Blog Post #9 - Recap of Greek Art

            Throughout this course, I have enjoyed discovering and studying types of art that I had no knowledge of before, as well as relearning or delving deeper into styles that were familiar to me. I can say that I have definitely benefitted from the material covered in lecture, and the art from most eras is appealing to me. However (and I don’t mean to be predictable), Greek Art seems to grab my attention the majority of the time.
            Perhaps for the same reasons as Winckelmann—or not, but Greek sculpture is my weakness. In the summer of 2009, I visited Paris and toured many prestigious museums, including the Louvre. When observing the work from that era, I am baffled by the precision and strength of it all. It has been discussed over, but the white marble pieces seem to capture and portray the human form to accuracy I’ve never witnessed before. As in one of my earlier posts, I find the pristine white marble figures more mesmerizing over the intricately colored reconstructions, or how they might have appeared originally. For example, the “Archer” from the west pediment of the Temple of Aphaia has been worn of its color through the years, but even so, in my opinion it works better than the Vinzenz Brinkmann and Ulrike Koch-Brinkmann reconstruction of the Archer from 2004. The colored version is also quite impressive, but somewhat distracting; it takes away from the form of the sculpture.

            Another reason I believe the Greek’s art is so alluring is because the Golden Mean appears in their architecture and the structures of their sculptures many times over, much like the west façade of the Parthenon. When repeated in itself, the Golden Rectangle has relevance to the construction of the building and proportions are shared. This ratio can be seen everywhere in nature, and perhaps for that reason, is so intriguing and aesthetically pleasing to the eye. It also acts as a canon of proportions for some carved figures.

            The Hellenistic Period in particular is a favorite of mine from the Greek Era, partly because it is distinguishable from their creations before with the content of the pieces and the painstaking detail of form, but mainly expression. This period takes on a dynamic style unlike other periods, and it is shown in the Gigantomachy Frieze from the Altar of Pergamon. The section with Athena Attacking the Giants shows much more drama than other Greek art from the past. This dramatic scene is exaggerated by elements such as the diagonals used throughout the composition, extreme detail to form, and the intense emotion on the faces of the figures. The emotions are what are most engaging to me. They are more than appropriate for the scenes and are perfectly depicted, almost enough to make the viewer feel the same in relation. This is demonstrated also in the sculpture of Laocoön and His Sons. With the kinetic energy represented by the diagonals of the bodies and limbs, the powerful subject matter, strength of the forms, and severe flawless emotion, this work unifies to be one intensely dramatic scene.

Byzantine and Early Medieval Art

            During the decline of the Roman Empire and the upsweep of Byzantine and Early Medieval Art, society started becoming more reliant on religion, especially Christianity. Much of the art from this time depicts scenes from the Testaments and moves away from naturalism, like the Greeks and Romans had nearly perfected. Art from the Byzantine Era becomes more stylized than past art, which is unusual, because one would think that the beautiful naturalism of the earlier Greek and Romans would only progress. Two pieces in particular show this sort of stylization: “Presentation Page with Abbess Hitda and St. Walpurga” on page 450 and “Christ Washing the Feet of His Disciples, Aachen Gospels of Otto III“ on page 451.

            These works are very similar in their styles and unique in the way that they do not represent the human figure directly. Proportions are off and even the buildings in the background do not follow a specific structure. In the piece “Christ Washing the Feet of His Disciples,” we see elongated fingers, arms, and other appendages; the robes that drape over their bodies do not fold in a way that would be normal in the real world; and we don’t see anyone walking around with a halo. Also, I noticed that the man in the bottom left that is lifting his leg over the washbowl has a bend in his thigh that is unnatural. Even the colors in the sky are not relative to that of reality. The building on the background that is on a tower of some sort appears to be a kind of linear perspective, but it appears to be more toward the foreground than it should, making it seem small in relation to the characters in the piece. In all, the style has somewhat of a geometric feel to it, especially the buildings. The forms of the figures are less organic than that of a real human. However, there are many long, smooth, curvy lines used as well.

            In the piece “Presentation Page with Abbess Hitda and St. Walpurga,” the forms seem to have a lot more freedom. The buildings in the background follow no perspective, but are also quite geometrical. However, many organic shapes and designs are shown inside of these, as well as throughout the piece (such as the pedestal on which St. Walpurga stands). The figures appear to have more accurate proportions than that of the other piece, yet there are still minor cases where they are off. For instance, the feet of the characters are way too small for the rest of their bodies. So much that it hardly looks like they could support themselves. Another element of this piece that gives it its style is the use of bold lines. They are used throughout: on the buildings, the backdrop behind the characters, the saint’s halo, and the border especially. Also, the small details throughout are very uniform and bring the whole piece together nicely. These would be the designs around the border, in the buildings, on the pedestal, the robes of the figures, and even the writing around the saint can be seen as an addition to these forms.

Ancient Roman Emperors - Commodus/Caracalla

            During the period of Ancient Rome, art was used for several purposes. This included the promotion of leaders through statues, figures, and paintings—propaganda. Two figures that will be analyzed in particular achieve this exhibit of power through their appearance: the bust of Commodus as Hercules, and the portrait head of Caracalla. Both of these men were former emperors of Ancient Rome. Commodus reined from 180 to 192 CE, and Caracalla from 209 to 217 CE. To gain respect and institute their leadership, the figures must display a sense of greatness.

            The bust of Commodus as Hercules is a beautiful statue and represents exactly what a leader would want. Instead of sporting a typical emperor’s garb, Commodus’ figure wears a lion’s pelt draped over his head with the paws tied across his chest. Lion’s have been previously discussed as being animals of power, especially in Ancient Near Eastern Art. They pose a hostile threat, being the dangerous creatures they are, and so if one is to essentially control or kill a lion, they appear more powerful and therefore more respected. Commodus also holds some sort of club in his right hand. This might also be a representation of his power; simply by wielding a weapon he could gain respect through fear. It is also possible that this is the club he used to defeat the lion. In his other hand appears to be some offering of food. The motive behind this could be to show that he can provide for his people and meet the demands of the society he runs. His hair was formed in a stylized manner, including his beard, which emits a sense of wisdom with its neatness and presentation of his age. Commodus has a modest expression on his face. Not one of intimidation, much like Caracalla’s. His form is also very clean and muscular. This might prove that he was a gentle man, but ran his empire with an iron fist.

            The portrait head of Caracalla is difficult to discern, because there is not much to work with. However, he wears a very stern expression. Emphasis is given to his furrowed brow, cheeks, and jaw line, almost as if he was clenching his teeth. He has a slight frown, which adds to his portrayed anger as well. There is a depth to his eyes that gives an impression that he has no fear. As said before, the portrait gives a sense of intimidation. It is a very effective piece for how little of it there is, and in return, is incredibly impressive.
            I believe anyone who viewed these works would have a similar reaction and understand that these men were held in high regard or were important individuals. They certainly come across that way to me, and the ways in which they accomplish their campaign make them appear to have been very solid leaders. Both of these creations are remarkably striking in their portrayals and exhibit the strength and power that an emperor of the time should have.

Greek Art and Winckelmann

            Johann Joachim Winckelmann lived in the 18^th century and studied Greek Art. He was naïve to the notion that Greek statues were originally painted, but hailed their work how we know it today—pure white marble. Winckelmann promoted “good taste” in art and believed that Greek marble statues epitomized the beauty and perfection he was trying to pinpoint.
            I don’t think that it was necessarily a bad thing for Winckelmann to shape a false view of beauty to his followers, because I believe he was right. I can’t say that his view swayed me, because I was unaware of his existence until now. However, in modern society at least, simplicity is key. Sometimes the simplest forms of art are the most beautiful. The white marble statues were not the intent of the Greeks, but they are not trying to make up for anything, and they were complete as far as Winckelmann and myself knew. Much like in graphic design, white space is elemental and basic. It relieves unnecessary clutter and business that distracts the eye and results in a clean final product. For example, the “Archer” from the west pediment of the Temple of Aphaia has been worn of its paint. Vinzenz Brinkmann and Ulrike Koch-Brinkmann built a reconstruction in 2004 of what the statue might have looked like before it lost its color. When comparing the two, the color statue becomes much more distracting to me. It becomes less art and more like a giant doll due to the vivacity of its appearance, and it loses more of its form. I’m not saying that color isn’t beautiful, but sometimes it isn’t needed. The anatomy of the original is much easier to see with the shadows on a solid color; so in subtracting the color, form and simplicity is added.

            My perception of the Greeks has changed only slightly after coming to learn that their statues were originally painted, because I admired the ingenuity of the pristine white marble. I thought that the Greeks might have left color out for the exact reason as I explained before—to keep the form strong. It made sense to me, since the Greeks respected the human form and held it in high regard.

            I do not believe that art would be produced differently today because of the beliefs and actions of one man. However, I am sure that he had a great impact. I actually think that art might have moved in the direction it did anyway, since we are learning more and more about what is aesthetically pleasing in its terms. Besides, art is a form of self-expression. How can one express themselves and their original ideas if their perceptions have been altered by the beliefs of another? To me, a large part of art is about being different, and in order to do that, one must disagree on things. If Winckelmann hadn’t promoted his stance on the perfection of Greek Art then somebody else might have, and there would still be people to disagree with them as well.

Aegean Art - Comparative

         The Cyclades people of the Bronze Age in the Aegean Era, like many other cultures around that time, had a particular style about their works. The “Figure of a Woman” statuette from approximately 2500 BCE very much resembles the “Venus of Willendorf from the Paleolithic Era about 20,000 years earlier. These figures each hold a distinct style from the periods in which they were carved.

         The Cycladic figure is carved out of marble, which is not surprising, due to their ample supply of it. This contrasts with the limestone Venus. The figure stands 24 ¾” tall, but like the Willendorf figure, standing 4 3/8^th,” it does not stand on its own. If they do not stand, then perhaps they were meant to be carried. This could mean that the people of these cultures did large amounts of traveling or maybe the statues were used for rituals of some sort. The marble stone makes for a smooth texture on the Cycladic figure, whereas the limestone looks to have been worn a bit more, and leaves a rougher texture. Both figures are obviously of women, and it is likely that women also carved them.

         The artists of each figure left their pieces faceless, so they do not appear to represent anyone in particular. The only features that appear are a nose on the Cycladic woman and what looks to be braided hair or a knitted hat on the Venus. The body of the Willendorf statue is thought to represent fertility through an emphasis on the female reproductive parts and the belly. Even though the Cycladic figure is not represented in such a way, they have the same symmetrical pose with small arms carved folding across the torso. Also, there is evidence of an original painted design on the Cycladic woman, including multiple eyes on the head. This is thought to be another way of depicting fertility or pregnancy, so they could have had the same function in each culture.

The Palette of Narmer & Egyptian Conventions

         The artistic conventions utilized by the Ancient Egyptians were extremely unique in regards to representing the form of humans, animals, or objects during their era. The human form is depicted in a composite view in typical Ancient Egyptian style art, generally with a profile of the face with a front view of the eye, both shoulders and a frontal view of the torso, and both legs in profile view as well. They were very specific with the arrangements of their works and used a grid known as “Canon of Proportions” to craft with mathematical precision and get the same form and style every time. If a human figure were to stand approximately 18 units high on the grid, the knees would start at the 6^th unit, and the shoulders would be at the height of the 16^th row and about 6 units wide. The Canon of Proportions allows the same style to be reflected over in this way with the same ratios. The Egyptians based their work off of this grid for nearly three millennia.

         The Palette of Narmer is a prime example of the repetition of style in the art of Ancient Egypt. The piece stands 25 inches tall and is made of green schist, with the main focus of the front being King Narmer preparing to execute what is labeled by a hieroglyph as an enemy of comparable size. The slab has registers dividing the depictions of other scenes with many smaller figures, including Narmer’s sandal bearer to his left, other enemies running in fear and defeat underneath, and the falcon god Horus bringing Narmer a decapitated head attached to some papyrus (a symbol of Lower Egypt), indicating that Narmer was clearly the ruler of the area. The backside introduces a scene where enemies lie decapitated with their heads between their legs, awaiting inspection by the royal procession, including Narmer wearing the Red Crown of Lower Egypt. Below this is a circular indentation between the elongated and intertwined necks of lions in which makeup might have been prepared. Finally, at the bottom is a bull (representing the power of the king) striking down another enemy. The majority of the figures on the tablet were created in the stylized Egyptian method, using the Canon of Proportions mentioned before.
         The Egyptians were creative, even though their art was made mostly to serve a function. I believe the worst art on the planet still had to have some sort of creativity that inspired it to come into being. Their creativeness is supported by the fact that they invented a system to work by, and the elements of art reach a fine equilibrium in their pictorial reliefs, statues, and paintings. Their composite forms are more descriptive and still recognizable, whereas they might not be—if depicted how they would actually appear to the eye.

I do not think that the Egyptians were much concerned with their degree of creativity. It did not seem as important to them as the messages they were conveying with their art. However, creativity can be found in it everywhere. Even if it lacked ingenuity, it would still be valued today for how long it has survived and for the study of its purpose.

Reconstruction Drawing of Babylon

The Reconstruction Drawing of Babylon in the 6th Century BCE has much to offer in terms of presenting various formal elements of art. The great Ishtar Gate is centered in the frame, with what appears to be soldiers marching through it toward the Processional Way vanishing lengthwise behind it. The Palace of Nebuchadnezzar II and its Hanging Gardens are in the background to the right and the Marduk Ziggurat behind that. Since it is an aerial view of dominant structures, this piece has a sense of power to it. However, being able to relate to the individuals so small at the foot of one of these structures also gives a feeling of insignificance.

Much of the composition has already been spoken about, but it is fair to say that it is well balanced. The Ishtar Gate is undoubtedly the focal point of the entire work, being a drastically different color and placed in the center next to another building colored white (another color unseen elsewhere in the piece). The green shrubbery to the right reaches equilibrium with the white building and the other greenery on the left. This makes the drawing orderly with a centered and grounded visual weight.

A particular style of preciseness can also be detected throughout due to the geometric shapes and straight lines. I think that this gives the buildings the sharp edges they need and keeps the entire framework structurally sound.
         The lines, as mentioned before, are very active in the drawing. As I look at the composition, my eyes are lead from the towers in the foreground, about midway back to the intersecting wall for a pause at the focal point (Ishtar Gate), beyond to the very engaging Processional Way all the way to the vanishing point, brought from the horizon line to the Marduk Ziggurat and Hanging Gardens, and finally down a connection of shadows on the buildings where the cycle starts again. The lines holster the kinetic energy that makes the whole piece visually dynamic.

As for the colors, the palette chosen embraces a peaceful feeling. To me, the combination of very light yellowish/tan creates warmness and the right amount of blues and greens gives it the cool kick it needs. These colors remind me of the ones you would see in a tropical oasis, thus leaving me in a cozy and satisfied mood.

Another point to bring up is that this drawing takes place on a small scale. It packs a lot of business in the content, but the context is representing real life objects that we know to be larger than depicted, especially when referring to the people walking under the gate. If the proportions are correct in relation to each other (and I believe they are), then these buildings are quite sizeable. This especially gives the Marduk Ziggurat a looming sensation from a distance, since it is extremely in-depth.

After analyzing this drawing in reference to many of these aspects essential to art, I react with a pleasant sense of awe at its harmonious colors, the powerful but feigned size of the buildings, and the smoothness of its visual intricacy.

Venus of Willendorf

The "Venus of Willendorf" statuette was an archeological finding near Willendorf, Austria in 1908 by Josef Szombathy. The specimen was carved out of Oolitic Limestone and is approximately 11cm in length. A recent study dated it back to 24,000-22,000 BCE, making it the earliest recorded representation of a human figure. It is a peculiar piece because we know so little about it. Given the form of and context in which it was created, it could have represented a multitude of ideas.

The emphasis on the female parts in particular suggests that it was an icon for erotica, fertility, or even maternity. As opposed to the status quo of today, anyone who was heavyset in the Paleolithic Era was considered healthy and affluent. That being said, the Venus could potentially be modeled after some sort of queen or deity. Given the lack of a face, feet, and proportion, it is unlikely that the piece was carved to signify an existing person at the time, unless it was to symbolize a special female individual with a lifestyle of leisure. The study of this as well as other Paleolithic Venus statues raises other wonderments of the time, such as what religious and mythological views were shared, what the people ate, and how sexual behaviors might have been practiced differently.

There are layers of reasons why this figure was named “Venus,” which can be problematic when discerning its actual purpose. First, there is an ironic tone to the name, since Venus is the Classical goddess of beauty, love, and sexuality in Western culture where our standards of beauty might be different, which contrasts with the obese and less feminine form of most Venus statues from the Paleolithic Era. However, the name could also be linked to the fertility aspect and the naturally beautiful form of women through accentuating sexually related parts. Yet another reason could be that the figure is actually meant to represent a prominent goddess, much like the Earth Mother/Mother Goddess of Greek Mythology. If this is true, it might also suggest that the roles of females were significantly more important in society in Paleolithic times than nowadays. Societies may even have consisted of matriarchies, promoting the notion of fertility more so. All of these points, in some way, connote the idea of a “Venus,” tying the name and the piece together in its objectivity in a variety of ways.

Christopher L. C. E. Witcombe, the author of the article “Venus Of Willendorf,” gives the impression of having an aesthetic view toward the female body. I follow his view, and I believe the “Venus” of Willendorf is beautiful in its mystifying symbolism and the way that it is art. However, when compared to the standards of beauty in modern western culture, it loses attraction on the grounds of its form. It should also be taken into account that the human body is an amazing biological machine and is beautiful in the way that it is unique unlike anything else in the universe.

About Me

Hi friends. My name is Evan. I consider myself a pretty lax person, but I am always for having a good time. I'm outgoing and like to be with friends and I enjoy making people laugh. Since taking a couple philosophy classes, I try to keep an open mind and observe all angles in any given situation when I can, much like analyzing a 3-dimensional piece of art. It's just a way to better understand why things are the way they are or why someone made them that way.

I am currently a student at Central Washington University studying toward a Graphic Design Major. Plain old pencil and paper used to be my weapons of choice, but since spreading myself in other areas and classes at school, I have taken a liking to working with other media such as charcoal, brush and ink, clay, and metals. Art and music have always been hobbies of mine, which hopefully I can pursue to achieve a satisfying career.

I believe that self-expression is the most powerful trait a person can employ. Our character is based off of our beliefs, opinions, emotions, etc. If nobody expressed themselves, what would this planet be like? This world needs more art.

And less politics.