Favorite Art Periods

I learned a great deal about Ancient art in this class. I truly enjoyed learning about how people made art thousands years ago. More specifically, I found most enjoy when studying Egyptian art and Greek art.

            Egyptian art is quite interesting from the composite view to the Great Pyramids. I found the composite view enthralling, mostly because the Egyptians used this technique for such a long time. Composite view is the use of multiple views incorporated into one, such as the head in profile with a front facing eye. Not only that the Egyptians used the technique but many other cultures took on the technique too, for instance Minoan art utilizes the composite view. The canon of proportion was also used for a very long time in Egyptian art.  The canon of proportions is achieved by drawing a grid first and conforming figures to the grid, that way all figures portrayed are the similar looking. The Judgment of Hunefer before Osiris is an example of both the composite view and the canon of proportions. All figures portrayed are in composite view, their heads in profile with front facing eye, frontal chest and the legs are viewed from the side. Overall composite view is not a very naturalist but this technique conveys important features in a way that best describes them. Although most people have a general history of the Great Pyramids, in this class I learned that these enormous structures can be seen as art. The Great Pyramids were built for the Kings Menkaura, Khafra and Khufu. The pyramids serve as tombs for these kings. When learning about these structures I did not know that once the structures were built they then had a thick polished limestone veneer which has eroded since then. I think part of the reason I find the Great Pyramids so interesting because of their size and that they were able to build something of that size without machinery.

            I also enjoyed learning about Greek art. Most everyone has seen some sort of Greek art, stark white marble sculptures, little do they know that at one point these sculptures were painted. After learning that Greek artists painted their sculptures I have a completely different view of their art. Painted or not Greek sculptures are quite beautiful. Peplos Kore is a sculpture of a woman, if she is seen without paint you can see details of her long hair and face. If you view the same statue with paint, she comes alive, which is the reason Greek artist painted their work. Greek artists felt that their statues are more naturalistic when painted. The Archer, from the west pediment of the Temple Of Aphaia, my favorite Greek statue is transformed when seen painted. Unpainted the Archer is simple and plain. The painted version is fun and colorful, his tights are patterned, his face is natural, his arrow bag has a design, overall is more intriguing.

            Egyptian art uses techniques, like the composite view and the canon of proportions, to refine their art for generations to come. Greek art transforms with paint to become lively and more naturalistic. After everything I learned this quarter, I can not wait to learn about more art history. 

Sin and Salvation

           In the Early Medieval art the Doors of Bishop Bernward were created for the Hildesheim Cathedral. The doors represent holy figures and events which is an example of iconography. These doors are unique because they can be read in various ways that depict scenes from both the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Left door is read down with Old Testament scenes, and the right door is read up with New Testament scenes. The doors can also be read side by side, in a way Old Testament vs. New Testament.

Let’s have a closer look at Adam and Eve from the Old Testament in the third panel on the left. In this particular panel Adam and Eve take apples from the forbidden tree in the Garden of Eden. Gesture and foliage express the narrative similar to the other panels. Adam and Eve are gesturing with their arms to the forbidden tree in the center to convey that they picked the apples from that tree. The branches of the foliage on the sides of the panel express the focal area, Adam and Eve. Now, to the right of Adam and Eve’s panel is a panel that depicts the Crucifixion of Christ from the New Testament.  Although there is not any foliage to help express this scene, the gestures make up for it, the two men wearing longer gowns are positioned in a way that causes your eye to move towards the center. Then the two men with spears are standing in a way that again moves the viewer’s eyes to the focal area, which are Christ and the cross.

I found these two panels to be the most interesting pair. I think that these two panels are paired together because the Adam and Eve panel expresses the fall of man and sin, while the panel of the Crucifixion expresses Christ forgiving man’s sins. These panels seem to give a simple explanation of how Christ forgives sin by sacrificing himself on the cross. The panels express opposite themes, Adam and Eve’s panel is sinning and the Crucifixion panel is forgiveness of sin. In a way both panels express sin because Adam and eve eat the apples, and the two men spearing Christ are also sinning. When comparing the panels side by side, it can be seen that each focal area is basically in the center of the panel. The way that the figures in each panel helps convey the focal area, along with the foliage in the Adam and Eve panel, where in the Crucifixion panel the spears direct your eyes. These panels could be paired to mean that no matter how big or small the sin is that you commit, you will be forgiven by Christ, the savor.

            The panel of Adam and Eve expresses sin and the fall of mankind. The panel of the Crucifixion expresses forgiveness of sin. By placing these scenes together helps convey that Christ is their savor. Overall I think that they were placed next to each other very thoughtfully. 

Commodus as Hercules and the Head of Caracalla

            In some Roman art and previous art has a propaganda quality. In many cases the ruler wants to be seen as a strong powerful leader. The Commodus as Hercules and the head of Caracalla represent propaganda in Roman art.

            The Commodus as Hercules is an interesting piece. There are many elements in this sculpture that reinforce the idea of propaganda. I think that Emperor Commodus commissioned an artist to create him embodying Hercules because Hercules is a powerful warrior, not to mention he is Zeus’ half mortal son. In this sculpture Commodus is wearing the skin and head of the Nemean lion; this could signify that Commodus can slay a lion proving he is a powerful warrior. Commodus has a club in one also proving his power.

            The head of Caracalla is simply just the head of the Emperor Caracalla. This sculpture of Caracalla serves propaganda through his facial expression. He is scowling to provide a message that he is a strong powerful Emperor, who is “hard-as-nails.” His facial expression looks as if he is glaring out at us, not smiling; he is toughened with a tightly held jaw almost angry. When I see this sculpture I would not mess with this Emperor, he appears to be feared.

I feel that the head of Caracalla demonstrates propaganda more so then the sculpture of Commodus as Hercules. To me Commodus is pretending to be a powerful leader by dressing up as Hercules. Commodus does not have much of a facial expression. In the book it says that “it captures its subject’s weakness. The foolishness of the man comes through in his pretentious assumption of the attributes of Hercules.” I really agree with this because one can not dress up to appear as a powerful man like Hercules and expect people to fear you. If anything that would make you fear Hercules due to his power. This ultimately makes Commodus out to be a coward for dressing up in such a childish way. Another reason I feel this way is that the way Commodus is captured, he appears too youthful. Caracalla on the other hand has a toughened face. By looking at his sculpture you have a feeling that this man has been through a lot and has aged in the process, he is captured more naturalistically. If one naturally has a daunting glare then you will naturally be feared.

            I am unsure whether these sculptures are for a particular audience or if they are widely understood. I almost feel that Commodus as Hercules could be for any audience because his message is most likely not immediately seen due to the fact that he is just dressing up. I think that Caracalla head is for a more narrow audience, perhaps for his enemies as a way to say “look into my scowl; you will not under estimate my power.” I also think that Caracalla’s message is more immediate because of his intense facial expression.

            Overall Caracalla head sculpture is a more successful example of propaganda in art then Commodus as Hercules. Caracalla will be seen as a fearful Emperor whereas Commodus will only be seen as an impostor.

Painted Vs. Unpainted Greek art

            Johann Joachim Winckelmann an 18^th century archaeologist thought that Greek art represents “good taste” in art because of it’s simple white marble exterior. Many people would be surprised to know that many Greek statues were actually painted.

            I think that Winckelmann had a huge affect on how Greek art is perceived. Winckelmann encouraged the pure simplicity of unpainted statues. He once wrote, “Color ought to have a minor consideration in the role of beauty.”  If Winckelmann had not promoted his ideals about Greek art, maybe art today would be different. I’m sure it would not be a drastic change, but art would be affected. Perhaps statues like the Abraham Lincoln memorial statue would be painted rather then having a simple white marble exterior. Not only did Greek artists paint their statues they also painted their architectures. If Winckelmann never encouraged a pure simple taste in art, it is possible that the White House would have been painted with color. Although, I am unsure if Winckelmann’s ideals would have had affect in other kinds of art expect for statues and architectures. It is quiet interesting to think of all the possible changes art would have if Winckelmann had not promoted the white marble.

            After learning about Greek art, my perception of it has changed rather drastically. I always thought that the sculptures are very amazing with all the naturalistic details in the carving. Although, I am not very fond of the plain white marble, I think it is boring and uninteresting. Can you imagine if all Greek art was only white? The cities would have been very dull. When I saw the reconstruction of the Archer from the from the west pediment of the Temple of Aphaia, I was truly amazed by the liveliness of the painted statue. The unpainted statues definitely have a naturalistic perception but the painted statues come to life. This is because in real life we see everything in color, without color it lacks the true essence of life. Now imagine the painted version of the cities, they are full of energy and life. The unpainted Peplos Kore is impressive with the detailing, but the painted reconstructions give the statue a sense of a real woman. Her dress has elaborate details, her lips are red and full, the recreations give us an idea of what color her hair could have been. One can not have the same perception of the unpainted statues verses the painted ones. Not only do the painted statues appear more lively, so does the painted architecture. The Treasury of the Siphnians has painted details for example the Ionic frieze near the top of the structure. This structure would not have caught my attention without these painted details.  I feel that looking at these artworks is like watching a black and white film in color for the first time, it’s the same film yet you have a completely different viewing of it making it exciting and new.

            Winckelmann, an 18^th century archeologist, changed the way Greek art was supposed to be viewed. Greek artists painted their statues because they wanted them to appear naturalistic. Instead Winckelmann promoted the idea that Greeks did not paint their statues so that they appear naturalistic, pure and simple with “good taste.”