Interesting question sir.I do not really think that the names given artistic movements serve any purpose besides clubbing artists of similar characteristics together. and very often a single artist cannot associate themselves fully to a single movement.For eg:Picasso made contributions to many art movements during that time.TS eliot also borrowed insights from various movements.The entire process of naming is indeed very arbitrary.

Thank you, Khushboo. I was hoping that someone would have the courage to say what you did. Yet... unless I use these arbitrary labels in my publications, I fear that I won't be understood. Is there any alternative that you or someone else might suggest?

The human mind tends to group aspects of reality into categories, and these categories vary from one culture/period/region to another. As for stylistic categories in the arts, each researcher is free to accept, reject, modify, or reinvent them. Ideally, we should separate the variables used to define these categories: content, form, technique, media, materials, sociocultural context, etc. Depending on the intent and focus of one's research, the same art objects (or acts, or texts) could be assigned to distinct categories. It is important to define one's criteria and terms, and to make one's thoughts explicit in publications. Some categories are firmly entrenched; if one chooses to use them, one can provide a brief critical analysis of their strengths and weaknesses.

You're right on target, David. The trouble with redefining categories is that sometimes you come across an audience of readers not very receptive to change. I write in English and Spanish on Western philosophy and literature and find that my readers in Spain have difficulty letting go of outworn critical conceptions (as for instance, generational theory of thinkers and writers: the concept may work relatively well in cultures with a relatively high percentage of writers to readers, but not as in a number of Hispanic cultures where that percentage is lower).

I hear what you're saying, Nelson. In Guanajuato, a small city in the mountains of north central Mexico, some colleagues have trouble with concepts like the embodied mind, or science as a point of view rather than a limited set of disciplines. Some even feel threatened by the fundaments of critical thinking (perhaps because it would force them to abandon unsustainable beliefs). Other colleagues, as well as most of the students, are more receptive to such ideas. I suppose the same situation is present, in varying degrees, throughout most of the academic world. Getting back on track, I think asking the question you have asked is a good way to get people to think critically about the accepted stylistic categories that we all have learned and use, often without understanding precisely what they mean nor where they come from. Labels are comfortable and make a convenient shorthand for communication, but it's important not to lose sight of the complexity of what we are looking at.

David, how frustrating it must be to deal with minds untrained in forming concepts, the cornerstone of our disciplines! Do you ever get to Mexico City? Returning to our theme, I am currently writing a book on French composer Maurice Ravel, who despised the term "impressionism." Yet it fit him in one period of his production as he evoked visual impressions of landscapes, waterscapes, and skyscapes. He was so versatile, that he tried his talents in a number of styles, yet always came out recognizable as Ravel.

Yes, Nelson, Mexico City is a major node in my professional network (that's inevitable in a country as highly centralized as Mexico, especially when working on topics related to this región). The Ravel Project sounds fascinating and I'm sure that you are enjoying it. Studying art is rewarding because we get to work with intrinsically pleasing material!

Actually, I am writing on the theme of "Ravel and the Music of Spain." Critics disagree on so many aspects of this theme (Spain in Ravel's music and Ravel's impact on Spanish music and music criticism) that I felt a book was warranted. Ravel himself was a French Basque who regarded his Basqueness as mainly Spanish. When he and Debussy largely cultivated Spanish-style music--around the first decade of the 1900s--, critics regarded such music as impressionistic. Ravel did not, yet he saw as Spanish some music which his critics did not. I am trying to deal with these vast artistic labels without doing violence to artists' individuality. The undertaking is difficult. Any suggestion you can make would be very appreciated.

I note you have written on the Otomi ethos, yet are broad enough to devote time and thought to purely artistic themes.

The only suggestion that occurs to me at the moment is to reiterate the importance of keeping variables separate: nationality, regional or linguistic ethnicity, artistic styles, etc. One finding in my studies of the Otomí of ca. 1520 is that there was a plurilinguistic and multiethnic culture in central Mexico, in which the various participating groups shared nearly all aspects of culture, including artistic styles; they just verbalized about things with different words (albeit with the same metaphors, expressed in different verbal languages but in the same pictorial language). I just uploaded a paper on culture and ethnicity as concepts:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236111409_La_cultura_y_la_etnicidad_como_conceptos_en_los_estudios_histricos?ev=prf_pub

Chapter La cultura y la etnicidad como conceptos en los estudios históricos

Sir,what you can try to do is explain the contributions of the concerned artist and then see if some recurring characteristics in some artworks or some phase of time,which can be connected to the art movements and accordingly argue that it is impossible to pin the artist down as just an impressionist because his contributions do not warrant such a label.You can also analyse the contributions of all the major artists to a particular movement,and see if there is indeed a common thread running through their works,if your research does not provide any such evidence,then it can be a strong case against such arbitrary labeling.

Thank you for your perceptive answers, David and Khushboo. They are indeed helping me with my research. Thanks for your paper, David. I notice you deal with culture and ethnicity as concepts but refrain from ascribing conceptualization to the Otomi'.

your welcome sir.Indeed curious to see how the paper turns out

I'm glad you found something of use in my contributions, Nelson. As for culture, ethnicity, and the Otomí people, I go into this in other studies, especially "Los otomíes: el pasado acumulado en el presente": https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235326238_El_pueblo_otom_el_pasado_acumulado_en_el_presente?ev=prf_pub

Chapter El pueblo otomí: el pasado acumulado en el presente