The "Art History" and "Stone Faces" essays both have extraordinary strong and attractive points explained in two completely different views. Jensen and Butala although using two unlike styles of writing, both articulate their point of view in a productive way. Both essays contribute to the statement of Art being equally essential in our everyday lives as well as a great factor of influence in everything we experience. However, "Art History" achieves this by using well-built words in a persuasive manner, unlike "Stone Faces" which uses more descriptive and poetic language. Together, these to authors ambiguously affirm the fact that Indigenous Art is not only necessary in our world, but should be respected and recognized in our culture.
These writers impressively emphasize the implication Indigenous Art has on our own community. Many aspects in Canadian culture have been influenced with elements from Aboriginal Art. Their Art can be witnessed all around, as Jensen writes, "Art was fully integrated with daily life" dwellings painted with abstract Art...ceremonial
robes [and] utilitarian objects, including food vessels, storage containers, and clothing...[were] decorated with eh finest most significant Art" (Imprints, 273). Butala also writes, Indigenous "people must have seen [Art] as important and it follows, then, that's these must have had to do with their spiritual life" (Imprints, 282). Indigenous Art is still witnessed in our mainstream culture today.
In contrast top writing about Art as a whole, Butala differentiates with Jensen by specifically writing of one Art sculpture. The most vital argument Butala states, is that asking who created the piece of Art and why is scarcely insignificant. She adequately writes, "To ask what a carving in stone of a turtle, paintings, or carving of other animals and human on or in stone...is to be distracted by something that seems to...