Stylsim Vs. Naturalism

During the time of Byzantine art, artists moved away from a naturalistic approach to their pieces. Religion and connections to spirituality were booming and we can see connections to these in mosaics and other works during this time. Churches were trying to give the effect of spirituality and gives almost another worldly experience. I want to focus on the mosaics that can be found in the church of San Vitale. Within the church there are images of many different important figures. In the mosaics images of Christ, angels and bishops can be seen.  Christ is appearing in a purple robe here. Purple at this time was very expensive and displayed imperial imagery. Christ is being displayed if not the most important, but a very important figure in the piece. The image of Christ Enthroned (pg 239) is one of many mosaics that display an emphasized sense of divinity and mystical qualities. These mosaics really take a step back from naturalism  Christ again, is in a purple robe extended above the ground. He is there enthroned in a blue orb. We can get the sense of mystical and spiritually when looking at this piece. Below the figures we can seen green grass and trees which gives us the impression that they are outside. What isn’t realistic is the gold sky, naturally, there would be blue sky. The gold background is there to give us the sense that these figures are in another realm, paradise. Other pieces in the San Vitale church also display a more stylized approach. Emperor Justinian and his attendants (pg 240) are shown in a stylized approach as well, almost in a pattern. Each figure in the mosaic has nearly the same stance. Once again, the main focus on the man in purple. Purple and gold are once again used to show importance and a spiritual connection in these figures. Empress Theodora and her Attendants (pg 240) can also be seen in the same pattern way as the Justinian piece. Looking at both mosaics both Justinian and the Theodora there isn’t much individuality between the characters in the image. Each person seems to look nearly the same. The way they stand and their overall figure isn’t too different between them either. The people’s facial features such as eyebrow, eyes are very identical. Everyone also seems to have the same gaze on their face as well. Each figure has black outlines around their body and face. This also takes away from naturalism. Naturally it is hard to see fine lines in artworks. You can see there are a contrast of dark and light in their faces to give a sense of depth but the black outlines really gives them a more stylistic approach. its obvious that the human form was not given a very stylistic approach either. All the figures have a more boxy looking shape due the the clothes. These drapes do not allow the human form to show through like we have seen in prior pieces. It is almost as if the artist was trying to focus more on the silk rather than the human figure. This is also stylized and less naturalistic.

Roman Vs. Early Christian Art

There are many similarities and differences between Roman and Early Christian Art. What particularly stood out to me was how much these two cultures had in common when it came to their architecture. Romans were genius when it can to engineering and we can see that in their building they created. Many early christian architectural styles and ideas were adopted straight from the Romans. Christian communities became organized geographically much like those of the Roman provincial governments. Christian styles and imagery derived straight from Roman visual traditions. Early christian art features the adoption of Roman art forms for christian purposes. In Early Christian architecture, the use of the roman basilica was the ideal design for churches. In Rome, the basilica Ulpia (pg 192) was a court of law, and other basilicas were used as imperial audience chambers , army drill halls and schools. When the Christians adopted their layout the basilicas purpose changed to a religious one. Maxentius created the Basilica Nova, also known as new basilica (pg 211) was the last important imperial government building erected in Rome. This basilica functioned as an administrative center. Much different from the use of Roman basilicas the Christians used the building differently. Old St. Peters church was a large new basilica marking where what Christians believed was the burial site of St. Peter. Christianity was booming and required a gathering place for the entire  community to gather inside one building and worship. Christians were also in need for a place for activities, private prayer and burials. Pagan basilicas did just that for them. They were churches,  and tombs which provided model for baptisteries and martyr’s shrines. Constantine ordered the construction of St. Peter’s church . There are two elements of architecture that can be related back to the Romans. The Early Christians formed basilicas based off of two Romans prototypes, which are rectangular basilicas and circular square structures. These are also made from two different types such as the longitudinal- plan and central- plan Churches. The longitudinal planned churches lead with a porch and are long and rectangular shaped. Central planned buildings were first used as tombs much like the Romans. Central planned churches has a more vertical axis from the center to it’s dome (pg 228). This dome was thought to have functioned as the symbolic vault of heaven. The thought of the dome having something to do with the heavens leads me back to the Romans and their construction of the Pantheon the circle square shape leads us to the center where there is a rotunda which is a large circular room the is covered by a large dome (pg 198). We can see the this massive domed room has different lines of square on it. Its thought that these row have to do with the seven planets that are known at this time. But the dome itself also was thought the have to do with the heavens as well. We can see that the Romans as well as the Early Christians have many things in common but for sure we know the the use of the basilicas is one that’s near the same. the basilicas purpose is different in both cultures but beliefs that had in terms of their building such as the dome is nearly identical. You can really see how style is passed from one culture to another.

The Parthenon Debate

I am a bit torn whether or not the Pieces of the Parthenon should have been returned. But it is understood why there is so much uproar about their place at the British museum. Lord Elgin was someone who fancied antiques, especially those of Ancient Greek Art. Elgin set off to collections some of the Parthenon’s most prized pieces such as metopes, frieze, and pedimental sculpture. Elgin was given permission to step foot on the Acropolis and he then took pieces from the Parthenon.  Elgin wished to preserve these pieces and was indifferent by the state they were in. Some respected the arrival of the pieces in Britain while others saw Elgin’s actions as vandalism. The British Museum then bought the pieces from Elgin at a price lower than what he expected. Today they still sit in the British Museum.

This is cause for a huge debate on whether the marbles should be returned to Athens. Controversial issues include the fact that people who visit Athens would then be able to appreciate the Parthenon in almost its entirety because missing pieces that were in Britain can be seen in their original place where they were created. Visitors would then have a more full understanding of the Structure as a whole. There are also speculations that the marbles were obtained illegally and must be returned to their rightful owners. There is also a new Acropolis museum to hold the Parthenon for safe keeping Greeks wish to arrange the pieces of the Parthenon the same way it was displayed when it was build. It would be hard to do that without the missing pieces.

Although it is understandable why the Greeks wish to have their beloved pieces of history returned I can to see how they are not in a bad place in Britain either. The reasoning behind the place in Britain as to also ensure their safekeeping. They are to be up kept and on display for all sorts of people to appreciate. Many have come to see these pieces and it has given Greek art a sense of fame. Many people come to Britain to see Greek Art! On the flip side the way these pieces are being displayed was not the way they were intended however.  Pieces on the frieze’s are on display at eye level. Humans who visit these pieces in the British museum look at them aesthetically. People look at the beauty rather than the history and story value there is behind the sculptures.   These friezes where seen up high and out of eye level. They were once a painted story of Greek gods. It is understandable why they are wanted back in Greece. If another country say took the statue of Liberty we could feel a sense of loss to our American history. Greece should take pride in what has happened in their history. Having the pieces in Britain can feel like a loss to them, especially if they feel the taking of the pieces was wrong.

Minoan Art

The Minoan civilization can be found on the Island of Crete. When looking at their art, i automatically noticed the significance of the bull in their culture as well as all the other cultures we have discussed. From the very beginning bulls and buffalo were painted on cave walls. In ancient Near East art you can see bulls manifested on the Great Lyre which also depicts a large carved 3d image of a bull on top. As for Egyptian art, the Palette of Narmer displays two bulls heads on the top of each palette. It is clear that the bull shows much significance to each of these civilizations. In the Minoan culture, we too can see bulls in their pieces.  Such as the bull leaping piece, I can see much similarities to the cave paintings found in France. The large bull is shown in action and can be seen in profile much like the bulls found in the cave drawings. The Minoan piece that really grabbed my attention was the Bulls Head Rhyton. This stood out to me much as the Great Lyre with Bulls head did from the Near East. These pieces can really stand out in a crowed. Each bull is shown more on a larger scale. their faces are very noticeable and prominent. The horns, ears and eyes are also seen on a larger scale. Both bulls display the same color palette. Blues and Golds were used for their faces. Each bulls manifests a small patch of hair between their large horns. Each patch of hair is very well detailed and Not to mention, each piece did serve as a use in their communities. The Great Lyre with Bulls head was a popular musical instrument. As for the Bulls head Rhyton this was use to pour liquids out of. However, they are both manifested a bit differently. The bulls head on the lyre is painted with a bright gold paint while the Rhyton was painted with a deep blue color. The eyes and ears and nose on the lyre bull seem to be a bit on the larger scale and the flamboyant blue beard is nowhere near realistic. To me, the Lyre bull is manifested in a more fanciful way while the Rhyton bull is more on the realistic side. Although the Rhyton is painted blue and has large horns, the over scale of his face seems to be more realistic compared to a living bull. Eyes, ears and mouth are more to scale and show a more naturalistic bull image. the detailing on each bull is shown a bit differently as well. The gold bulls face seems to be more smooth around the eyes and nose but displays most f it detailing in his hair and beard. As for the blue bull his detail is shown more in his face around his nose and eyes rather than just being shown in his hair. These works of art indicate that each culture seems to use different materials to create their 3D objects. Ancient near east artists create pieces that were more out of wood. And as for the Minoan culture a lot of their pieces were created more from shells or rock. Overall, both of these pieces render bulls in a very beautiful perspective.

Egyptian Art

Humans and animals are a large piece to Egyptian art. Both men and women are scene in many of these pieces which is much different compared to the paleolithic art when men are hardly seen at all. Egyptian art has gone through many different periods which changed the styling of the human forms.

Egyptian sculptures depicted humans of importance a bit differently than regular people. People of prominence were shown as having strength and power. These three dimensional images express feeling, strength and permanence.The king and Queen are both shown to be in a young and healthy state as well. Mekaure and a Queen are shown standing strongly side by side as she embraces him. Humans of less importance are shown in a more natural state. Such as the seated scribe man we can see him sitting cross legged and very relaxed. Servants are actually shown in the action of work.

Pictorials in tombs show many Egyptian humans in action and they are also shown in profile. They all seem to be holding an object or in some kind of action. Animals and other artifacts are shown along side these people as well. I also noticed that men of importance are always sitting in a chair while the women tend to them. For example, Queen Neterari is shown making some kind of offering to Isis as he sits in his chair. Also, there are two women seen tending to Osiris as he sits in his chair. I got the sense of hospitality from women to men in many of these pieces. Home and family seems to be important here.

In the time of the new Armana style humans started to been seen a bit differently. They almost look unhealthy. Before, kings and queens were shown to look youthful and muscular. In this era they look underfed and fragile.During the 3rd Intermediate period women sculptures were shown in a new light. They were much more slender in the late New Kingdom.

The idea of creativity I think was rendered in small amounts of these pieces. It was a new way to show people completely in profile but the amount of creativity it took to get there wasn’t much. Whats really interesting and valued in Egyptian art wasn’t its amount of creativity but how overall Egyptian life was shown. Creativity was not the soul purpose behind these sculptures and artifacts, it to me was an explanation of Egyptian life. Kings and Queens are shown together as well as their servants and regular Egyptian people. The sense of family and man and women working and being side by side was the importance of it. Ancient art does not need to be creative to be valued today. Ancient art is not just a creative painting that someone thought up in their heads as a piece to put on the wall. There is real history being all these structures and scribes and sculptures. That’s where the real value is. If these pieces never came to be there would be no real way to tell about life during this time.

Week 3 Formal Analysis

The great Lyre with Bull’s head from what I see has two distinct artistic parts to it overall composition. The bulls head itself, as well as the sound box of the great Lyre which can be seen right underneath the bull’s head.The composition of the bulls head is that it has a rather large gold head with a very detailed blue beard. To me, the beard must resemble some importance for many reasons. It it a large colored and very detailed piece of the bull compared to its rather flat face. It is a very bright and eye catching attribute to the overall bull. Another bold piece of the bull is all of it exaggerated features. The bull has a large beard as well as eyes, ears and horns extending from its head. Although the scale of the nose, ears and horns seem to be lifelike the grazing eyes seem to catch my attention with their large bold black pupils. But what really makes this bull unique would have to be the large blue beard. This beard looks to have been painted with a deep blue color. When looking closely I can see the detail hidden within the beard. Much carving had took place here. There are many fine twirled lines that were all carved along what looks like to be locks of hair within the bulls beard. The beard itself seems to actually be about the same size as the actual head of the bulls defiantly giving it a sense of significance. The face of the bull looks as if it was painted with a very metallic gold paint which was used to finish the face. The gold extends all the way up the bulls horns leaving the tips to be painted by a dark black paint. This gives off the sense that the tips of the bulls horns are very sharp. The top of the bull’s head supports and small rough patch of black detailed hair. Most of the bull’s head seems to support a smooth surface rather than the more rough and detailed patch of hair and large swirled beard. the bulls head seems to be carved in high relief due to its deep grooves and etched detail of the nose, mouth, beard and eyes. What makes this form distinctive would have to be its bold features. The artist was not afraid to over do the bulls many features. The sculpture of the bulls head was entirely cut out of wood and painted with gold, silver, lapiz lazuli, bitlumen and shell. Since the bulls head is so bright in color and is protruding out from the wooden backdrop gives the sense of the bulls head a sense of importance and strength. The front panel of the great lyre is decorated with a sound box which seems to be made out of a wooden slab. The piece is not nearly as colorful as the bull’s head and is covered with black and white paint revealing animals and human figures which seem to be telling a story. instead of carving a high relief piece from wood, the artists changed their ways and went for a low relief two toned and very organized image. This image places four separate features stacked on top of each other vertically. Automatically, since the featured image on top with the man and the two beats were much larger and on the top this gave me the sense the the figures in this section were the most important in the whole piece. And since the composition lead the smaller images towards the bottom, this leads me to believe that the images at the bottom are the less important features of the piece. This artifact seems to use a more hierarchical scale to render importance. Since the piece is primarily in black and white the actual figures that are in white and stand against the black backdrop really pop. Much detail went into creating these images. Hair fur, and clothing are all very visible to the viewer. The detailed use of animals and humans in both the sound box as well as the large bull head leads me to believe that both humans and animals at this time were more equally powerful or at least the animals signify a great use or purpose in this particular culture.

Week 2 Venus of Willendorf

The discovery of Venus of Willendorf brought forward a lot of questions and thoughts  concerning a woman’s role in paleolithic society. This figure is important because it shows a realistic image of a woman’s body. Venus of Willendorf’s figure made others question whether she was a woman of higher power, and lead many to believe there was a matriarchal society at that time. Later “Venus” that we see in other art forms are a more modest representation of the female body. As Venus being the classical goddess off sexual love and beauty, I think the label is important because all the labeled “Venuses” of the world are all completely different just as humans are.  Venus of Willendorf was described by having a more unrestrained image that is seen as a cultural taboo to most in this era. But the author described the more modest Venus as “curvaceous” and treated with civilized restraint.  If these thoughts were the same during the time Venus was created then why was there not a more socially accepting body of Venus? There is a sole purpose behind the creation of her figure. The author described her as not being feminine either. That I did not understand. To me, the figure was in fact feminine maybe not in a socially acceptable way but it was a true female form just was not put modestly. Femininity is seen today as a thin modest woman, almost as the author described Venuses unlike the Venus of Willendorf. This to me, is something that men have created entirely. How can Venus of Willendorf not be feminine is she is a woman herself? There are many aspects of women and our femininity shows in all kinds of different ways.  This brought forward that maybe paleolithic women who were much like Venus of Willendorf were in fact higher up on the power scale. It was interesting to know that during this time frame there were not nearly as many images as men as there were women. This leads me back to the importance of Venus herself. Why take the time to carve this figure if there were no real importance behind it. Another explanation behind this Venus was that she was used as a fertility idol. Much detail was given to this figure for possibly a learning experience. I find it interesting that the creator did spend so much time of certain aspects of the figure but seemed to not care so much about the arms and feet as well as her head, no face is present. It makes the thought of her being used as a figure to be more realistic, and It does lead me to believe that she did serve a more fertility idol purpose because all of the reproductive parts were very well known on the model. This lead to the discussion that Venus of Willendorf was in fact carved by a female. Which can also be believed because if women were of higher power they must being the ones creating theses figures.

Introduction

Hi all, my name is Rachel Thoreson I am a senior at Central Washington University. I am aspiring to be an elementary school art teacher. I have been involved in art my whole life and continue to paint in my spare time. I can’t wait to get out in the world and teach children to be creative artists.