Talk:History of Asian art

Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Promotional articles about yourself, your friends, your company or products, or articles created as part of a marketing or promotional campaign, will be deleted in accordance with our deletion policies. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Spam.

This page is close to Eastern art history. Should they be merged?

dino (talk) 16:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes - frankly all that is needed is to make this page redirect there. Johnbod (talk) 16:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, I left some remarks on Talk:Eastern art history. I'm not locked in though. If the consensus says merge...then redirect to Eastern art history. Modernist (talk) 23:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I came across this article while doing research for our bio of Oleg Grabar, who was a specialist in Islamic art, something that fell under the rubric "Oriental art" way back when. That is why I added the link to this article. betsythedevine (talk) 16:05, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Magazines on asian art

http://www.paragonbook.com/html/browsesubj/browse.cfm?regionid=5&subjectid=36&group=1&print=yes&RequestTimeOut=3600

Rajmaan (talk) 04:15, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

See Talk:History_of_Eastern_art#Requested_move_19_January_2016, where it is suggested this article is merged to a new History of Asian art. Please make any comments there. Thanks, Johnbod (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

To state the blindingly obvious, Asia is a huge continent, with a huge and culturally diverse population. And while I'm no expert on the subject, I'd be astonished if there was any distinguishing feature unique to art from that continent, beyond its geographic location (the limits of which are a social construct, as any geologist will confirm). In plain words, 'Asian art' appears to only exist as an external 'western' categorisation, rather than one applied by the artists in question, who one would assume see their art in its own specific cultural context, rather than that of the arbitrary subdivisions of outsiders. Why is Wikipedia perpetuating this exercise in Orientalism? What exactly does it achieve? AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:38, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

You should probably ask these guys:

• The Asian Art Museum (San Francisco)
• The Asiatic Museum, in St. Petersburg, Russia
• The Seattle Asian Art Museum
• The Museum of Asian Art in Berlin
• The Museum of Asian Art of Corfu in Corfu, Greece
• The National Museum of Asian Art, in Washington, D.C.

Is "any distinguishing feature unique to art from that continent" actually necessary to make the term valid? I don't think art history or the art market work that way at all. In fact Buddhist art and to a lesser extent Islamic art provide strong pan-Asian factors, and in older times Scytho-Siberian art, reaching from China to the Ukraine, the Mongols, and the spread of Chiinese pottery and textiles along the Silk Road(s) provided others. Johnbod (talk) 12:31, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure that listing a whole load of museums, none of which are in Asia, actually disproves my point. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:42, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

No, they just happened to be handy at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asian art. Are you going to ignore the rest? Johnbod (talk) 12:47, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

List of museums of Asian art lists some that are in Asia. And the term "Asian art" appears in a ton of publications in GS and GB. Would you like to nominate African art for deletion? Go for it... I'll get popcorn. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:20, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

I think I'll nominate Straw man instead. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:18, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:History of Asian art which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:01, 30 December 2025 (UTC)