last post

Throughout this quarter we have learned about and studied many different types of historical art, all the way from painting to architecture. Most of the pieces we examined I found to be interesting and fun to learn about. But the type of art I particularly enjoyed studying about was the Egyptian Pyramids. They are a work of art miraculous not only when it was built, but still to this day a piece we stand in awe of thinking about the work and design put into them. Not only that but as well the durability for a structure from such an old time period surviving in the form it did even to this day. In particular I enjoyed studying about the Great Pyramid of Giza, the oldest of the seven wonders of the ancient world. Taking some twenty years to be completed this 480 foot masterpiece made from 2.3 million limestone bricks which were made and placed by hand, the pyramid was completed around 2560 BC.

I see these Pyramids, like most pieces of art, being built in some type of religious manner. The Great Pyramid of Giza, like many others, was used as a temple and burial site for the kings and a way to offer their lives to the gods. Not only were there buried kings and pharos, but treasures as well. The Egyptians believed in giving offerings of gold and expensive items to the gods they would not only be accepted into the afterlife, but they also believed they could bring these riches with them and continue to be rich in the afterlife.

The sheer size and construction of this great pyramid is what really interested me. I think that you have to be crazy if you don’t enjoy the history and footprint this structure has had on our earth.  

week #9

Byzantine and Early Medieval art both portray estouneshing features both in color, story, and picture as a whole. Today i chose to take a look at two pieces from our text book, David The Psalmist pg. 253, and Virgin Of Vladimir pg. 252. Both of these paintings are works of art that portray something real but unlike the naturalistic style that art of its time had been following, they began to divert away somewhat and become more "distorted." I believe the reason for this is to show the viewer importance in every part of the painting and not have one sole focus. In looking at the David The Psalmist, you can see it looks as if the two human figures are right on top of the animals, giving no depth for the viewer to know where things are placed, they are just there. Going along with the problem of depth, another charecteristic of this painting that is unnatural is the proportion of the animals to people. The scale is completely off in order to portray the picture as a whole even if the charecters are closer or farther in reality. Looking at the top right portion of the painting you see what looks like a woman peeping out from behind a pillar, if this woman was to be proportional she would be a giant. But instead the artist paints her to the same size as the other humans in the painting. These things all come together creating a style which is based off of but not exact to naturalism in art. Now taking a look at the Virgin Of Vladimir we also see a close depiction of naturalism but again with a twist. This painting also has a big charecteristic of of unproportion. At first glance the biggest thing that stands out is the size of the head of the adult (giant) compared to that of the child (minature). Not only does this through off the realistic resemblence of the human figure but it draws the viewer into that portion of the painting. Looking closely at the faces you can see the artist did not neglect the childs face when it comes to detail just because it is smaller, but instead he keeps the detail par with that of the adult. Moving on from just the faces when we look into the rest of the painting you can see that natural placement and posture has gone out the window. The position of the child is very unnatural in how she sits and also the position of the neck, both parts of the body obscure the painting enough alone to bring this painting away from the erra of naturalism. As you can see for yourself, even at a moments glance at both of these paintings the Byzantine began greatly to draw away from naturalism and come up with a style of there own.

week 8

For this week I chose to talk about option #2 and compare the art produced by Early Christians and that of the Romans. These two artistic styles appear to be very similar and share few differences do to the time period of which they are created and also the growth of human civilization between the two time periods. In particular I chose to look at the Cubiculum of Leonis, Catacomb of Commodilla from the Early Christian art, (pg 224), and the Church of the Holy Cross from the Romans (pg 557). At first glance these two works of art look very different, but taking a closer look there are many similarities. The first similarity that stands out the most is the geometric design of the ceilings, both perfectly balanced and geometrical. Although one is constructed out of paintings and the other architecturally built, both give the same balance and cemetery to the viewer’s eye. Not only are the ceilings of both art pieces similar, but the walls as well, each complimenting its adjacent wall to create the same cemetery as the ceilings. I believe that the major reason for these similarities comes from the fact that the Roman lifestyle developed from that of the church and holds similar values, therefore the style of the art stayed similar in many aspects do to the belief that you don’t change the bible so why would other things change. In other words, why try and fix something that is not broken, it worked then and it will work now. But although these two time periods share many similarities they also have some differences. The biggest difference to the eye is the color. Early Christians used lots of bright vibrant colors in order to make things stand out and be seen, while the Romans developed somewhat of a gothic style in the church. This change by the Romans may have come because of violence and wars between the time periods creating a darker atmosphere and a fear in God. Another difference in these two periods when talking about art is the size. In early Christianity the churches were smaller and compact with short ceilings and narrow passage ways. Later the Romans decided to take the opposite direction and make things BIG. Cathedral ceilings were extremely tall in order to be easily visible from any spot in the cities; this created plenty of inside room and gave more of a spacious feeling while still inflicting the fear from the darkness of the style. In the end I believe that the reason for the similarities in the two come from historical significance and relation of church to church in the same religion.