Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
An idealistic view and glorification of the body is something that has always been apart of Greek art, but is was in the classical period that some of the expectations for bodies began to shift– literally. During this period we see artist beginning to adapt contrapposto which is a more relaxed representation of the human form. Contrapposto allowed for artist to express the human form in far more detail, and therefore they were able to create perfectly ideal nude bodies. Sculptures were no longer disconnected from the viewers, but they were beautifully lifelike and relatable. It is clear that being built and fit was the ‘ideal’ for this time period.
This is something that I see in our modern culture as well. All around us in the media we have certain narrow standard of beauty being glorified. During the classical period, artist made the ideal body shape through sculpture, but these days we see ‘normal’ bodies being altered in order to fit into the ideal standard. While the ideal body does make slight shifts over the years, it seems like (at least for male bodies) the Greek ideal body is very similar to our cultures expectation on men.RE Valene
So true! I like what you said about athleticism. Perhaps the greeks valued that because they so valued having strong and beautiful bodies. I hadn’t actually made that connection. Their games and such were also done in the nude to show off all the effort they had put into making their bodies as strong and attractive as possible. So interesting!
RE Valene
Wow, that example about the Alaska Native artifacts is so close to home. I feel like that makes sense. Especially because the Alaska Native culture is still prominent and is so deeply valued by the people. Allowing those artifacts to go to the tribe seems completely fair to me! Cultural context and ties really help us to better understand the past, so removing those artifact from their proper place within culture could diminish their value.
This argument is pretty complex. I can totally see how any of these perspectives could be taken and defended. Personally, I believe these artifacts belong to humanity as a whole, and yet each situation is so different. There are plenty of artifacts that no one is pining to ‘retrieve’ in order to hold onto their culture, and at the same time I am sure there are plenty of people groups who want their ancient artifacts to be given back in order to hold their historical culture sacred. To be so cut and dry about ‘who’ deserves to keep every item that is found seems pretty narrow minded. We all own the past, and for each piece that is found, a different discussion needs to be had in order to properly assign where the piece should live. I do think there are individuals who have selfish motives behind finding artifacts (ie. making a ton of money off of them). Being aware of the need to value and preserve the past and respect the ancestors of those who are living today, and making a conscious effort to celebrate and uncover the past at the same time is so important. Each situation is different, so we must approach them differently.
According to google, humanism is “..a rationalist outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters.’ In cultures prior to Greek culture, there is a significant amount of emphasis and inclusion of the gods in every bit of the art work. In Egyptian art for example, the gods were depicted in animal or half human half animal forms, but in Greek art, the gods, if depicted, are generally expressed in idealistic human form. The gods and goddesses are also far more ‘human’ in that they tend to be moody and easily impacted by the actions of men. All through the Greek sculpture and in the progression to more realistic representation of the human body through the classical period, we see a deep appreciation and valuing of accurate representation of the human body. To the Greeks, beauty would have been nearly the same thing has divinity. Hand in hand with this is a deep valuing of sensuality and that aspect of human nature, which is why many of the sculptures of this time are nude. After all, if the pinnacle of life is found in the beauty of a human, why wouldn’t the sculptures depict idealistic nude humans?
RE Miranda:
So true! They would generalize and not take time and place into consideration when they started ‘connecting dots’ so to speak. While that certainly makes classifying finds easier, it certainly wouldn’t have made the conclusions accurate. Schliemann really wanted that to be the mask of the legendary Agamemnon, so of course he would jump to the conclusion. I suppose when historical sites are being discovered it is so important to know the history, know the fact, and keep your own hopes and expectations out of it in order to accurately assess the situation.
While it is nearly impossible to approach any subject or situation without a bias, it is clear that both Sir Arthur Evans and Heinrich Schliemann went into their discoveries with preconceived notions that may have had a great impact on out understanding of Minoan and Mycenaean culture. Evan’s reconstruction of the Palace of Knossos was pretty short sighted. Much of the reconstruction was based primarily off of his own ideas of what it would have looked like. The pillars, for example, were modeled after Greek Doric style, and there isn’t any proof that the Minoans would have used such columns. There is also questions about whether his team’s reconstruction of the frescoes was truly accurate. This slight alterations and creative liberties have had such an impact on our understanding of this culture, that we may not ever fully understand what is was that was lost. Schliemann also took a number of creative liberties within his discoveries, which are more potentially more harmful to our understanding of these cultures. He is believed to have altered the mask of Agamemnon in order to make is fit the 19th century understanding of the ancient culture. While this conclusion has been questioned, Schliemann’s biased opinion very well could have changed our understanding of a whole people group.
RE: Kaitlyn
I really like the point you made about the art simply having focused on a certain aspect of Minoan culture. I hadn’t thought of that even being an option, but I suppose it certainly could have been the case. One thought I do have though is that it seems like there would at least be some sort of ruins show casing their weapons or some other evidence of the ‘warrior’ portion of their society. But hey, who knows, maybe those things have simply been lost. So much has been lost over thousands of years, so I wouldn’t doubt it! Also, as you said, perhaps the people who were able to pay for the art to be made were only the top of the top. Perhaps the people in the lower levels of the society did the fighting and such.
Great post! (:
It is clear that leisure was a massive part of Minoan culture. Their palaces had sophisticated masonry with heaps of beautiful scenic paintings on the walls. They also had sanitary facilities and provisions of adequate lighting and ventilation. These are not your standard architectural norms at this time– but these people were concerned with the simple pleasures of life. Much of what they traded with other civilizations were finely crafted goods, and also during this period of time there was a tremendous amount of development in metal work and pottery. A society that did not value sophistication, luxury, and leisure, would not put such an emphasis on all of these things. The Mycenaeans on the other hand, were known as fierce warriors and great engineers. They were known for their fortified walls and bridges. The sheer level of fortification of the city shows the deep concern for safety. The Mycenaeans buried their dead with weapons, and while they also buried them with other fine jewelry, the level of care given to the ‘fine’ objects in Mycenaean culture, does not really compare to that of Minoan culture. There was also a greater emphasis of bright color in Minoan culture that is not seen in Mycenaean culture. While whole civilizations cannot be completely simplified to only luxurious or only war loving, I do believe there is evidence of a difference in values as well as cultural emphasis between these two civilizations.
RE: Bob Hook
I hadn’t thought about the sheer size of the Great Pyramids, the Sphinx, and the Funerary Temple as being evidence of the religious beliefs of the Egyptians. By standing out on the dessert landscape, as a people group they were clearly proclaiming what was of most importance to them. The leaders were able to ingrain these values into their people and anyone who came by, through these structures. This is a consistent thing within cultures that have a prominent religion. It makes me think of cathedrals or mosques. By creating massive and elaborate structures that ‘wow’ the viewer, culture is shaped and values are formed. Great post! It certainly expanded my perspective on this issue! (:
It is clear through the sheer quantity and prevalence of the inclusion of the gods in Egyptian art that these people were extremely religious. An example of the presence of the gods in Egyptian art is seen on the Palette of Kind Narmer. In this carving we see Horus, a god falcon holding the head of an enemy, which is assumed to be an enemy of Narmer. Clearly, in this palette we see that the god is helping Narmer in his conquest. Horus could even be the instigator of the conquest. Also in this same work there are a number of other images of the goddess Hathor who is in the form of a cow and is set at the top of the stone. The gods blessed the conquest of the kings, but are strategically placed above them the kings. This demonstrates the hierarchy– the kings were in fact subject to the gods in many ways. We are also able to see the relationship of the gods with the Egyptians in the Tomb of Nefetari. Here is found a number of New kingdom paintings that show interaction between Nefetari and the gods. The Egyptians valued connecting with and pleasing their gods. They desired to please their gods in order to remain in their good graces so that Egypt could continue to be great. It was the ultimate honor for the gods to interact with them as humans, which is likely why we primarily see great leaders depicted interacting with the gods.
RE: Miranda
I hadn’t thought about how the environment would have an impact on the two cultures art. I find it so interesting that the Mesopotamian people were so devout that they created statues to stand in the temples for them! Both cultures certainly used art for worship. I think as humans, we have a tendency to want to worship something– whether the object of out worship is ‘worthy’ or not. Humanity seems to crave connection to a higher power. I wonder if we do the same thing in our culture today?While there are many similarities between the art found in Mesopotamian culture and Egyptian culture, there are a number of distinctions that make the difference in priorities and value systems between these two cultures very clear. While art was used in both cultures to demonstrate the superiority of rulers and their connection to the gods, there is a significant focus on death and the afterlife in Egyptian art that is not emphasized in Mesopotamian art. Many years were spent preparing burial places for Pharaohs. Over the course of their rule there was a constant, heavy emphasis on preparation for the after life. This can be seen in particularly well in the art found within the pyramids. Detailed descriptions of spiritual journeys, directions, as well as needed supplies could be found in the pyramids. Both cultures made sure to communicate that their leaders were connected closely with the Gods. And example of this in the Meso culture is the Stele of Naram-Sin. Naram-Sin is placed near the gods and is displayed as being an elevated conquer. While this sort of elevated rank as evidenced by sheer size and proximity to deities is also seen in Egyptian art, the biggest distinction emphasis and general valuing of the afterlife by in Egyptian art, that is evidently lacking in Mesopotamian art.
RE Lacey Miller,
The STELE OF NARAM-SIN is such a great example of this. It is evident in this piece that Naram-Sim is ‘the man’ so to speak. They really believed that had god appointed power. How interesting would it be to get into these peoples’ heads and to understand the thought processes they had and why they believed this stuff! Pretty crazy but so interesting!
