Week 11: Women in Art

I really enjoyed learning about art involving females. It is one of those things that I always knew there was a lot of art for females, but I always thought it didn't arrive until later in history. Art for and by women has actually been around since the beginning. The Venus of Willendorff is one of the first pieces of the stone age, and has many different variations over time. I didn't know the purpose behind the fertility statue, or how much it had meant in the time. I really liked learning about the purposes behind Women's art, and how the pieces were made. Seeing the origination of the female figure, and watching it slim down as the view of the "ideal" women change, from a full bodied female to the thin, boney female image of today. It was interesting learning about why the figures were made, and why so many variations were made.
Later on, the figure of the woman is made more for a protection/goddess like figure, instead of as a female fertility. This is because the figures and statues of the female were now for the men in the society, and not for the females any more. I found it interesting that even though the figure of the female was once seen as a figure of fertility for females, soon became to be a figure of worship for males for protection. I liked learning about the different views of females through out history, and the evolution of the thoughts about women. I find it interesting that up until recently, the view of women have been a strong, heroic, protective image. Even though the vision of women now is a weak one, I feel it is important as art historians to keep in mind the previous view of women, and hopefully bring it back someday.

Week 9: The Doors of Bernward

Bishop Bernward traveled to Rome and was exposed to many different forms of art. Some say that this trip is what inspired the design on the huge doors to the Abbey of St. Michael in Hildesheim, Germany. The bronze cast doors stand sixteen feet tall, with lion heads for handles. Eight panels on each door tell the story of the original sin and of salvation. The figures in each panel are in lower relief, meaning their bodies were in a shallow relief carving with the heads sticking out and 3D. The panels tell a story, both individually and as a whole. The right side has stories from the Old Testament, and the left is the New Testament. The doors are meant to be read one of two ways. The first is to read down the right side, beginning with the formation of Eve, through the original sin and ending with Cain murdering Abel. Then, the left side is meant to be read from bottom up. Starting with the Annunciation of Mary, and ending with the Promise of Return to Paradise. This movement in the story is significant in the way that while you read down the left side, your head ends up looking down, almost like it is hanging in shame. Then, as you read up the right side, your head ends up looking upward in salvation. Another way the doors can be read is from left to right, comparing a story from the Old Testament to the New Testament.

One example of this comparison is the third and fourth pairs from the top, the sections titled “The Fall,” and “the Passion.” These panels tell about the original sin on the left, where Adam and Eve are tempted by the snake, and Judgment of them from God; and the judgment and crucifixion of Christ on the right. I feel these sections were paired together because they both show a trial and result from someone’s wrong doing. On one hand, we have the sin that started it all, and on the right, the action that ended it. It’s almost like this section is truly the beginning and the ending of the stories of the fate of humans.  On the left, is the moment that humans became capable of sinning, and is when our suffering began. However, on the right is when the suffering was put to an end, and when we were given the understanding that our sins were going to be forgiven.

By having these panels across from each other, it is significant because it shows the beginning and end of sin. The first temptation, and the first act of God’s forgiveness; by having His own son dying for our salvation.

week 8: Busts of the Past.

The emperors of early Rome varied from very powerful and successful, to almost being a joke. The art and statues they commissioned and that people made in their honor portrays who they were and how they ruled. The art produced ranged from paintings, to full sculptures, to a small bust; and every detail was thought out and meant something.

Two examples of this are the busts of Caracalla and Commodus as Hercules. These two men ruled almost 100 years apart, and were completely different in their rule. Commodus ruled in 180 ce alone, but ruled with his father before that. After his father died, Commodus ruled even though he had no political skill, no administrative competence, and no intellectual distinction. He was quite conceded, and was mainly focused on his looks and his own luxury; whereas Caracalla was a strong ruler and was focused on protecting his people. These differences can be seen in the busts made in their honor.

Commodus was so enticed with himself that he convinced people that he was the reincarnation of Hercules, and the incarnation of the god of Jupiter. He was devoted to his luxury and frivolous pursuits. He was full of vanity and was more concerned with his looks and the way his people saw him then with protecting his people; and when it did come down to protecting his people, he was so convinced with who he was, he didn’t do much. His bust shows his vanity and his dedication to thinking he was the reincarnated Hercules. His bust extends to his arms and mid-chest, and is very detailed. He is muscular and it seems every strand of hair is detailed, both of these tell us just how vain he was. Commodus is shown with the attributes of Hercules; his club, the golden apples, and the head of the Nemean lion. The only thing that connects this bust to the fact that he was a ruler is that he looks like the other members of his family.

Caracalla, on the other hand, was a powerful, protective ruler. His bust is smaller than Commodus’s, and doesn’t have as many attributes or indicators of who he was or what he did. In his face, however, is a stern, almost vengeful look. His hair is cut short, to show that he was a man of the military. His bust shows that he was fierce, courageous and a great ruler. His bust has a lot of detail; we can see the creases in his forehead and the little details in what little facial hair he has. This basically says that he was a man of business; he liked to keep his hair short and out of the way. The artist put a lot of detail in Caracalla’s eyes, and even over exaggerated them to make them catch and reflect more light and shadows, to increase the intensity even more.

The busts were made to show the viewers what kind of ruler and person the subject was. Most of the time, however; the busts were not made to be viewed by the people who they were ruling over, but people later on. The busts were used as decoration around the palace or in the tombs to tell about the person.

Week 7: Winckelmann and Greek Statues.

Winckelmann was an art historian and anthropologist who studied the statues of Ancient Greece. He liked the pure white marble of the statues. He argued that the art of Greece embodied good taste. He said that the plain, pure white was the ideal beauty. Winckelmann felt that art should be plain and simple, and that color ought to have minor consideration in the role of the aesthetics of art.  He  promoted the idea of “good taste” and the idea that art should be simple and have very little extra parts to it.

However, He was basing his studies on the replicas in Rome and not on the real sculptures from Greece. These sculptures were white, and marble, but not exactly the same as the actual sculptures in Greece. For example, the Greek sculptures were painted. By studying these Roman-Greek sculptures, Winckelmann stayed firm in his statement that the art of Greece was pure and that the beauty of the whiteness was the basis of the beauty of art. However, the main difference of the two sets of sculptures is that the original Greek ones were once painted. This says that Winckelmann’s thoughts on the “pure” Greek sculptures were wrong. The art from Greece was not as pure as he thought it was, after all. They were actually almost completely painted. Art of Ancient Greece is known for being naturalistic and detailed. The proof that the Greek sculptures were once painted means that they were actually more detailed and naturalistic than previously thought.

I think that Winckelmann’s perspective on the Greek art isn’t that life altering, I’m sure that in the time, the idea of white, and purity was a popular idea and was easily relatable to the beliefs of Mother Mary. However, modern art is very colorful, and the idea of white being the basis of beauty is kind of lost now. Personally, I enjoy color. I like to surround myself with color and use bright colors in my own work. I also think that the current perception of color would not be so appreciated if Winckelmann’s perspective had not been made clear.

The Greek art as always been thought as being clean and pure. Even people today still think that the statues have always been clean white marble. I feel that if Winckelmann’s point of view hadn’t been so well known about the white statues being pure, more people would know and understand the statues being painted.

I, myself didn’t know that the Greek sculptures had been painted until recently. For me, it changes my perspective on the sculptures.  It made them seem more realistic, and more life like to me. Knowing the sculptures had been painted add a whole new level of detail and understanding to the way the Greeks saw the human form and how they wanted to display it.

Week 4: Comaring Venus and Female Figure

Throughout art history, the figure of the woman has been highly revered. From the images of Mother Mary, to the idealized images of saints and angels in during the renaissance, the female has been a choice subject for artists. Even though many of the famous modern artists are men, the unsung heroes of Prehistoric to Ancient art have been suggested to be female.

 Two examples of this are the Venus of Willendorf from the Paleolithic Era, and the Standing Female Figure from the Aegean Bronze age. These two figures are constructed differently, mean different things, and look different. Yet, they look the same, are positioned the same way, and are made by the same type of people. 

The Venus of Willendorf and the Standing Female Figure are both upright, standing looking forward. The figures are nude, with clear, slightly exaggerated pubic area. The arms are resting on their chests, and rounded bellies. Their legs are semi-detailed, with clear distinction at the knee line. Their faces do not have a lot of detail, The Standing Figure has a nose, and the Venus’ hair covers most of her face.

The differences in these sculptures are clear though. The Venus of Willendorf is stout, curvy, exaggerated breasts, and has no feet. She represents fertility, and may also be an indication to males that the female owner is ready to mate. It is said that the figure, and figures like it, were made by pregnant females. The perspective looking down at the body is the same perspective of a pregnant female looking at her own body. This is why the Venus does not have any feet. She is made of limestone, with some of the natural divots and texture as part of the sculpture.

The Standing Figure is tall, skinny, and smooth. It is made of white marble, and its surface is smooth and sleek. Her features are not very defined, and her thin arms rest slightly below her almost nonexistent breasts. Figures like this were found almost exclusively near or in funeral sites, saying that this figure was meant for a burial ceremony; perhaps as a guardian of some sort. She has strict symmetry, and is perfectly measured and sectioned out.  Her elongated neck supports her tilted head, looking upward. There are traces of red pigment on the figure, showing us that this figure was once painted. This tells us that there were once eyes on this figure, and was possibly once clothed.

Even though these figures look like they could mean the same thing, and look similar, they are not. They clearly mean different things. One is the representation and the peruse of life, and the other is for protection in death.

Week 3: A Formal Analysis of The Great Lyre of Ur

    

One of the most widely known ancient musical interments is a 46.5 inch tall harp. The Greay Lyre of Ur was found in the 1920s on Sir Leonard Woolley’s excavations in Ur when he was looking for information on the ancient city of a Mesopotamian biblical city. Sir Leonardo also found sixteen royal burial sites and many spectacular objects.

The Lyre rested over the body of a woman who is suspected to be the one who played it at the funeral ceremony of the royal figure buried nearby, and she was most likely sacrificed to ensure the wonderful afterlife of the royal person who had died.  When it was found, the wooden sound box had deteriorated; however, the gold and lapis lazuli bull’s head and the front panel made of carved shell had survived. The head of the bull is 14 inches tall, the front panel is 13. The harp is 55.5 inches in length, and 46.5 inches tall. This is large object, and the owner of it must have been wealthy to have been able to afford such a large, very well crafted piece of work. This piece tells us a lot about the owner, actually. The materials used to make the head and front panel are rare and valuable, even in today’s terms.

The front panel, or the Cuneiform, on the harp shows four different registers to help tell the narrative from the 3,000 line poem, Epic of Gilgamesh. The top square shows a heroic battle of a man interlocked with two bulls and is remarkably over powering them, and the bottom shows Gilgamesh encountering the scorpion man and another mythical creature. The second story told below in the next three registers show three common activities being acted out by animals, including showing a donkey playing a bull-shaped lyre, much like the one it is posted on.  The Cuneiform also shows animals upright, attending and bringing food to a feast.

However, since the cuneiform was carved about 700 years before the poem was wrote, it is suspected that instead of telling the story that has been passed down for years, it may tell the story of the man it belonged to; showing an inflated, heroic image of the deceased at the top, a funeral banquet in the middle, and the guardians of the afterlife at the bottom.

The front head of the bull is suspected to be the head of Sargon of Akkad, who was King at the time of the conquest of Sumerian city-states in the 23^rd and 22^nd centuries, BCE. This led him to be called the, “Great King,” and adored by all. He had distinct facial features when he was depicted in art, all of which the bull on the harp has. An enormous curling beard and braided hair twisted around toward the back of its head, indicating both royalty and ideal male appearance; both made out of the lapis lazuli.

These important image cues are here, it says that the owner may not have been Sargon, but he saw himself as equally powerful.  When the piece was found, half of his face was destroyed, with the eyes and ears missing. Symbolically, this means that the people who were under the thumb of this ruler was not pleased with his ruling technique. They crushed the face of the bull to keep the man’s power limited, if not destroyed. The removal of the eyes and the ears makes it so that the dead man could not see or hear in the afterlife. This could have also been done, however, by tomb raiders who dug around the barial site and did not want the dead owner to see them stealing from him.

The significance of the materials used is a big one. Lapis lazuli is a valuable blue colored mineral. It is only found near the Fertile Crescent.  This shows us the people who made it were active in trading, thus active in traveling and communication with other tribes both near and far.

Zoomorphic figures are important to the artists of the Mesopotamian era, it not only relates back to the altered definition of “human” used in the early Neolithic period, but also relates the viewer to the gods of that time. The use of an animal head with human-like details (hair, eyes, body shape etc.) allows the viewer to see themselves and the royalty around them in the same way and makes them have a closer connection to the god protecting their country.