Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It is true that like nearly all historic cultures, there were very strict social hierarchies in the kingdoms of Mesopotamia. Rulers used visual record to communicate their dominance as well as where their subjects fell in the ’line up’ in a number of ways. One example is found at Perespolis. This was a massive audience hall and to date it was the largest covered area. Inscribed on the sides were images of lions in combat, which were intended to represent the strength of the kind. Also just above, along the sides are carved soldiers. This structure was made for one purpose– to demonstrate to the people that the person ruler was in fact, above them. The sheer size communicated the ‘smallness’ of the kings subjects. Another example of this hierarchy is seen on the carved vessel from Uruk. At the top we see a priest-king interacting with a goddess. Just below there is a string of men, and still below that are lines of animals. As the vessel goes from top to bottom, the size of the characters decreases. The placement and size of the characters is a visual representation of status. When A character is larger than others, on top, or endowed with some sort of ‘god like’ attribute, it is clear that character was considered of more importance within the social hierarchy.
All through the various mesopotamian cultures, we see rulers attempting to show their power through depictions in architecture and other forms of art. Generally, the rulers would be consulting with various Gods– One example of this is seen in the Stele of Naram-sim. In this limestone carving, Naram-Sim is portrayed larger, standing above enemies as well as his own soldiers. He is endowed with a horned helmet, which represented divinity. Through this image, Naram-Sim is showing his authority and strength. Just above him are three suns that represent the sun God.
At the peek of his power in the 1980’s, Saddam Hussein began to rebuild on the ruins of ancient Babylon in an attempt to portray himself as the ‘reincarnated Nebuchadnezzar. He renovated the Ziggurat of Ur- but he only succeeded in rebuilding the first level. Like many rulers before him, Saddam was attempting to style himself as a god.
To Maggie May:
I love what you said about us understanding art through our personal experience of art. I hadn’t thought of it in that way. Initially, I didn’t think this art could be considered ‘abstract’ but after reading your post I can see why some may see it that way. Great post! (:
To Miranda Jackovich:
I like the point you made about people needing to develop an understanding about their surroundings. I hadn’t thought of it that way!
I personally do not think that prehistoric art is ‘abstract’. As looked through the pieces that were assigned for this week, every one of them resembled something or someone– they were not ‘abstract’ in the way we understand abstract art today. It seems that all of the pieces had a purpose. They artists used their work to communicate meaning. The chauvet cave painting, for example, did not consist of abstract non-living blobs, colors, or shapes. I was a representation of various animals, crafted intentionally. The same is true of the bison reliefs. The artists wanted their work to appear real. The work over this period of time is far from ‘abstract’ in my opinion.
I think it is likely that the prehistoric people were using these images/sculptures as teaching tools as well as communication with other people. Also, I think it is in the heart of people to ‘make things in their own image’. We naturally want to replicate what we are.. Perhaps because we understand ourselves more than other things in the world. I’m sure these prehistoric people had a similar desire to be creative and expressive. Also, we naturally want to replicate things that are beautiful. The hyper curvy women that are constantly carved/painted were likely made to appreciate the beautiful form of a woman as well as place an emphasis on the importance of fertility. Also, I am sure there was an element of wanting to tell stories– there are tons of paintings that depict religious ceremonies and hunts and such. These people were simply telling their story in the way they could.
I’m not sure if this posted, so I am going to try again!
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j-Uw1kEXvx1-yM9twsJrtwRgQyVfGvI4/view
Hello all! Here is my intro video! (:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1j-Uw1kEXvx1-yM9twsJrtwRgQyVfGvI4
Krgeay3, I love your point about art being ‘anything that is appreciated for its beauty’! That is so true. People often put art in a box. They think that it has so be some sort of painting or a song, but art can be so much more than that!
Hi Laura! It is so neat that you are doing an exchange. I too love to travel. I am spending this semester in New Zealand doing an ‘unofficial’ exchange. I hope you’re able to get everything our of this class that you are hoping for!
Hey Kaylyn! It is awesome that you want to be able to help people who have gone through similar battles as your brother has gone through. We need more people like you in the world! (: Looking forward to hearing you perspective on art over the course of this class!
Hi Laura! It is so neat that you are doing an exchange. I too love to travel. I am spending this semester in New Zealand doing an ‘unofficial’ exchange. I hope you’re able to get everything our of this class that you are hoping for!
Part 1: What is art?
Agree- “Art is the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.”
I agree with this definition of art. Art is a tools that can be used to press the limits of human expression.Disagree- “Art is not, as the metaphysicians say, the manifestation of some mysterious idea of beauty or God; it is not, as the aesthetical physiologists say, a game in which man lets off his excess of stored-up energy; it is not the expression of man’s emotions by external signs; it is not the production of pleasing objects; and, above all, it is not pleasure; but it is a means of union among men, joining them together in the same feelings, and indispensable for the life and progress toward well-being of individuals and of humanity.” Leo Tolstoy
I do not agree with Tolstoy’s understanding of art. Art IS a manifestation of a mysterious idea of beauty. It is a way that we let off our energy, and it IS a way to express our emotions and perspectives. At the same time, art connects us to each other– it helps us to see our humanity and appreciate beauty. Tolstoy’s perspective is far too narrow.Part 2: What is art history and why do we study it? How does it help us to understand the world in which we live?
In art history we take a close look at the art of those who have come before us– is asks the why behind the art. Art history considers the context of the work of art as well as it impacts on the culture from which it came. We study it because it gives us insight into the minds and perspective of the culture from which it came. Is causes our appreciation for humanity to grow. Studying art helps us to understand the world around us because it forces us to see the world through glasses that we are not accustom to. We are also able to learn and develop as artists as we look back at the risks that artists before us have taken. This understanding broadens our skill and taste and opens our eyes to the role that art has played in many poeple’s lives.
