When I began work on this project several years ago, of the artists covered in this work, only one, Gilda Edwards, was already deceased. Sometime early on in this process, Cleveland artist and kindred brother of the Neo-Ancestralists, Harry Washington, passed away. In the short span of a few weeks in the late fall of 2005, three others died: Cincinnati resident Thomas Kent, whose inspiring creative endeavors have been presented in this book, and Columbus artists Roman E. Johnson and Smoky Brown. Since 2005, we have also lost Ed Colston and Barbara Chavous, two more prominent Columbus artists whose work echoes the Neo-Ancestralist impulse. And in 2011, Cincinnati lost one of its most widely known entrepreneurial artists, Kwame Clay. In 2013, the man who inspired so many, Mr. James Batchelor, died, and, like the other artists named here, he is sorely missed. The passing of these artists is a painful reminder of how important the work of documentation is in preserving a cultural legacy. Like life itself, installation art is transitory, and the ephemeral nature of installation art makes necessary the kind of record we have attempted to provide here. It has been said that life is short and art is long: in the case of installation art, documentation is the only means to longevity.
Although temporary, Neo-Ancestralist installations offer interesting re-presentations of the familiar materials of our everyday existence. The juxtaposition of disparate forms of and approaches to artistic expression constitutes a critical aesthetic practice that recognizes the harmful effects of official practices used to impose one particular style of art and school of thought to the exclusion of others. The Neo-Ancestralists’ theory and practice emphasize inclusiveness and radical transformation—not only the immersion of the artist into popular life but also a move beyond cultural hierarchy toward new kinds of popular, including collaborative, art.1 Their appropriation and recuperation of African and working-class vernacular culture is not based in romantic sentiments of cultural nationalism or modern romanticism, however. Their re-presentations of cultural practices serve as metaphors for counterhegemonic strategies of social change. The Neo-Ancestralist approach is an important critical practice in the ongoing culture war, but it is not to be confused with the kind of direct confrontation with communities and institutions that leads to the radical transformation of social and economic conditions. The Neo-Ancestralists’ critical confrontation with cultural hierarchy is a metaphor for the confrontation between the differential socioeconomic interests of society. Both are the important work of artists everywhere.