As we all know and have become more familiar with, artistic beauty comes in all shapes and forms, whether it is a sculpture of figurines, pottery, low or high-relief carvings, colorful art versus uncolored art, they are favored in by a variety of ways.
Perceptions are driven from the essence and beauty of what we view. Of course, what we think of beauty and essence is defined by our own definition. Winckelmann was infatuated with what he thought the Greek culture did with their art, and the way it was presented to an audience. The two sculptures in our text of “Archer” are great examples. When I observe these two statues resembling the “Archer”, even though they are trying to depict the same sculpture, they look like they are from two different cultures, and they do not show the same elements and characteristics we value. In the reconstruction of Archer, I am distracted from the busy patterns rather than focusing on the unique elements such as that of the “Archer (Paris)”. Such as Winckelmann suggested, the “fine and simple” elements make it more rich in culture. Winckelmann thought the Greek art was more pristine by leaving the naturalistic appearance of a sculpture, rather than marking a piece of art with color. Winckelmann’s idea was more so along the lines of the “less is more” theory, which I have to agree with. As important as color is and what color does to paintings, which is bring out characteristics of life that may not have been easily seen, it also acts as a mask that does not allow any audience to see what Winckelmann says, and that is “pure and simple” elements or techniques that were used in creating the piece of art. From the lecture, Winckelmann quotes, “color ought to have a minor consideration in the role of beauty.” The fine detail is what makes artwork unique to its time frame, and what helps present the characteristics of the artwork come to life. What Winckelmann did not know was that the Greek culture and art were full of color. He must have made a premature judgment of a few artworks, rather than a variety of pieces with and without color. Winckelmann valued the naturalistic and true to life elements that were present in what he thought defined Greek artwork. Greeks thought that color was a useful technique and helpful attribute to express what we think of naturalism. However, as this may be, today we more so agree with Winckelmann, and that is we think true naturalism is seen in artworks made out of marble, absence of color, and the pure elements. The bright colorful patterns are very distracting, however skin tones are not distracting and they bring out a lively feeling. What I mean is that the skin color adds to what brings the character to life, and will allow an audience to see that these sculptures were suppose to depict human forms.
In a way, I believe that Winckelmann has not affected my modern perception of Greek art, because when I ponder the idea of ancient Greek culture, the idea of white statues, and rich culture that involve traditions come to mind. Of course, today’s Greek culture, I think of vast amounts of colors and patterns being used. However, seeing pictures of Greece has helped shape this idea as well. His definition of Greek art is along the lines of what I think of ancient Greek art. If Winckelmann had not come to this conclusion, I think that I would have had the perception that Greek culture was the exact opposite of what I think now.
I believe that Winckelmann had a great part of defining what ancient Greek art is, because he valued the opposite of what the Greeks did. He helped define another area of what beauty is within this time frame. Without Winckelmann’s promotion of naturalism, I believe that color would have been valued more today, because there would not have been that aspect to compare Winckelmann’s naturalism with the Greek’s naturalism. The statues that were presented in the lecture and text, reminded me more of characteristics coming from Germany, which can be seen in Leavenworth today. They really redirect us from thinking that they come from another culture just because color was added. Greek culture and the culture from Germany are very different in various aspects.
Nice thoughts. I do think that color would be valued more today if Winckelmann hadn't promoted white "purity." I like that you brought up the example of painted German statues. Polychromy (adding color with paint) is popular in a lot of other cultures too: it can be seen in Spain, Portugal and colonial Latin America. It's interesting think about how painted sculpture continued in some Western traditions, but not in others.
ReplyDelete-Prof. Bowen
I loved how you compared same statues of the "Archer" but depicted them from two different cultures. I agree with how you say that the reconstruction is busy. I found it crowded with designs and overelaborate patterns. While comparing it to the "unique elements" brought out in the "Archer (Paris)," we see a more thought out and simply made sculpture. I loved how you said, "Winckelmann suggested, the “fine and simple” elements make it more rich in culture." It really shows a little goes a long way. By leaving sculptures in an uncomplicated and ordinary way, it leaves the viewers to a more open-minded interpretation.
ReplyDeleteThat is interesting how you said the Archer looks like it is from two different cultures, I never got that till reading your blog. I also like that you agree with Winckelmann's idea of less is more, because I do too. But I don't believe in what his views are of the Greek art how they are simple. Also I like when you talk about Naturalism, how Winckelmann believed the Greeks were and how you talked about how the Greeks really viewed naturalism in their art. Very good Blog!
ReplyDelete