Post #9

During this quarter, I have taken a higher interest and appreciation for the ancient architecture that can be viewed as art.  Most importantly, such works as Stonehenge, the Parthenon, and the Temple of Aphaia.  I find these pieces of work to stand out above others through the ages because of the severe complexity that has been put into raising these marvelous structures.

The Parthenon, although a popular piece that we associate with ancient Greece art and culture, stands out to me as one of the most well thought out pieces of architecture from the centuries.  Not only does it serve its aesthetic purpose, it has been composed and designed by the idea of math; there is much more to the structure than just a few pillars and columns strategically placed, it has been mathematically calculated to each exact point.  It highlights areas of precision and pays close attention to proportions throughout the entire building.

Another piece which has been considered artwork and highly controversial over the centuries is Stonehenge.  One of the greatest attracting ideas to this architecture is the fact that nobody is quite sure of how it became to be, where it came from, or what it even symbolizes; its entire existence is just a giant question.  To think that some of the stones average around from 13 to 24 feet tall and weighed up to 26 tons each makes it hard to believe that people could construct this during the 2500 B.C. era without the help of machines or devices.  There are even such theories that such figures as Merlin, who was the magician of the King Arthur legend had built it and that Stonehenge was the primary location for Celtic druid rituals.  Something that leaves me thinking about the idea of the architecture of this is the fact that the bluestone was not located anywhere close to where the actual stones are placed.  The book refers that they would have been moved over 150 miles from the west in order to arrive to their current location, which makes us wonder how that is humanly possible without the technology we have today.

Along with these two pieces, I found the Temple of Aphaia to be rather intriguing as well.  The way that the temple was structured and designed showed that there was also a fair amount of time put into figuring out how the columns would hold the roof and combining structures.  The temple also uses mathematical proportions within their columns that expressed artistic creativity by the engravings towards the top.

I realize that some of these may be a little cliché in the terms of what artwork we should be choosing to focus on since we covered so much, but the architecture just stands out so much above the rest to me that it is hard to ignore.  Such intricate and mathematical measures have been presented in creating these columns in most of these temples that it is fascinating to think somebody could replicate these detailed designs over.

Bust of Commodus as Hercules vs. Caracalla

  In these sculptures, both contain various attributes that can be considered as power.  Both figures were sculpted to highlight their facial structure definition, to show that they were probably wealthy and powerful judged off their looks.  On the other hand, there are very contrasting points within these pieces.  For example, Caracalla has a V-shaped forehead above the eyebrows, which gives off more of a sinister, dark feel to his personality.  Perhaps he ruled the people by being notorious and ruthless, thus winning the hearts of his followers by fear.  In the Bust of Commodus as Hercules, the statue seems more relaxed and apathetic.  The figure in the sculpture seems like he presents more of a calm, monotone presence over people, making him a selected person that people would more look up to rather than fear.  At the same time, he has a fanged animal trophy over his head and draped around his neck, showing that he is fierce and a fighter.  Not to mention, the club he holds in his hand as well shows that he is a combatant.  Caracalla is a more simple piece and only draws my attention because of how much anger is carved into this sculpture.  It is almost scary how his face is positioned and even more creepy how his eyes are looking straight up.  It appears as if he is looking up towards the Gods in spite of something.  Caracalla would appeal more to the fighting type people as he highlights as a ruthless leader of anger and blood, which Commodus as Hercules appears more as a loving warrior that would rather capture the trust of individuals.

Greek Art - Option #2

     I personally think that the Parthenon Marbles should be relocated back to Athens.  I'm aware that this is a highly debated subject and a part of me knows that there is no right or wrong answer to solve this case.  If we were to look back into other events such as artifacts that were looted during Iraq's liberation, it was a bad decision to hold their arts/history in a museum in such a dangerous location.  However, it still belongs to their country and ancestors/people that belong to its history, whether or not it is in a safe place.  I do think that during the time, Britain was entitled to owning these marbles since Greece wasn't entitled to their freedom yet during the ruling of the Ottoman Empire.

   
     Also, I feel like the Parthenon Marbles was a very important part of Greek culture and has a highly popular image as the aesthetic architecture movement.  Being located in the British Museum entitles that it would also be safer due to the pollution eating away the marble issue that was also addressed in Athens.  At least in Britain, it will be properly preserved and displayed for centuries to come.  So the great question is, would it make more sense to keep it here in order to ensure its survival?  Probably.  But would it be disappointing if someone was set on seeing Greek art over in Greece?  Yes.  If Britain is to continue displaying this art, I think it should be presented in a more historical context since this type of work was made popular by the Greeks.  It is a piece of their history and establishes their roots.  Like I mentioned before, there is no right or wrong answer, and I've somehow caught myself in the middle of both sides.  But if I had to choose a particular case to follow, I'd have to say that Greece is entitled to own their own heritage.

Aegean Art - Option #2

    Based on the location of the Minoan civilization, I believe that the first piece of art belongs to these Bronze Age people.  One of the first pieces of evidence that leads me to believe this was that on page 84, where it claimed that, "with many safe harbors and a convenient location, Crete became a wealthy sea power, trading with mainland Greece, Egypt, the Near East, and Anatolia".  Another chunk of evidence lies on page 87, explaining that, "Minoan painters worked on a large scale, covering entire walls of rooms with geometric borders, views of nature, and scenes of human activity".  Having stated this and referring back to the image, it is clear that this figure is some sort of fisherman and/or fish trader.  Also, it is easily noticeable that at the top of the slate lies somewhat of a border that has outlined this image, although, it appears to me as if this image has been removed from a larger scale painting or canvas of figures.  According to the shades and colors used to develop this piece, it is evident that the "Spring Fresco" on page 91 in the textbook shows some common similarities with the colors used in this unidentified piece.

     For this next ceramic piece, I believe that this could have possibly been from the Mycenaean civilization.  One of the reasons I think this is, is based on the ceramic imagery presented on page 99 in the textbook.  If you notice the characters in the unidentified image and the image in the book, you can notice that both of the figures within the ceramics look very cartoon like.  It is clear that they did not design the figures to be accurate in proportion to reality, but more so to just create a simple symbol.  All of these civilizations were involved and responsible for ceramic works, however, the Mycenaeans were the only ones to incorporate different colored metals in their works.  While ceramics was also one of their large areas of focus, another piece that leads us to this assumption is the fact that their kraters (bowl for mixing water and wine) were all commonly produced with a certain scene that could tell a story and symbolize some sort of message.  One of the major reasons why I don't think it is Cycladic is because they were focused more on sculptures and those that involved nude women and emphasized symmetry.

Giza Pyramids vs. Ziggurats of Near East

     Ziggurats of the ancient Near East, like pyramids were used for the purpose of religious meetings between gods and humans.  Pyramids were similar in some ways, but were mainly used as funeral locations for wealthy rulers that had them constructed for themselves.

     Pyramids had various elements involved within their tombs specifically, such as sculptures located throughout, as well as paintings that could possibly relate to their afterlife future or even some that could tell a story about the patron.  Ziggurats were supported by the wealthy, built over other ruins upon ruins to hold ceremonies regarding the connection between the heavens and the people.  Like pyramids of Giza, these ziggurats were built with a handful of stairs in order to reach the top of the shrine.  Both of these structures were used to symbolize or represent some sort of ruler of person of higher status during their lives.

      Ziggurats were usually built over previous sacred sites and continued to be built on as they been known to serve the "Bond between Heaven and Earth".  They were also usually built upon larger cliff areas that looked over flat lands, which also helped them gain the name, "House of the Mountains".  While pyramids were built with much more time and preparation, they were carefully planned out and some took a decent amount of time to build since they had much more underground structures to build.  On that note, ziggurats were built more for aesthetic purpose on the outside of what is presented, rather than what is below or buried at the tomb.

     So overall, ziggurats and pyramids were both used as special ceremonial places to be used for worship and connections directly with the gods.  But the primary contrasting differences is, are that pyramids were used for burials more than meetings, ziggurats were used to hold meetings for religious purposes generally.  Both were large pieces of architecture which held some symbolic meaning during their time frame, both equally as important during each civilization.

Darius and Xerxes Receiving Tribute

                One of the more elegant pieces of Eastern art that has grabbed my attention was the relief of Darius and Xerxes Receiving Tribute.  This piece is not only sculpted into a few characters, but rather tells a story.  Also, this relief is believed to symbolize not Darius in the throne, but rather Xerxes, the up and coming successor of his father.  In this piece specifically, Darius is supposedly being greeted in a ritual manner that is referred to as a proskynesis, while Xerxes (son of Darius) overhears what is being presented.  This piece can be found on the Apadana staircase located in Persepolis, Iran.

My initial reaction to this piece was bland and dull.  It didn’t have much variation, nor did it contain much information based solely on the image.  However, after reading more about this relief, I discovered a few things that have helped mold my perspective into thinking otherwise.  First off, I learned that in Eastern art, people were not very fond of having their actual face portrayed in self-portraits, it was something that most people would simply prefer not to have.  Thus, making it impossible to identify who is Darius and who is Xerxes, because they have the exact same face.  Facial features were not a high priority in these forms of work.

                 This relief is actually portrayed within the Apadana, within Persepolis, Iran (which was the audience and meeting area to greet Darius and attend events).  During this time frame, the Persian Empire reached from Africa all the way to India, thus making Darius a very powerful and renowned figure during the Ancient Near East era.  It was said that this piece of art was at a time more vibrant with colors and metals that were used to emphasize Darius’ crown and gold leaf used for his necklace.  Key components in this relief are used to show just how powerful and royal Darius was at this moment in his reign.  Noticing how his feet are not touching the ground, but have their own ataman to rest upon, reflects that he was of high power.  Another thing that drew my attention was the fact that he has two guards behind him and two more guards in front of him, both symmetrically placed to achieve the King’s protection.  He also has an entourage of potentially royal figures/family that stand beside and behind him on his throne, proving that he must be of a higher importance.

              Placed in front of Darius are two incents stands, implying that his throne was a clean place and had the type of resources that he could keep his palace pristine.  It is hard to tell what the people behind Darius are holding, but each one seems to be wielding a different object.  Although, the figure behind Darius (who is assumed to be Xerxes) is also carrying the same object as the King, possibly a goblet or a brazier of some sort.  The figure directly behind Xerxes appears to be a woman because of the ornament she is wearing on her head, covering parts of her face and seems to be holding some sort of cloth.  And furthermore, the figure behind her seems to be holding some sort of pickaxe, with a dagger drawn to his waist.  This was probably considered a man who was handy with creating things, maybe a carpenter under the King’s personal request.  What I found strange was that the guards to the far right seem to be found holding what looks like a purse, or a small knapsack.  But being that close to the incents, it could just be more material to keep the scent of the place.

             I find it simply fascinating that such a small detailed relief from a staircase in a audience hall can tell such a story.  Perhaps there is more to the story than historians can even make from this and from what information we have gathered over the years.  In my opinion, there is always more information to uncover, especially from such early Persian times like these.  Although this relief was made during the last five years of Darius' ruling, it could simply be a story to illustrate how Darius is now passing the throne on to his successor and son, Xerxes.  To be able to make such intricate reliefs at this early of a time frame blows my mind and has helped shape the world into what the Greek's adopted as art.  And from there, what the rest of the world soon adopted as art.

Venus of Willendorf

     Upon reading about Venus of Willendorf, a few things have quickly drawn my attention.  One of these things was the fact that Venus was portrayed as an overweight/obese figure but still held the symbol for how women were supposed to look.  Comparing this figurine to the common present day media, it is quite evident to understand why some people would be a little confused.  However, back in earlier history of such dynasties like China, it was said to be that people of obesity were actually the more powerful members of society, so this could have definitely been one of the possibilities.

     As far as beauty is concerned, the writer strongly believes that the beauty of the female figure is represented in this small idol.  Like mentioned before, today's definition of beauty significantly clashes with the ancient thought of these features.  Although big breasts are still highly emphasized in present day image, other attributes like over sized abdominal regions and large legs are not exactly what women or men classify today as beautiful.  This statuette was named Venus because it was said to be one of the first female icons to embrace and expose the natural beauty of the female figure.  However, this has been highly debated on what the message of the figurine really represents, but it still remains a dated piece of antiquity that will draw future questions to understand the meaning and representation of this piece.

     It is cloudy to me how this resembles the aesthetic image of femininity or females in general, but I can understand that the dating and uniqueness of this figure has made it so increasingly popular over the years.  Some of the things that I believe have made this piece of popular is the fact that it dates back to prehistoric eras, it is made of a material that is not native to its found location, and the idea that this is what was the image for women during this time period was.  The naming of "Venus" itself too brings forth some speculation on whether this image was more of a bash towards women or a praising towards them, since there was such opposing views of how the name Venus was portrayed in mythology.  Creating a mockery out of this figure could have definitely been a possibility, however, it is still unsure. 

     Overall, I think this piece was of a specific individual who held a high amount of power in society during their time.  As time changes, so does the image of how we perceive certain aspects of human life.  I believe Venus of Willendorf was an image and creation that all people of this time could recognize as pure, natural beauty.

Introduction-

Hi, my name is Kyle and I'm just starting my junior year in pursuing a Graphic Design degree.  I enjoy computer arts and photography (you can check out my flickr account @ www.flickr.com/kgdonteventrip).  This is my first online class here at CWU, so I hope it will be a good one.