ABSTRACT

In this paper, we test a widely accepted assumption in literature, namely, that due to its universal(istic) and humanistic character aiming to transcend ethnic boundaries, art is an effective tool for overcoming inter-ethnic divisions, and further, that people consider art effective to this specific purpose. To test this assumption, we ran a socio-psychological experiment at different universities in Bosnia–Herzegovina. Students were asked to assess the aesthetic value of the selected art installation, but were given different names, surnames and city of the artist, since names and places tend to indicate ethnicity in Bosnia–Herzegovina. We hypothesized that the students would attach greater value to the work of an artist perceived to belong to their ethnic group than that of one thought to belong to another group. The results revealed that the artist’s perceived ethnicity did not play a role in evaluating the value of the work presented. The findings demonstrate that the ‘the other’ in Bosnia–Herzegovina is not always perceived through an ethno-political lens as the literature often suggests. Furthermore, it found that art per se is not necessarily perceived as an effective tool for bridging inter-ethnic divides.

摘要

在本文中，我们测试了文学中一个广泛接受的假设，即由于其旨在超越种族边界的普遍性和人文主义特征，艺术是克服种族间分歧的有效工具，而且，人们认为对这个特定目的有效的艺术。为了验证这一假设，我们在波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那的不同大学进行了一项社会心理学实验。要求学生评估所选艺术装置的美学价值，但是给他们不同的名字，姓氏和艺术家所在的城市，因为名字和地点往往表明波斯尼亚－黑塞哥维那的种族。我们假设，与那些被认为属于另一族的艺术家相比，学生将更重视被认为属于其族裔的艺术家的作品。结果表明，艺术家的感知种族在评估所展示作品的价值方面没有发挥作用。研究结果表明，波斯尼亚－黑塞哥维那的“另一者”并不总是像文献所经常暗示的那样，通过种族政治视角来理解。此外，它发现了艺术本身并不一定被视为弥合种族间分歧的有效工具。