its main source is ancient Polynesian art and culture -because it was synonymous with the myth of a paradisaical lifestyle.

In my book TIKI MODERN I chronicled the parallel development of the rising appreciation of primitive art with that of the spread of the Tiki image in the 20th Century (including examples inspired by African art), and I described how primitive art in general was felt to be the "Birth of Art". I did that to describe the psychological climate at the time that facilitated that the Tiki became such an icon. But to jump from Africa straight to Tiki in one question is too far of a stretch in my opinion.

On 2009-04-22 10:41, GatorRob wrote:
As an academic exercise, this could be an interesting topic. But I agree it should be relocated to Beyond Tiki.

Remember...

"The Tiki that Tiki Central focuses on is a mid-century American invention that is Polynesia-inspired."

I think is thread is uniquely qualified to be located in "General Tiki" as it directly pertains to the origins of Polynesia-inspired Tiki which form the basis of Mid-Century Tiki in America.

Even though this thread would remain in General Tiki, such a strict interpretation of the General Tiki would require most thraeds on the main tiki board to be moved to Beyond Tiki, including almost all of the currently "top" threads:

Huell Howser's show re the Cook Islands,
Tiki in Video Games,
Time Machines
Which car is the most tiki, etc.

While I obviously have not researched the subject like you, Big Bro, even showing up at the Night of Tiki art show in Culver City some years back immediately raised the question:

Night of the Tiki art show:

http://www.lastgasp.com/pics/nigtik.jpg

"This book explores the work of Shag, America's hippest neo-tiki artist; Leroy Schmaltz, the granddaddy of 1950's tiki Americana; and the authentic Oceanic art that influenced them both."

The Oceanic art that was there included Melaneisa, like this one at the De Young:
http://www.famsf.org/deyoung/collections/collection.asp?collectionkey=39&screen=2

Where did people from Melanesia come from? At some point, Africa.
The commonly accepted Out of Africa theory and the opposing (some say European-centric) based opposing theory each admit as much.

The Night of Tiki cover art is strikingly similar to this example of African Art:
http://hof.povray.org/images/mask26.jpg

This African Art looks very similar to Melanesian art, like that at Night of the Tiki:
http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/07/ho_tribal07_003_lh.jpg

The Suffering Bastard - made famous by the Tiki Mug - looks exactly like this African Art:
http://www.brooklodge.co.nz/Creative/webimages/Africa_totem.jpg

[ Edited by: christiki295 2009-04-22 11:31 ]

Maybe far-fetched is the wrong word, I did not want to suggest the idea is wrong in its basic concept. I (and Tom and Trav) meant more that it is too BROAD of a net, not DIRECT enough of a link to motivate us to get into a discussion.
Good catch on the Suffering Bastard, it also resembles some Igorot figures.

And don't use The Night of The Tiki as a source with me, that is an example of an initially fine premise executed in a very confused fashion.

[ Edited by: bigbrotiki 2009-04-22 11:40 ]

The only real correlation I see between Tiki as we know it and Africa is one, not so simple word, "tribal". Some Native American art resembles tiki, but I do not think they are directly linked to one another. Primitive drawings all carry similarities, but so does a kindergarten class holding a finger painting session. Increase that size to include every kindergarten class in the United States, even the world for that matter. I'd be willing to bet that at least 75% would look similar. Primitive art is just that, primitive. And in my opinion, it isn't much different than the example of having all the children in the world who are age 5, paint something....Sure, there might be different scenes, based on today's technology, but put those kids in a world without cars, celphones, TV, bicycles, videogames, and I'm sure you'd see an overwhelming similar outcome in terms, not only of subjects, but also general style.

If you gave one thousand monkeys a typewriter and had them type for 1,000 years, none of them would ever produce a copy of the Book of Tiki, or anything even similar to the Book of Tiki.

But,

If you give 1000 wood carvers a piece of wood and asked them each to produce a figural form, there is a very good chance that several of them would look very similar to each other.

Christiki:
The answers you seek may be found in an Anthropological concept called "parallel generation." I takes into consideration two isolated cultures coming up with similar art or technology advances independent of each other.

Tom kind of came close to the theory here, but forgot to check it with the geologic timeline

On 2009-04-22 10:00, Tom Slick wrote:
With that said, I'd gamble to say that almost all primitive art looks similar, and could also show the progression of each human's internal clock and same speed learning based on timeframe of art, and location.

This next part has a few problems:

I would dare to say we all came from one giant continent before the Teutonic plates shifted and moved masses of land to how the earth's continents now look. The Earth evolved,shifted and moved, while taking humans along for the ride. I don't think art is genetic, and it would have had to be inherited or tought AFTER the plates shifted, which would debunk the title question of this thread, in my opinion.

After the plates had shifted?

First, I'd like to congratulate the Brazillians for jumping off their land mass and luckily hopping on the one that was moving west. Good job guys! You got out just in time. You might have ended up being Africans and later sold in to slavery and sent to Brazil to work on the sugar plantations.

Second, Pangea started to split about 176,000,000 - 161,000,000 years ago. That leaves about a 175,800,000-160,800,000 year hole in your human art development timeline. It would be at least 161,000,000 more years before Homo Sapiens even came about. Maybe the people back then were riding on the backs of dinosaurs during the Ice Age shopping for African tiki mugs as the continents gently floated around? Eventually, they may have passed Hawaii on the way back to where Africa is now and seen the tikis there and that is what probably stated this whole tiki revival thing anyway.

And lastly, I think Chris-tiki should have to change his TC name. It looks like too much like CHRIST-iki to me.

Buzzy Out!

On 2009-04-22 11:52, Tom Slick wrote:
The only real correlation I see between Tiki as we know it and Africa is one, not so simple word, "tribal". Some Native American art resembles tiki, but I do not think they are directly linked to one another.

I think it might depend on your definition of the word "tribal" and what you consider "Native American". Many Polynesians (Hawaiians) call themselves Native Americans and we've come to learn that there is a direct link between Polynesians and Inuit tribes. Also, there's evidence that Native American DNA was found in inhabitants of the island of Rapa from long ago. Of course I'm no expert, but in Polynesian culture, the kupuna pass down the kuleana from generation to generation, so that's where my info comes from. Just a thought, though I think I may have gone off topic. Apologies.

And both, primitive art and children's art were an inspiration to the moderns. But otherwise, Tom, you are getting into dangerous un-p.c. territory by equaling primitive art with children's art. :D
But many books have been written about that, thousands of pages have been filled with discussing it, and to the specific question about the connection to TIKI, I have said my part in my books, and beyond cannot agree to such an oversimplification as "Tiki came from Africa".

Buzzy, that is a good angle, artistic synchronicity, Zeitgeist and consensus consciousness all play a part.

Interesting topic! I like it. (Or, you can just delete it and we can go back to talking about mugs and mug collecting).

But seriously, latest evidence indicates there may have been several varieties of Neanderthal, all in different areas (Except here in America). There were middle eastern, European and Asian Neanderthals, all slightly different, and the DNA evidence seems to back that up.

And then there is Homo Anteccesor!

On 2009-04-22 00:22, leleliz wrote:

Rule 1 on TC is : No discussing religion or politics. Tiki Central is not the place for this kind of discussion.

[ Edited by: leleliz 2009-04-22 00:28 ]

Leleliz, it strikes me that you are the one discussing religion here, and thus the one infringing the rules.

Buzzy owes 1000 monkeys an apology.

On 2009-04-22 12:18, bigbrotiki wrote:
one "cannot agree to such an oversimplification as "Tiki came from Africa" ".

True. There can be no direct correlation as there exists a Millineum of time, and evolution in between.

Nevertheless, there is food for thought that those Melanisians who created the art referenced above descended from those who initially hailed from Africa and subsequently became the predecessors Polynesians. Consequently, the art of these early Polynesians shared a common historical origin.

The Wikipedia excerpt on Melanisisa indicates that they "reached the Pacific islands 35,000 years ago (according to radiocarbon dating)" and "It is likely that from this area a very small group of people (speaking an Austronesian language) departed to the east to become the forebears of the Polynesian people."

The Melanesians are dark-skinned people(s) which suggests that they might be descendents or linked somehow to those who hailed from Africa way back when.

[ Edited by: christiki295 2009-04-22 18:10 ]