Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The use of stained glass in churches allowed for more light to enter the church, but not just light but colored light. Stained glass allowed for what some call a divine light. The ROSE WINDOW, CHARTRES CATHEDRAL, c. 1230-1235. Stained and painted glass, has 5 pains of glass below a large circular window. I feel that these five panes carry just as large of a message as the illuminated manuscripts or an add on to churches being considered bibles for the illiterate. The pains depict The Virgin Mary carrying Christ and the old testament profits are carrying evangelists on the other four panes. The stained glass told stories, illuminated the church and gave off what was considered a divine light; in these ways the church effectively used stained glass to promote values and beliefs upon the masses.
Pilgrimage of Compostela which is called The Camino de Santiago today is a pilgrimage route that is still used today. The route leads to the cathedral of Santiago de Compostela where it is said that the remains of St. James are enshrined. A pilgrimage is believed to be a way to get closer to god, today many people walk or cycle this route to become closer with their own inner self and nature. During stops along the way people have a chance to meet other people from different parts of the world and social classes. The churches helped to support pilgrims by making the church more accessible for visitors during periods of mass or prayer. The church undoubtedly received considerable revenue from the pilgrims when the visited.
The churches of the medieval era chose to use many images that depicted scenes from the bible. The Maestà of Duccio, Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1308, Tempera and gold on wood, is a great example. This altarpiece is made up of 43 panels all depicting a small scene or characters from the bible. The front boasts the virgin Mary with child along with 19 saints and 20 angels.
The choice to depict scenes from the bible helps to give an understanding not just for the illiterate but the literate also benefit from having a picture to go with words. The choice of placement id interesting because The Maestà was placed so the front and the back could be seen, the back has a connected theme of the life cycle of Christ and the virgin Mary.
The choice of medium was tempera and gold on wood, the colors are very vibrant and gold itself has had an important part in culture throughout history. Gold is often associated with wealth but has also been an important part of art in churches throughout the ages.
The way this piece helps the church function at all levels of society can be explained by a written account from a witness to the installation of the altarpiece. He wrote that nobody worked that day, The Clergy, the politicians, and all the people came to see the glorious painting. The bells were ringing in the square and the poor received many gifts of food or money. The church and this painting captivated a entire town with depictions from the bible and brought hope of everyone that the city would be blessed because of the wonderful image that Duccio had created.
Just in case the other link to the presentation is defective.
The Byzantine Era influence on medieval art is more easily recognizable due to it’s hyper-focus on religion. I feel that the medieval art still does not have a lot of the style and technique from the classical era and the content is largely different. When looking for influences from the classical era on medieval art the most prominent and distinguished examples I could find were the images of angels in the Book of Kellis.
I feel that it makes sense that Byzantine art would have the greater influence on Medieval art as they are closer time periods. My parents generation has a greater influence on my generation than say my great grandfathers generation. The Byzantine era split from Classical era styles and that shift carried over to the Medieval Era as part of art evolution.
I feel like the Dark Ages were innovative and productive culturally if you look at the culture of the time being dictated by religion. I think of it as the American culture of WWII being focused on patriotism, almost everyone was on board and patriotism was the culture.
The north spire of Notre Dame was rebuilt in 1506 and the intricacy of the new spire is a good example of the innovation during the late medieval period. The Bible moralisée during the time served to created a lot of innovative illustrations for the period and in my opinion display huge cultural advancement.
I noticed a major shift from more realistic sculptures of Greco-Roman period during this time, the content during this period seems to be more important. This can be attributed to the shift in the church and the amount of influence it had over society.
The content of this time was very church oriented and very restrictive, almost a devolution of art in a way. Looking back at previous periods where human proportions and form were at the top of an artists list, it seems like the quality took a back seat to the narrative of the piece.
Syncretism between Jewish/Early Christian art and architecture and that of the Romans is very evident in the Royal Complex of Herodium. The was built the same way the Romans did it, the whole complex is very similar to Roman architecture. Columns are evident throughout buildings of this period and although are not strictly Roman they were not discarded as cultural advances occurred.
This blending of the past and the present seems to take place in everything not just art. Suppose we would have just threw away the wheel and started new instead of trying to improve it. Today’s wheel takes on a very similar shape to the original, it is however, much more advanced today than where it came from. Syncretisim is an example of a normal evolution in art.
I noticed a lot of places of worship depicted in the art which is hard to recognize as a false Idol. If I had been an artist in this era I would be worried about painting anything but Jesus, God the Father, or the virgin Mary. This is a very difficult question to answer easily because many people have different beliefs and feelings on religion.
During this period of time we see a shift in art and what is acceptable, this is directly related to the church and preaching of the time, I look at it as a more strict church possibly even borderline fanatical. This is not the first or the last time that art will be influenced by the church or state. My personal feeling is that this more strict approach to art stems from the church having nothing else to worry about at the time. A good war would have curtailed the churches power over the people and the state allowing artists more freedom of content.
False idols and other gods is what this question addresses more than anything. Byzantine art tried to adhere to more strict rules and a lot of art was banned and/or destroyed. There was another mention by another student of Afghanistan about the Taliban, I could not agree more: art was suppressed and regulated. The destruction of art throughout history seems to be a reoccurring theme and it makes me wonder what the next attack on art will be.
The byzantine art is focused primarily on Saints, Christ, and The Virgin as well as scenes such as the Baptism or the Crucifixion. I have very strong feelings that religion was invented as a way to control the population and supplements governmental types of power. I feel this is evidenced through the persecution of artists and destruction of art throughout history.
I notice that icons from the Byzantine era were more closely related to the bible and Christianity, this differs from earlier eras where many gods were portrayed.
Several of the works in the Etruscan wing depict women or were commissioned by women. How does the role of women in Etruscan society seem to differ from that of the other cultures we have studied?
The Etruscan society appear to be more accepting of women and the role that they played. There are many examples where the woman’s stature was not diminished but portrayed as more equal to men. The Cerveti Sarcophagus and The Sarcophagus of Larth Tetnies and Thanchvil Tarnai bothe show displays of affection between men and women and portrays them as being more equal than art from previous periods.
We all know that women have always had an important role in society and history has even produced some very prominent women leaders. I would say that looking at percentages and facts that the social-economic, political and religious views of the time did not allow for vast populations of women to gain public status. There just was not that many women in power so most of the art sensationalized men, warriors, and rulers. I feel it is similar to the LBGTQ folk, in the 70’s they practically had to hide for their life and now they are on TV doing the nasty. Art is allowed to evolve with society but not against society.
I find it fitting that this shift comes after the Hellenistic period, it is almost as if the artists and women of the time were given more freedom of expression and the portrayal of “real” life became acceptable.
I always say that art is a tangible expression of emotional expression, considering we are all just energy than emotions must be how that energy is expressed.
Pergamon and The Laocoon are both great examples of how the Hellenistic era divorced itself from the previous art. Both of these statues incorporate facial features that portray emotions. Previous roman art focused on perfectly proportioned muscular bodies whereas Hellenistic art sought to portray emotions. The Hellenistic era also broadened the acceptable subject matter for art by adding everyday people, perhaps this was just another form of propaganda to make the people feel more important.The definition of propaganda from Wikipedia is “information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.”
When I think propaganda politics comes to mind. The Roman art used this in many ways, the fact that statues depicted leaders as powerful and worthy of the public’s trust is in itself propaganda. It appears that the rulers always wanted to “one up” the previous ruler in order to gain popularity with the public, pure propaganda. Augustus of Primaporta mixes up messages, a breastplate is used for battle but his depicts diplomacy. The cupid and dolphin are meant to let the masses know that he was of divine blood. This all lends to the appearance that he was a strong and fair ruler that was born to be a ruler.
Roman influence is alive and will in modern society. My first thought when I think of roman architecture is columns, arches, and coliseums. The coliseum is perhaps the biggest influence that is still alive today in the form of stadiums. The government building also incorporate a lot of roman influence, The White house, The Capital building, and even the Lincoln memorial use many roman design features like columns and domes. The Olympic stadium, Brandenburg Gate, and Reichstag in Berlin feel like they could have came strait out of Rome.
