Week 11 post

Our course offered many new time periods and cultures to learn about. The Etruscan and Roman Art time period were the most interesting periods to learn about. I enjoyed studying about the two different rulers of those times.  For this specific week that we studied the Romans we considered the bust of Commodus as Hercules (c. 191-92 CE) and the portrait of Caracalla (c. 217-230). I always enjoy learning about rulers and what their life was like. This particular option had us looking at both these rulers’ lives and depicting what characteristics were incorporated into their busts. These specific sculptures were only a small part of Roman art that I enjoyed. I also enjoyed the abstraction of this time period. There were a variety of sculptures that came from the Roman period that depict great detail.

            I was more intrigued by the historical context of these pieces. Generally it’s the historical aspect of most art pieces that draw me into their beauty. You can’t fully appreciate a piece unless you know the story behind it. Whether that’s the story of the featured person’s life or the context of why a structure was created. The symbolism of the art pieces is better portrayed through their history. Although the history is interesting for many pieces our interpretation and analysis of the visual details is always stunning.

            I was also intrigued by the function of the structures in roman times. The Roman Arch was one of the well-known structures. Using the golden rectangle through out the structure was the most interesting aspect of the arch. Although the Etruscan and Roman’s were not the ones to invent the round arch they were the first to use the form in their structures efficiently. An example of this is the Pont Du Gard in Nimes, France. Also the Flavian amphitheater emphasized the arch structure in their finished product. This particular structure functioned as one of the many facilities for sporting events.

            The Etruscan and Roman period was a time of violent emperors and facilities that held violent sports. It’s this historical background that drew me into the period. The sacrifices to gods and the stories of rulers who were slightly unorthodox in their methods that were the muse of many artists to create the pieces that we see today.

Week 9 Post

When looking at the Hildesheim Cathedral doors the two panels that stuck out to me the most were the panels three down from the top. The one to the left is from the Old Testament. It is the scene of Adam and Eve in the garden. The one to the right is from the New Testament. It portrays the crucifiction of Jesus Christ. Although these panels portray scenes that happened centuries apart from each other they are strongly connected. 

First I looked at the panel to the left with the Adam and Eve scene. Adam and Eve were the first people God created. First he created Adam and then created Eve from a rib he took from Adam’s side. God provided Adam and Eve with everything. They would be given the perfect life if they followed the one rule. They were to never eat from the Tree of Knowledge. The serpent tempts Eve to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, telling her that it will make her more like God, and that it will not lead to death. Eve falls into temptation and eats from the tree. She then offers Adam to eat as well and he too falls under the temptation. This is known as the Fall of Man. This is where I believe the panel is set. Eve is covering her body as if aware of her nudity. This happened after they ate from the tree, and they covered themselves from God in shame. Adam holds the apple in his hand yet to eat the apple. The panel represents the moment man fell.

The panel next to Adam and Eve is the crucifiction of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ was Gods son. Birthed to The Virgin Mary. Jesus was given to the world as a final chance to be forgiven of all sins. Jesus lived his life performing miracles, but when the time came he was betrayed and hung on the cross to die. Before he died he prayed, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do." God had given his only son to die for all our sins. When Jesus was resurrected he told the world that we are forgiven for our sins. The panel directly shows the suffering Jesus went through before he died for us. As the Romans put sponges of vinegar in his wounds while he hung from the cross.

These two panels represent the beginning of sin and the forgiveness of sin; the beginning and the end. If Adam and Eve had not eaten from the Tree of Knowledge there would be no sin. With no sin, Jesus would not have had to die for our forgiveness, correlating these two panels. The fall of man was redeemed later in the New Testament by Jesus’s suffering on the cross. These two panels, I believe, are the most connected stories in the bible. They are the two chances that God gave the world to be free of sin, and by placing these panels next to each other we are able to see that correlation between the two. 

Week 7 Post

(For some reason this was deleted from my blog)

The Parthenon Marbles are probably the most interesting piece I’ve learned about this quarter. There is so much history behind them and the fact that there is an on going debate about them brings my interest in further. The Parthenon Marbles originally were sculptures attached to the Parthenon. Over time damage was conflicted on these sculptures during various configurations of the Parthenon. The Parthenon Marbles are the surviving sculptures from the Parthenon. Currently they are in the British Museum, which brings up controversy. The Athenian’s believe they need to be returned to them as apposed to staying in the British Museum, because ‘legally’ they did not belong there. Elgin sold them to the museum to get himself out of debt from his divorce. I personally feel that they belong in the British Museum where they can be recognized and studied. I believe by staying the British Museum there is more cultural gain for everyone.

I always believe historical context it the way to go. It is more intriguing and gives us a better understanding of the history of the piece, and can enlighten us about why certain artistic royalties were taken. The museum display can very easily display both the aesthetics as well as the historical context. I think the Parthenon Marbles should stay in the British Museum. While they are in the British Museum they are able to teach a new culture to people as apposed to teaching a culture to people who are already apart of said culture. Like what would happen if the Parthenon Marbles were to stay in Athens. Museums in my opinion should have various information and pieces from different cultures and multiple areas of the world. It’s one thing to learn about your own area, and it’s a completely new outlook to learn about how people from around the world created art. There are always differences in art from around the world and we won’t be able to see that if we don’t open our eyes to various forms from every nation. By the British Museum having the Parthenon Marbles they are sharing a different culture, and that story with their people. 

Week 8 Post

God, goddesses, and rulers alike all have a different way they want to be represented. It’s the creator’s artistic freedom to depict their statues how they believe their audience sees these higher powers. When considering the bust of Commodus as Hercules and the portrait head of Caracalla we are able to see two different representations of these higher powers.

    When initially looking at the bust of Commodus as Hercules I saw a lot of vanity. Commodus was known to be particularly proud of his physique. The way they show his muscular form holding the apples and weapon depicts this. The weapon is what I can only conclude is what he used to kill the lion that he wears as a headdress. Commodus was incredibly vein he thought of himself as a reincarnation of Hercules.  I’m guessing that’s a servant kneeling down to Hercules, which also shows how vain this statue is. It shows that people would bow to Hercules. Hercules’s face also brings interest to me because it’s the same face most Godley statues have, and it makes him seem so peaceful and detached from what’s going on in the world around him.

    The portrait head of Caracalla has fewer aspects to evaluate than the bust of Commodus. It is simply his head. No bust to see his muscles, no added aspects that would depict him in anyway. It’s simply his face, and a stern one at that. By just representing his head we experience more emotion in his facial features. His stern glance off into the sky depicts a sort of power and determination. The line and detail in this statue is incredible and definitely represents a strong figure. Caracalla is the emperor remembered as unpleasant mostly because of the massacres and persecutions he instigated throughout his Empire.

    When comparing the two statues its hard to compare the full bust. We can only compare the emotion the statues portray. It’s clear that Commodus as Hercules wanted to represent his power over all those below him, and the vanity of his body. Caracalla represents determination and strength through his facial features and distinct lines. I think Commodus, as Hercules is a statue that as an audience we look at to worship whereas Caracalla is a statue that we look upon and respect what it was he did. Each statue represents a different leader. Each leader represents a different achievement or triumph. The background behind both these men is what gives these statues more emotion. After knowing that Commodus was incredibly vein his statue as Hercules makes more sense in that it shows many aspects of vanity. Caracalla was notorious for his lack of caring and this marble portrait shows this emotion to use. I will always be a strong believer in understanding art better with the history behind it rather than my own interpretation of the piece. 

Week 5

       This is a Male figure from the Cycladic culture. It isn’t specified to be male, but because the figure seems to be taking ‘an action’ it is seen as the male gender. Initially my reaction to this was that it was a very clean sculpture; clean lines, clean figure, and overall well done. The way the man is sitting in the chair holding his cup looks like he is interacting with someone. As if he is in a deep conversation with someone across from him. This really engaged me into the sculpture.

       The male figure is from the height of the Cycladic culture. It is from the time period of 2800-2300 BC.  The figure is constructed entirely of marble. His left arm crosses over his body while his right arm raises a glass as if to propose a toast. His upward chin and defined nose make him seem he is of importance. As if he understands what he is talking about and is taking thought in what he is saying. That is if he is speaking at all. The legs look as if they were just sliced down the middle and parted to make two. Not sure why it was sculpted this way. Maybe they did this to make the sculpture symmetrical.

       I then looked at the male figure from the Ancient Near East. This human figure is from Ain Ghazai, Jordan during 6750-6250 BCE. This early representation of the human figure is a little different than the figure from the Cycladic culture. This specific statue stands 3 feet tall and is made of a cane from which is encased in white plaster. The nostrils and eyes are quiet defined. The eyes are made with shells. The eyes are also painted with a type of natural asphalt. These types of sculptures were also said to have clothes, and tattoos painted on the body. This human sculpture also seems disproportioned to an average human figure. I see this mostly in the size of the arms, and how they are rather small. I also see it in the rather large neck.

       Between the human figure from the Cycladic culture and the human figure from Ancient Near East I can see many differences. First thing I saw was the difference in stature. One is standing with no emotion on his face. The other is sitting and even though the features of the face are not distinct we see emotion in the way he sits and holds his head. The Ancient Near East sculpture also has rough craftsmanship about it, whether that is because it is an older piece or the material, but we see a more clean presentation from the human figure from the Cycladic culture. More detail was put into the Ancient Near East human figure with the various mediums they used, and yet each statue has a very simple design to it. Looking at both figures helps us realize that the human figure is seen differently in every culture, and amongst every individual. It’s interesting to me that there are so many forms of beauty out there and each artist has a different way of portraying it. 

Week 4 Post: Option 1

         When comparing the pyramids of Giza and the ziggurats of the ancient Near East I not only saw similarities, but also many differenced between the two.  Differenced in their structures as well as their functions. Just by looks we can already see differences between the pyramids at Giza and the ziggurats of the ancient Near East.

         The pyramids of Giza are located on the west of the Nile. Also know as the land of the setting sun. The pyramids of Giza are constructed of bricks that weigh an average of 2.5 tons each. These structures are up to 450 feet tall with slanted sides.  The pyramids of Giza once had a covering of white limestone and a golden cap on top. Erosion over time has taken from the pyramids, but we can still find reminisce of these materials. These pyramids are not solid structures; inside they have tombs, and tunnels.

The ziggurats are similar to the stepped pyramid of Djoser, Egypt in that they have the same structure. The ziggurats have a step approach to their construction and have stairs incorporated into the design. The ziggurats compared to the pyramids only stand, on average, 170 feet tall, the tallest being 270 feet. In scale they do not come close to the height of the pyramids. These structures were usually built on top of ruble with sun-baked bricks layering the inside. On the outside of the structure it was said they used oven-baked bricks. These structures were once white washed, but like the pyramids they have been eroded away. The slants of these structures were to prevent flooding as well as delay the erosion of these structures.

         The functions of these two structures are also different. The pyramids were funerary tombs for the kings such as Pharaoh Khufu. These are the places where Pharaohs would be buried. The ziggurats were structures dedicated to the gods. They were solid structures because their function was on the top. They built a shrine on the top of the ziggurats called a cella.  The top of the ziggurats were called the meeting place, it was were heaven met earth and they could talk to their gods. Each ziggurat was dedicated to a different god or goddess.

         There may be an obvious difference in the structures of these monuments, but I believe the biggest difference between these two structures is the function. The ziggurats I believe had the most use out of them. They were used constantly for worship and connecting with their gods, whereas the pyramids were used for a burial ground and weren’t visited as often. The emotions behind each sculpture are also different. There was praise and happiness connected to the ziggurats. The pyramids represented sadness and loss of loved ones.

         The pyramids of Giza, and the ziggurats of the Near East were both built with purpose, worship or morn those of a higher power. It’s just amazing to think something of similar statue was created for very different reasons. They both are monuments of beauty. 

Week Three: ‘The Great Lyre with Bull’s Head’

        ‘The Great Lyre with Bull’s Head’ is an instrument that dates back to 2600-2500 BCE. The ‘The Great Lyre with Bills Head’ is 14’’ in height. This piece of art is made from various materials such as wood, gold, silver, lapis lazuli, bitumen, and shell. The front panel of the piece is also known as ‘The Sound Box of the Great Lyre’.  This front panel is wood with shell-inlaid bitumen. This statue was not only an instrument, but also a tool used in celebrating religion. The Great Lyre and Bull’s Head was discovered with the heads of three elaborately attired women, who were believed to be lyrists and singers, in the pit of the King’s Grave.

       Initially when I looked at this piece I thought it was the front of a rowboat. I hadn’t recognized what a lyre was until I saw an image in Google. That is the main reason I chose to write about this piece, because music always brings an interesting outlook on various art pieces. A lyre was generally played to accompany the chants of hymns and songs of praise. It is an 11-string instrument that was believed to evoke the divine bull, a sacred bull said to be the gate keeper of Shiva.

       What we see in this specific instrument is a realistic head of a bull. Most of the head, including its horns, was covered in gold sheet. Its eyeballs were made of shell insets; the pupils, eyelids and hair on the forehead and top of the head were comprised of lapis lazuli. Individual pieces of the same imported stone were set to create the beard.

       Personally I think the beard, aside from the front panel, is the most interesting aspect of this instrument. The bull was a religious icon to this culture. Beards make me think of wisdom, and experience. The fact that this particular bull had a beard made me see it with more power and wisdom. The gold sheet that composes the Bull’s head also makes me think of wealth. We see these attributes of the bull’s head and can connect to the higher representation it brings to the Sumerian culture.

       Then there was the Inlaid Front Panel that brought more interest. The top scene is what looks like a man holding two bulls. These bulls seem to be rearing upwards as if to resist. What’s interesting is that all three of these figures seem to display both human and animal actions. What I noticed was that all three figures are turned to show us their profiles. I’m curious what the meaning behind that was, but I could not figure it out.

       The next three panels are what seem like groups of animals with human characteristics. In the second panel we see a hyena and a lion working together. Judging by the knife on the hyena’s side we can assume he had just hunted the animals he is holding, while the lion brings a vase of water. The next two panels depict the same thing, animals performing everyday tasks (tasks such as playing and instrument, eating, and enjoying the company of one another). Seeing these animals perform everyday tasks as if they were human turns us to the thought of animals as equals if not a more superior evolved species. The combination of these human and animal features represented a Mesopotamian belief that there was power to be gained in combining various species attributes.

I still think it’s interesting how the human form is depicted in various ancient of near east sculptures and art piece. Here we see the animalistic forms of humans where as in the Venus we saw a different form of beauty. Overall I see The Great Lyre with Bull’s Head as a religious tool more than the possible combination of animal and man resulting in power over the physical world. It is an instrument of worship. Where people would gather and sing their hymns and songs of worship to their god(s).

Week Two: The Venus of Willendorf

       The Venus of Willendorf, to me, was an interesting sculpture. Not only because of the originality behind it, but also the name.  Both aspects of this sculpture hit on a few interesting topics to think about: First is the way the female form is portrayed in this sculpture and the questions that arise from that, secondly is the name and the meaning behind it, and lastly, I ask, does this statue represent beauty?

How the female form is portrayed is very different than what we are used to seeing. These days, usually, obese women are not what we see when learning about the female form. The women we see are of average size if not an abnormally skinny size.  Whether this sculpture was a realistic form of woman back in the day or it is an exaggeration it causes us to think about why The Venus of Willendorf was sculpted the way it was.  When the article talks about how women may have played a more important role in society, possibly a more dominate role, this sculpture seems to portray more power behind it rather than just a woman. I think this is why she was represented as slightly larger, to represent power over males.

       Second I would like to talk about the name of this sculpture (The Venus of Willendorf). The word Venus, when referring to a name, means The Goddess of love and beauty. So would that mean that this is an image of beauty for their time? Or is it irony? I found it interesting that when they mention other ‘Venus’ sculptures they also mention that these women are covering their privates. The Venus of Willendorf dose not cover herself. Her arms come above her breasts as if to rest on them. Her stomach hangs down, but does not cover her genitals. She stands proud of her form as if this was the form of beauty for their time. The only thing that is kept secret about this statue is her face. I believe this is because they believe her to be the Earth Mother, whose face not only cannot be seen, but also must not be seen. What I found interesting was that some people looked at this statue as a form of pornography which some believed took away from its beauty, because it was seen as more promiscuous. It would take away from her beauty.

       Lastly, beauty becomes a question. Beauty has been a term that has changed so often through the generations.  Beauty generally means the combination of shape, form, and color of an object that comes together to please the eye. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder (cliché I know). Beauty to me is an image that stops you in your tracks and makes you appreciate what you are seeing. To some The Venus of Willendorf is a beautiful piece that makes us stop and appreciate the female form in a different perspective than what we are use to.

       In the end it’s all about perspective. It’s what we think the name means and if this statue truly represents the Goddess of love and beauty. We must ask ourselves what we think beauty is and what, to us, portrays this. The Venus of Willendorf will always bring an interesting discussion to the table.  

My Introduction

       My name is Amanda Hollingsworth, and I am a Senior at Central Washington University. Chances are I will be here for another two years because I am double majoring in business as well as graphic design. When it comes to it I enjoy all types of art, but photography will always be my passion. I hope to get an internship next fall in Australia working in an advertisement firm. I won't know if that works out until late spring. Internships are where I plan on getting most of my experience before I start my career so when I graduate I hope to do at least two or three different internships. Other than design I am also very passionate about film and music. If I had enough money for another year of tuition I would have minored in film. I don't think there is enough time or money in this world to learn everything I need to.