Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 87 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Illuminated Manuscripts #7649
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    RE: tmbergan
    Ooh, I like how you brought up the color scheme. It’s quite right, I think gold helped emphasize the “holy’ and religious aspect of it all in the Byzantine era and the medieval era.

    in reply to: Illuminated Manuscripts #7647
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    As we know it, Byzantine art was highly symbolic and was mostly centered around Christianity and the fight against iconoclasm. The symbolism of the manuscripts is reminiscent of that — they are not meant to be worshipped or have a any “graven images’ but are meant to be viewed and support the Christian narrative. The book of Kells shows that representation of christian symbols while still maintaining their main function.

    in reply to: The Dark Ages #7645
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    RE: Miranda Jackovich
    You made some really good points there — the fact that the Romans created labels for those around them that did not meet “civilized’ standards that they had, like the use of “dark ages’ and “barbarian’. It reminds me of living on the Navajo reservation and taking classes at the Tribal college. What was perceived as barbaric to white outsiders and settlers was a complete misnomer as the Navajo people developed medicine, ceremonies, hunting, astronomy, and so many innovations that don’t meet the colonial standards. It’s just differing perspectives trying to label something they don’t fully understand.

    in reply to: The Dark Ages #7644
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    RE: Miranda Johannson
    I was thinking the same thing. The art that the nords and celts created during that time is so very unique, it seems unfair to call this time lacking innovation. I enjoyed reading your response.

    in reply to: The Dark Ages #7642
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    I think the “lack of innovation’ stems purely from a historical and scientific perspective, but from an artist perspective we see many interesting innovation and styles come out of the medieval ages that are unique to the era, such as the Celtic animal art style. Religion and cultural practices helped form medieval art as we know it. Lots of metalwork was done in the’dark’ ages that seems to not get enough credit. Jewelry, armor, and weapons were created and used. Though it doesn’t relate to this course specifically, torture devices were also designed in the middle ages which goes to show that innovations were just placed elsewhere.

    in reply to: Artistic Conventions #7448
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    RE: Tamara Toy
    I don’t think it’s crass! I completely believe this is the reason why we had such an odd shift in the artistic style. They were fighting for recognition and importance, and the focus on symbolism definitely set them apart from previous cultures we’ve seen. I also think that maybe they did not have the time or goal to perfect human anatomy.

    in reply to: Artistic Conventions #7447
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    RE: Miranda Johannson
    I agree that they were meant for the intent of worship rather the intent of adoration. I think what you said hits the nail on the head; that they were instead focusing on the message of the art instead of the visual appeal. I do favor the greco-roman realism more so, but I understand the reasoning in the artistic shift.

    in reply to: Artistic Conventions #7446
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    The shift from realism to the sort of abstract art that they did during the Byzantine era mostly came out of the intense symbolism that the Christians and Jews wanted to incorporate into their artwork. As they were not meant to worship any icons or graven images, it would be inappropriate if they focused on getting the anatomical detail of the images portrayed rather than the narrative and symbolism. Also, as iconoclasm was going on, they simply did not have the time to focus on perfecting anatomical detail, as they had to do art in secret or in hiding. I think since there was no time for perfection it created a style unique to Byzantium in which soon became the root of medieval styles.

    in reply to: Iconoclasm #7445
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    RE: Miranda Johansson
    It is indeed unfortunate that we can’t see what kind of works that were destroyed during iconoclasm, but like you, I think I understand the perspective of where they are coming from. Iconoclasm is also in of itself a part of history that tells us what was going through their minds during this era.

    in reply to: Iconoclasm #7444
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    RE: Laura Barber
    The Virgin Mary is a great example to chose. She is not worshipped or adored more above God himself, but works as sacred symbolism that fit the narrative of Christianity. It’s kind of confusing to see what they chose to identify as graven images and what they did not. In any case, the loss of artwork is still unfortunate.

    in reply to: Iconoclasm #7420
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    This era is similar to last weeks in relation to the worship of false idols, in a way. The Jewish and Early Christian artwork was highly symbolic and didn’t create statues meant to be worshipped on behalf of their god unlike the pagan religions surrounding them. In iconoclasm, we see the destruction of any graven images because they were believed to hold powers of their own and Byzantium was split into two. It made worship more difficult for the Christians and they had to be careful on where they write/create displays that teach bible stories or honor Jesus and God. However, where there was graven images with Christian imagery, it was intense and concise and gaudy like the Hagia Sophia and Ravenna. It’s quite a contradictory and interesting time.

    in reply to: Graven Images #7317
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    RE: Tamara Toy
    That’s the word I was looking for! Symbolism. I really enjoyed your reply– the fact that the art is an act of worship instead of a thing to worship is key. It’s an interesting distinction between the pagan religions before, where their focus is more on the abstract and the idea of it.

    in reply to: Graven Images #7315
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    RE: Aalieyah Creach
    I think that’s the main difference between previous cultures we saw. While both their devotions were passionate, the ones we are studying in this segment focus more on the surrounding areas FOR worship instead of things TO worship. It’s an interesting dynamic.

    in reply to: Graven Images #7314
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    In both Jewish and Christian art we see the passion and commitment to such a commandment. They create places of worship dedicated to their religion without use of false idols, but instead incorperating different aspects to their worship. We do not see so much deified pieces of art as we did before, but instead stories to tell and places where they can worship. Unlike Greek and Roman cultures, the statues are not created as a means of worship (Like the several gods depicted in the former cultures). As monotheistic religions, both Judaism and Christianity center around the ways to worship, not the things to worship. The fact that they had to hide their religion actually enhances this– it shows genuine devotion to their religion.

    in reply to: Syncretism #7311
    Jessi Willeto
    Participant

    RE: Aalieyah Creach
    I noticed that too! I saw that he had a contrapposto, even though it was a slightly different posture than that of the greek statues. His hair texture was also similar to the ones we studied before, though the face did look a bit different. Beautiful nontheless.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 87 total)