"western art"? or "Others"?

Talking about "western art" or "Other Arts", I think there's nothing to make one better than the other, to make one smarter than the other. It depends on where do you stand and what position do you take because the two worlds don't share a common language. In Chinese the word "China" means "the Central Kingdom", by that point they see all other culture all "others", as well as in Western culture a non_western artist has to deal with "impurity". we can connect many discussion in our class in the past to this topic. A artist's work not just belongs to the artist, but also belongs to the culture. The art reflect the artists themselves, and it is how we mediate our perspectives.

We cannot talk about art seperately. The reality is, if the economy is not equal, if the political power is not even in the world, the art is not in the same value. 

what culture?

Does an artist need to speak his "own culture"? He might speak his "own language", but what is his "own culture"? When we define a person's identity, we should think about "becoming" rather than "being" (if the person is still alive), because we are far from one thing(one culture) only. Or we can forget the term of "idnetity" at all, because we only think ourselves are different but see all others as a "whole". In the essay Fisher made comments on  the internationalism and multiculturalism. I agree the cultural symbol is "pure", but is there still any "pure" culture exist in this world? 

The essay also mentioned about the "cultural sign" and some artists who deal with "cultural sign"s. I believe a cultural symbol or "sign" is presenting "truth", with original meaning, and it is "pure". Ai Weiwei is one of these who successfully uses cultural symbols. This is his "Coca-Cola Vase". The vase is from Tang Dynasty (618-907) and paint.