Have we invented a modern art genre? Could there be such a style as "African Still Life"?

What is a still life?

The Tate defines a still life in this way:

One of the principal genres (subject types) of Western art – essentially, the subject matter of a still life painting or sculpture is anything that does not move or is dead.

Wikipedia's explanation is also short and to the point:

A still life (plural: still lifes) is a work of art depicting mostly inanimate subject matter, typically commonplace objects which are either natural (food, flowers, dead animals, plants, rocks, shells, etc.) or man-made (drinking glasses, books, vases, jewelry, coins, pipes, etc.).

This wasn't moving, and one could argue the subjects are dead. Does this photo constitute a still life? If we set aside the glaring fact that this is a photograph and not a painting, I would argue it's a rudimentary still life, but new and different in critical ways.

A few examples from classical times

Ambrosius Bosschaert the Elder (Dutch - Flower Still Life) (early 1600s)Image source

In this painting, the artist painted a few flowers scattered on the table, seemingly randomly, but note the butterfly perched on the stem of one of those randomly scattered flowers. If the painter had placed the butterfly on the flowers in the vase, would it have been as visible? And the dragonfly?

The description of the painting gives insight into the motivation for painting still lifes:

A pink carnation, a white rose, and a yellow tulip with red stripes lie in front of a basket with flowers, that would not bloom together: roses, forget-me-nots, lilies-of-the-valley, a cyclamen, a violet, a hyacinth, and tulips. Insects, short-lived like flowers, remind of the brevity of life and the transience of its beauty.

)Maria van Oosterwijk, Vanitas Still Life (1693)Image source

The vanitas was a particular genre of still life:

Especially popular in this period were vanitas paintings, in which sumptuous arrangements of fruit and flowers, books, statuettes, vases, coins, jewelry, paintings, musical and scientific instruments, military insignia, fine silver and crystal, were accompanied by symbolic reminders of life's impermanence.

Here's one for Halloween.

Philippe de Champaigne - Still Life with a Skull (mid to late 1600s)Image source

Still lifes with skulls were surprisingly popular. Wikipedia goes on to explain why:

Additionally, a skull, an hourglass or pocket watch, a candle burning down or a book with pages turning, would serve as a moralizing message on the ephemerality of sensory pleasures. Often some of the fruits and flowers themselves would be shown starting to spoil or fade to emphasize the same point.

Is this photo a still life?

Leaving aside the lack of a skull, dead animals, butterflies or dragonflies to add interest and thematic emphasis, the arrangement is indeed reminiscent of those 17th century still lifes.

The vase has a vibrant, bold pattern and communicates a joie-de-vivre that the vessels in the classical paintings tended not to do. This "painting" argues against the case for passively accepting the inevitability of death.

If, if, if

Dang! If I'd taken the photo the day before - there would have been dead things in the image. I noticed many dead flower heads in the arrangement the first couple of days of my stay in Lusaka. This morning, a staffer was carefully brushing the dead heads out and rearranging the remaining blooms in the vase.

So could an African Still Life be a new genre?

This kind of still life could represent hope and resilience - the spirit of clinging to life rather than fatalistically accepting death.

What do you think?

Team South Africa banner designed by @bearone