Sculpture

The sculpture Bodhisattva had the strongest impact upon me for various reasons. This piece, found in the Silk Road Chicago collection at the Art Institute of Chicago, is a cross-cultural work with obvious Eastern and Western influences. This sculpture is a beautiful 2nd to 3rd century A. D. piece that depicts a man standing in obvious deep meditation. This model was created in the region of Gandhara, which is modern-day Pakistan and Afghanistan. This early representation of a Buddha-like figure is a unique and powerful image. The title, Bodhisattva, can be directly translated from Sanskrit as meaning a “spiritual essence or being.”

This figure is an interpretation of a sacred being that has delayed its own nirvana in order to help others reach the spiritual plane. The adornments that this figure wears are representative of its delay to the spiritual realm. Wearing material and worldly items means that it has not transcended yet. This type of commitment is impressive and the figure is blessed with the incredible ability to be in a state between both worlds. The figure in the sculpture has an awe-like power over the viewer. It makes you feel as if you are looking at an object that attains holy attributes.

Although, the sculpture has divine qualities, it also makes the viewer feel able to relate to it. It is humanized in a way that differs from other Buddha representations. This makes the impact of the work even stronger. An inner strength is portrayed that varies from the traditional at rest Buddha that is found in most artwork. This figure has power, but it is not menacing. It is serene and this serenity is transferred to the viewer of the piece. It is easy to see how these types of figures transcended into what is now modern-day Buddhism. The bodhisattvas were ancient spiritual beings that were worshipped.

The collective group of these became the Buddha figure that is widely known today. The detail of this sculpture is incredible. Despite its age, the particulars of the piece have remained blissfully intact. The hands are missing, but it is possible to guess at how they were placed in the sculpture. The right hand was most likely raised and assuming a gesture of reassurance. An object found in the left hand would determine the type of bodhisattva. There is realism in the depiction that makes the viewer feel that they are gazing upon an actual interpretation. Unlike other bodhisattva pieces, this work feels more based on a real person.

Despite the Eastern subject matter, there is little doubt that there is Western influence apparent in this piece. “The art of this region experienced a type of merger with Greek influences after Alexander the Great conquered the region in the 4th century B. C. ” (Rowland, 1960, 8). An example of this found in the Bodhisattva is clear in the figure’s intricate robes. These types of folds are traditionally found in Greek and Roman artistic depictions. The drapery reminds the viewer of the togas worn by the figures in the sculptures of Roman imperials. The chest of the figure is also reminiscent of the merger of these two cultures.

It is a more realistic portrayal with the muscular indentations found upon the figure’s chest. Eastern portrayals had less defined bodies in their works. The Indian traditions of the sculpture are displayed in the figure’s mustache and the dhori that he wears. The dual influences of this work made the most significant impact upon me. It is rare to see a piece that has such obvious Eastern and Western elements found in the manifestation. This cross-cultural work is a harmonious interpretation of a strong spiritual figure. Additionally, it has a strong religious impact.

It is a documentation of how Buddhism made it way from India into China. When looking at the sculpture, it is unavoidable that you are not moved at how this is exposing a historical occurrence. The stone material of the piece lends power to the idea that this is a strong figure that is tied to the material world, but has the ability to guide people to their own nirvana. The lasting material makes the viewer feel as though they are looking at a spiritual piece that has transcended through the ages. Buddha is an important figure in artwork and it is essential to know how this form came into being.

Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, my hometown, celebrated 130 year anniversary since the time it was found in 1882. For these 130 years the city has changed 3 names as Vladimirovka, Toyohara and Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk. The city has belonged to Russia, then to Japan and after all to Russia again. The city has an interesting history. Many cultures have mixed here in one multinational community.

But my story today is about vegetable carving displays what we made for the CityDay. I asked two of my students to help with the exhibition. And they made a few crafts too. I made a bird sitting on a pumpkin tower. I carved carnations out of beetroot using the technique learned from Mr. Chat Kunsri at the III Thai Carving Event in Tokyo. The 3D pumpkin faces made the visitor smiling and taking photo. (Mr. Chat Kunsuri on sEptember 24 2012) Food Carving & Garnishing Fruit and vegetable carving & Garnishing was first developed in the imperial palace of Chinese Dynasty around 800 years ago.

The culinary workers in the imperial kitchen often served the royal family with sumptuously and  beautifully decorated food dishes in order to make food more attractive and appetizing.

As the days past, food carving & garnishing is no long a decorative feast that only was served in the imperial palace. It became a traditional business feature at restaurants.

Today, food carving & garnishing has moved to an artistic stage throughout the world. It not only can be found in the restaurants but also can be used in festive dinner parties, gathering events, home tables and all sorts of  occasions. Food carving & garnishing has become an international food artistry, which can be an occasion for all professional food artisans to show off their  sophisticated carving and garnishing skills.

Artistic carving and garnishing is by no means difficult. To display beautiful decorated food dishes, all it takes is concentration as well as practice. Although special carving tools will make the food carving quicker and  easier, one sharp-pointed knife is enough to commence to carve fruit and  vegetable.

From root crops like carrots, radishes, yams and potatoes, along with  vegetables like peppers, tomatoes, cabbages and cucumbers to fruits like apples, pears, grapes and watermelons, which can be dedicated carved and garnished into a colourful display of flowers, animals or cartoon faces. (China Fong on 2010)heart and apple butterfly I have many people visiting my blog by searching “How to make an apple butterfly”. As many of butterflies too. When I was a child I had a collection with bugs, moths, dragonflies and other flying creatures. We have a short summer season here on Sakhalin.

The most of things from my collection were found  sleepy between window glasses and in some warm places in the balcony. In this video I show how to carve a butterfly pattern on an apple. It’s not so difficult. You may do that with a knife only. Though some special carving tools will be in help. See this video to understand how to make an Apple Heart for Valentine Day. (Miss. Selena on January,3,2010) Mukimono, fruit and vegetable carving art Sajan Thapa Magar, born in April 18, 1986, received his basic education in Dharan, a city located in the eastern part of Nepal.

He is a self taught artist who held a solo exhibition of his arts at Gurukul, Kathmandu from November 18 to December 7, 2010. His second exhibition, titled Mukimono (Fruits and Vegetable Carving), was showcased at Gurukul, Kathmandu in September, 2011. Mr. Thapa Magar works as a theatre actor at Gurukul, one of the leading theatre companies in Nepal. He has performed in numerous plays and is well appreciated by the theatre critics in Nepal. Besides acting he also looks after lights, props and publicity departments at Gurukul, a School of Theatre.

Apart from performing plays and producing manpower for theatre, Gurukul also organizes art workshops and art exhibitions. At Gurukul, Sajan Thapa Magar got an exposure to numerous art events, which nurtured his interest in painting. In the beginning he copied other artworks, but as his creative impulse took rein over him, he marveled into his imagination. Today, he remains in touch with well established artists of Nepal like Prakash Chandwodkar, Karna Maskey and Kiran Manandhar, and has been receiving guidance and inspiration from them.

After his first exhibition, he joined Kasthamandap Art Studio run by well established artists in Kathmandu, where he learned fruits and vegetable carving. “On September 3, artist Sajan Thapa Magar, gave a perfect example of vegetable and fruit art by creating stunning art pieces from them. His artworks amazed the visitors who got opportunity to witness his creations at the art exhibition Mukimono held at Gurkul, Puranobaneshwor, Kathmandu. ”( Sajan Thapa Magar on September 7, 2011) Japanese cuisine is renowned for the beauty of its presentation.

Among the key elements in this presentation style are mukimono–the decorative garnishes and carvings that add the final flourish to a dish. It might be a carrot round in the shape of a plum blossom. Or a scattering of cherry blossoms plucked from a radish. Perhaps a swallow, a butterfly, a ginkgo leaf or a cluster of pine needles. Whatever the motif, it will have been created to delight the eye and the palate with its shape, color, and taste. In The Decorative Art of Japanese Food Carving, internationally acclaimed chef Hiroshi Nagashima offers 60 edible garnishes and food carvings for home, party or professional use.

Some are designed to be set on top of the food. Others are fashioned to hold the food–and sometimes, they simply are the food. Each is introduced in full color, with easy-to-follow, step-by-step instructions, sample food arrangements, further ideas and secret, insider tips for successful presentation. Most are simple enough for the amateur chef to master, although a few are quite challenging and require much practice. Nagashima’s instructions rely on household utensils found in a typical American kitchen–from knives to peelers to cookie cutters–and use familiar, easily attainable ingredients. Kenji Miura on September 2012) Japanese cuisine is renowned for the beauty of its presentation. Among the key elements in this presentation style are mukimono — the decorative garnishes and carvings that add the final flourish to a dish. In The Decorative Art of Japanese Food Carving, internationally acclaimed chef Hiroshi Nagashima offers 60 edible garnishes and food carvings for home, party or professional use. Some are designed to be set on top of the food. Others are fashioned to hold the food — and sometimes, they simply are the food.

Each is introduced in full color, with easy-to-follow, step-by-step instructions, sample food arrangements, further ideas and secret, insider tips for successful presentation. Most are simple enough for the amateur chef to master, although a few are quite challenging and require much practice. The Decorative Art of Japanese Food Carving is more than a practical handbook, however. It is also an inspiration book, filled with creative suggestions and inventive ideas to enhance and transform the way we cook. (Hiroshi Nagashima on 2009 )

Vegetable carvers from around the world are taking part in the first European Carving Championships being held within the GASTE 2011 Trade Fair for the Restaurant, Hotel and Catering Business, in Leipzig, Germany. The three-day championships which was held from September 4th till 6th, included both individual and team competition. Individual food sculptors competed with each other in three categories: individual, cocktail and platter set and composition, and then teamed with fellow competitors for the live carving competition.

In the latter competition, participants had four hours to use their imagination and creativity to carve in front of the jury’s eyes. Each participant was provided with a basket containing melons, giant papayas, kohlrabi, cucumbers, radishes, Chinese cabbages and carrots. Participants may bring their own pumpkin too. (Kaushik on September 14,2011) The art of carving The detailed techniques used in bothm fruit and vegetable carving came to the U. S. from Asia, where it has been practiced for more than a thousand years. The traditional styles come from China, Thailand and Japan.

The Chinese style is perhaps the oldest, and is said to have originated during the Tang Dynasty in the 6th century. In the traditional Chinese style, carvings are often three- dimensional and crowned with small nanimal figurines. In Thailand the art is called kai-sa-luk, and is said to have had its beginnings in The Royal Palace, Sukothai, about 700 years ago. Because it was once feared that this art would be lost, today it is taught in schools from the early grades through university. The other traditional style of carving, mukimono art, comes from Japan and is said to have been popular during the Edo period, 1600- 1800.

Classic mukimono carvings typically have clean, precise lines. to create a multitier masterpiece that stood more than 6 feet tall and featured a sun sculpture towering over a seabed adorned with a carved treasure chest and shipwrecked vessel. The piece, which was completed in four hours, won a gold medal and $10,000. Competitions are becoming more popular, and many criteria are taken into consideration during judging, according to Bill Sy, CEC, AAC, academic department director of culinary arts at The International Culinary School at The Art Institute of Tucson (Arizona).

Sy is trained in both Chinese and Thai techniques of fruit and vegetable carving, and often serves as an international judge. He says judges look for the degree of difficulty in the techniques, as well as the variety of product, number of products used, detail, color contrast and, finally, overall design and total presentation. Sy says Chinese food seldom uses garnishes except for vegetable and fruit carvings (Daniel Paliska on january 6, 2011).

Margaret Thatcher Rt. Hon. Baroness Thatcher of Kesteven L. G. , O. M. , F. R. S. Official booklet to mark the unveiling on 21st February 2007 of the bronze statue of Baroness Thatcher sculpted by Antony Dufort for the House of Commons. Edited by Malcolm Hay, Curator of Works of Art, Palace of Westminster. Clay for the portrait head of Margaret Thatcher, June 2005 (Photo: Antony Dufort) “This historic commission is a very fitting way to remember Margaret Thatcher’s time in the House of Commons and I am very pleased to welcome the statue joining those of the other Prime Ministers of the 20th Century in Members’ Lobby. Rt. Hon. Michael Martin MP Speaker of the House of Commons Baroness Thatcher is the latest 20th Century Prime Minister to be represented in Members’ Lobby immediately outside the House of Commons Debating Chamber. This over life-size bronze statue by Antony Dufort recognises her contribution to British politics during her three terms of office as premier and records her rightful place in parliamentary history as the United Kingdom’s first woman Prime Minister.

Her statue looks towards the doors of the Commons Chamber, facing that of Sir Winston Churchill by Oscar Nemon, which since the late 1960s has stood sentinel to this historic Chamber, its foot touched in the early years for good luck by Tory Members before giving speeches in the Chamber and more recently by all those visiting the House. Since then, statues of David Lloyd George and Clement Attlee have been added to this historic space, together with busts of James Ramsay MacDonald, Harold Wilson, James Callaghan, Edward Heath, Anthony Eden, Harold Macmillan, Stanley Baldwin and Alec Douglas-Home.

Above and right Antony Dufort and Baroness Thatcher at the sitting on 28 May 2004 (Photos: Matthew Tugwell) The Parliamentary Art Collection of the House of Commons includes many painted and sculpted images of parliamentarians over the centuries, widely dispersed throughout the buildings of the Parliamentary Estate. Portraits of Prime Ministers line the Committee Corridor of the Victorian building, with more recent figures joining the House’s contemporary collection which is on display in Portcullis House.

Members’ Lobby was chosen to display sculptures of Prime Ministers of the 20th Century, because of its pre-eminence as the portal to the Debating Chamber, the centre of political life. Both interiors were rebuilt during the late 1940s by the architect Sir Giles Gilbert Scott after the original Victorian Chamber and Lobby of the 1850s were destroyed by enemy action during the Second World War. Commissioning the Statue The bronze statue was commissioned from the sculptor Antony Dufort in 2003 by the Speaker’s Advisory Committee on Works of Art, under the then chairmanship of Tony Banks MP It was . greed that Margaret Thatcher would be represented during her last term of office, 1987 – 1990, with the sculptor working from historic material as well as being given sittings from life. The current Chairman, and former Deputy Chairman, Hugo Swire MP and Members , of the Committee have overseen this project since 2005. “This is a very significant commission for the House of Commons. It is entirely appropriate that Margaret Thatcher’s premiership has been recorded in this way for future visitors to the House.

I think the way in which Antony Dufort has succeeded in showing her mid-debate will strike a chord with all those – from all sides of the political divide who remember her oratory. I share Tony Banks’s view that history demanded this commission. I am only sad that he did not live to see the finished statue. ” Hugo Swire MP Above Antony Dufort and Tony Banks MP after the committee meeting in Portcullis House where the preliminary design for the statue was selected The sculptor enlarges the full size clay of Baroness Thatcher from the half-size maquette, using a 3D ‘Pantograph’ (Photo: Antony Dufort)

Upper torso of the completed full-size clay figure, 30 September 2006 (Photo: Antony Dufort) The Works of Art Committee is responsible for all aspects of the Parliamentary Art Collection, and follows an active policy of commissioning portraits in order to keep the Collection up to date. Efforts are also made to fill gaps in the historical collection where notable parliamentarians from the past are not represented. The management of the Collection is undertaken by a dedicated team of professional curators, led by Malcolm Hay, who support the Committee in their work.

The Parliamentary Art Collection already includes a number of images of Margaret Thatcher. During the 1990s a marble statue was commissioned by the Committee from the sculptor Neil Simmons, but regrettably this was damaged shortly after completion, when the head was vandalised. It was successfully repaired and is on public view at the Guildhall Art Gallery in London. Other representations of Margaret Thatcher within the Collection include portraits by Henry Mee and Ruskin Spear, one of the Spitting Image latex puppets by Fluck and Law, and a photograph by Jane Bown.

Above Margaret Thatcher’s last speech in the House, 22 November 1990 (Parliamentary Copyright) Photograph of Margaret Thatcher by Jane Bown (Copyright: Jane Bown) Margaret Thatcher’s years as Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher served three continuous terms as Prime Minister, between 1979 and 1990. She is the Country’s longest-serving premier since Lord Salisbury. Her radical economic policies and robust approach to politics were branded ‘Thatcherism’ and became widely influential both at home and abroad.

She placed great importance on fostering Britain’s historic links with the English-speaking peoples of the World, and nurtured the ‘special relationship’ with the United States. At a time when there was general acceptance that Britain’s power was diminishing following the end of Empire, she worked hard to raise the profile of the United Kingdom on the World stage. Her success in defending the Falkland Islands against Argentinian aggression in 1982 won In 1992 she was raised to the peerage, taking her seat in the House of Lords as Baroness Thatcher of Kesteven in the County of Lincolnshire.

In 1995 she was raised to the Order of the Garter. her great praise. She is credited with bringing about the Country’s economic recovery and with breaking many of the restrictive working practices of the past. The Country underwent significant change during her premiership. However, strong views and robust politics brought out a mixture of both positive and negative reactions in people, and in 1990, despite an unbroken line of three election successes, divisions within her own party mirrored the rising discontent within the Country.

She resigned in 1990 after a leadership election. Antony Dufort – the designing and making of the statue “Creating the statue was an enormous but fascinating challenge. I already had considerable experience of making large freestanding sculptures to go outside, such as my ‘Fast bowler’ for the MCC at Lord’s Ground, and the Tribute sculpture ‘Testing for Gas’ for the Coal Miners and Collieries of the Nottinghamshire Coalfields at Silverhill near Mansfield. But the context of the House of Commons statue was particularly complex.

Not only would it have to complement the scale and style of the Above Mould maker Liz Turner peels back the silicon rubber inner layer of the mould. This ‘intermediate’ mould is used to make a wax replica of the sculpture, as part of the ‘lost wax’ casting process (Photo: Antony Dufort) three existing bronze statues of Prime Ministers in the Lobby, but also stand up to the scrutiny of Members as they passed it each working day. Moreover here was a sitter whose appearance the whole world felt they knew, though most had never met her.

Finally, this was the first statue of a female Prime Minister, and there was no precedent to follow. However for me, Oscar Nemon’s splendid sculpture of Winston Churchill set a standard to emulate. ” During Late May and early June 2004, the sculptor was given three sittings with Baroness Thatcher. These took place in the River Room of the Lord Chancellor’s Residence in the House of Lords. “Baroness Thatcher chatted to her assistant Gillian Penrose while I sculpted her. This let me see her face in animation– vital for giving the sculpture a feeling of life.

Her conversation was an intriguing mixture of reminiscence, observation, authority, seriousness and humour, which gave me a powerful impression of the many sides of her character. ” “In the breaks from modelling we discussed my preliminary designs and a range of photographs showing her speaking, including stills from her famous last speech to the Commons on 22 November 1990. She preferred those with “intensity”, which showed her “concentrating on getting the message across”. When I pointed out the hint of humour in the corner of her mouth,

Above At the foundry wax worker Dorota Rapacz removes the silicon rubber mould from the wax cast of the head and shoulders (Photo: Antony Dufort) The separate sections of the hollow wax replica are assembled at the foundry to ensure a good fit. Dorota Rapacz prepares to ‘weld’ the seams, 23 October 2006 (Photo: Antony Dufort) she explained the necessity of not just dominating the audience but “getting the message across by introducing humour…so the audience can relax. ” “As fundamental for the success of the sculpture as the accurate portrayal of her face would be the expression of her character through movement and gesture.

We agreed that it was important not to replicate the gestures of any of the existing statues. She explained how she unobtrusively shifted her weight from one leg to another during a long speech to avoid fatigue and would turn towards her “own people”, the Opposition or Mr. Speaker in turn”. “She demonstrated this and a range of arm movements, and linked movements of the head and upper body as if she were giving just such a speech. She liked the idea of the sculpture “…just having papers in one hand, I think we will ruin things by having too much in. ” The diamond brooch on her

Above The wax sections are covered with layers of ceramic shell. This shell forms the mould when the wax is melted out and the narrow void filled with molten bronze (Photo: Antony Dufort) lapel was a special favourite. So was the bracelet of gold and semi-precious stones, given to her by her husband Denis, so that was included as well. ” “Baroness Thatcher’s professionalism in sitting, friendliness, and willingness to be consulted and to analyse her appearance and ‘body language’ objectively was enormously helpful to me in developing the design and composition of the statue. ”

From material and information gathered during these sittings, the sculptor developed the portrait likeness and the animated composition of the statue. This shows Baroness Thatcher leaning slightly forwards. She supports herself mostly on her right leg, with her left leg lightly flexed. This in turn raises the left heel slightly from the ground. She is ‘making a point’ with her raised right hand and holds notes in her left. Her head is inclined gently to the right. Above Molten bronze at 1200 degrees centigrade is poured into the mould of the top section (head and shoulders) of the sculpture, 10 December 2006 (Photo: Antony Dufort)

Committee Members Peter Ainsworth MP, Frank Doran MP, Hugo Swire MP (Chairman) and Anne Main MP visit Bronze Age Foundry in December 2006 to view the bronze cast of the head and shoulders emerging from the mould (Photo: Terry Moore) A choice from a series of three small preliminary maquettes presented by the sculptor, was made as the ‘design option’ for the half-size ‘working maquette’ by the Works of Art Committee in April 2005. This in turn was unanimously approved in early 2006, and work on enlarging to a scale of one and a quarter above life size began in the sculptor’s former Baptist Chapel Studio in Gloucestershire in February 2006.

After eight months of continuous work, enlarging and then refining the detail and surface of the 7ft ft 4” clay model, moulds were made and taken to Bronze Age Foundry in London. Over the next three and a half months, under the sculptor’s constant supervision, the sculpture was cast, welded, fettled and patinated. After completion on the 9th February 2007, it was transported to the House of Commons and erected on the vacant stone plinth in Members’ Lobby, in readiness for the unveiling ceremony on the 21st February 2007.

Antony Dufort with the wrapped statue as it passes the marble statue of Gladstone in Central Lobby (Photo: Matthew Tugwell) The statue is lifted onto the empty plinth in Members’ Lobby by Keith Baker, James Elliot and associates on 10th February 2007 (Photo: Matthew Tugwell) © Parliamentary Copyright 2007 Designed and Printed by Print Services, Vote Office, House of Commons Back Cover Baroness Thatcher and Antony Dufort in Members’ Lobby after the installation of the statue on 10th February 2007 (Photo: Matthew Tugwell)

Ugly or Beautiful? It is well known that beauty and ugliness are opposites. If that is so, how can art be ugly and beautiful at the same time? Some pieces of art are ugly to the eyes but beautiful mind. The Venus of Willendorf (Venus of Willendorf: 1-3) is an example of such. It is a small figure of a large woman. She has very large breast with skinny little arms rested on top of them. Her breast lay on her even larger stomach, which hangs down to just above her pubic area.

Her pubic area and belly button are well defined but there is only small evidence of nipples. Starting at her wide hips her thighs touch and press together down to the knees, and then become much smaller than the rest of her. Her head is completely wrapped with what seem to be braids, with no face visible. This figure, at first glance, and second, isn’t one of beauty. After all, it is a rather plump nude woman with no face. But, looking closer and noticing where the emphasis lies gives it a different look.

The woman’s breasts, stomach, and pubic area grab the most attention; all three of these being attributes of a woman’s fertility. It seems as though they are being used to show a celebration of her fertility and ability to have strong children like her. Looking deeper into this figure it can go from something ugly to something special. Another example would be Punitavati (Punitavati/Karaikkal Ammaiyar: Intro 8). Punitavati is a bronze sculpture of a rather grotesque woman. She is very lanky.

She sits with her bony legs crossed and spread, her arms in front of her holding a small musical instrument. She has the face of a crone, with large high raised eyebrows, a long protruding nose, and a fang-toothed smile. Her entire body is bone skinny, except for a slight bulge in her stomach. This sculpture was made to symbolize her immense inner beauty. According to legend, this now hag-like woman was once stunning. Her husband had left her because she gave away one of his mangoes to a beggar. She then turned her god, the Hindu Shiva, offering up her beauty.

Shiva accepted, turning her into this figure. Her appalling appearance is used to show the beauty of her generosity and sacrifice. One other would be Rebellious Silence (Shirin Neshat, Rebellious Silence 20-33). This is a photograph of an Iranian woman, she is wearing a traditional Iranian women’s wardrobe, except her face is completely uncovered. Calligraphy is written across her entire face besides her eyes, and straight through the middle of her face she is holding up a gun barrel. This image wouldn’t strike most as an object of “beauty”.

It does grab your attention though. It makes you stare at the woman who is staring so intensely back at you. She wants to make her presence known and speak out in a country that doesn’t see women as equal. She is a strong and defiant woman. The longer you hold her gaze the more you can see the beauty in her braveness. All art may not be pleasing to look at, but a lot of the time there something deeper and more appealing in the meaning. Sometimes you must search to find the beauty of something ugly.

This essay is an attempt to address the marble sculpture commonly known as Laocoon and His Sons, and why exactly I believe it to be a work of high art, of great value and significance to the species. Laocoon and His Sons is a marble sculpture representing a scene that is a part of the tale of the siege and invasion of Troy. Laocoon was the protagonist in a play by Sophocles that is now lost. He was also written about by Virgil.

The statue itself is one of the most famous sculptures of Greek and Roman antiquity, its subject is Laocoon, a Trojan high priest, who, along with his two sons, is – according to legend – attacked and killed by two snakes, or sea serpents. The tale is known as myth, but its content may have symbolic roots in actual historical happenstance. No one is quite sure as of yet how much of that myth may or not be so. The scene depicts Laocoon, the chosen priest of Neptune for the city of Troy, and his sons, in their death throws, overcome by an enormous serpent. Cursed by the gods for either impiety – 3 ccording to Sophocles – or for warning the Trojans of the danger of the Trojan horse – according to Virgil, the serpents were dispatched to do away with Laocoon ‘I tell you there are Greeks hiding in here, shut up in all this wood, or else it is a siege engine designed for use against our walls, to spy on our homes and come down on the city from above, or else there is some other trick we cannot see. Do not trust the horse, Trojans. Whatever it is, I am afraid of Greeks, even when they bear gifts. ’ (Virgil, 2003, p. 26) The scene depicted is the wrath of the gods in action.

The turmoil of the scene, the hopeless agony on the faces of the figures, is so charged with emotion that the forms seem truly alive. This is the first time this caliber of realism is reached in Greek art, in all known human sculpture up to this point in history; and many would submit that it has never been surpassed. The action addressed in this sculptural scene animates it to the point that one forgets that this is apparently an idealized figure born from myth. The despair and pain in Laocoon’s eyes seem to be a pleading to the very gods that doomed him – in his final moments, asking ‘Why have you forsaken me? Achieving this sort of beyond-human realism through the sculpting of marble is particularly remarkable, as marble is known as a notoriously difficult medium to deal with, especially considering the simple tools the artists would have at hand to form this creation. But, the medium, once utilized correctly by skilled hands, is like no other, and has a powerful tone to it. Marble is slightly radioactive, and with statues like Laocoon and His Sons, that radiation can truly be felt. This piece is indeed a testament to Greek craftsmanship, and to the classical Greek culture that is ensouled in this piece.

In Pliny the Elder’s Natural History, Pliny describes the sculpture and retells of his experience of seeing it in Rome some time during the first century CE. However, Pliny doesn’t give an exact date for the creation of the statue – which is unknown. He mentions it was in the palace of the Emperor Titus, and 4 describes it as Laocoon and his children being strangled. From his point of view it was a far superior piece of art to anything else made; paint, bronze or stone. It may have been originally bronze and the marble version a copy, but this is unclear.

Pliny states that it was carved from a single block of marble; by Agesander, Polydorus, and Athenodorus of Rhodes. But, it is pretty clear that the sculpture is not made from one single piece of marble. Does this sully Pliny’s account? Was there another version which he was referring to? History is hearsay. We can’t be sure. One of the pieces defining characteristics, what makes it such a marvel, is how the physique is anatomically perfect. This speaks of a highly developed culture, with an intricate understanding of anatomy and physiology. But, also of a culture that privileges physical strength and beauty.

The Greeks of the time were either artists or warriors, or often both, so strength and beauty were central in their world. Laocoon and His Sons is a much more naturalistic piece than earlier Greek works; in which the figures were often idolized; lacking luster, life, emotion, humanity. Cleobis and Biton, a set of sculptures from the Archaic Period, exemplify this quite well; posing, rigid, golem like figures; lacking the humanity they are supposed to represent. The Hellenistic baroque style of Laocoon and His Sons gives us a much more true-to-life representation in comparison to earlier works.

This work has inspired artists and regular humans alike down through the centuries, one of whom it is particularly well known to have influenced greatly was Michelangelo; as can be seen in some of his pieces; e. g: The rebellious Slave. I summation, I think this piece is truly of note to art historians. Above, I have highlighted some reasons I think this is the case. Bibliography: Virgil, (reprint) 2003. The Aeneid. London: Penguin Classics. Pollitt, J. J. 2006. Art in the Hellenistic Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 5 Pliny, Natural History XXXVI. iv. 37

Marble Female Figure Cycladic Final Neolithic, ca. 4500-4000 BC Bequest of Walter C. Baker, 1971 (1972. 118. 104) “The figure represents a rare type known as steatopygous characterized by particularly full legs and buttocks, and is undoubtedly indicative of fertility. “ RACHELLE DARDEN Rachelle Darden Art History 11 Short writing Assignment 2 The marble female figure is a sculpture selected from the Ancient Greek and Roman Galleries at the Metropolitan Museum in Manhattan. It’s also known as the final Neolithical Cycladic marble.

The figure, now missing its head is an example of an uncommon type known as steatopygous. This sculpture is a representation of the Human Body in which its described by its distinctive features. It has a thin torso or abdomen suggesting a slim like body however it can be defined by its abstract but round shape. This particular piece is non-realistic in which the form of the breasts are in the shapes of what look like rain drops however they don’t look like actual female breasts but because of their placement it’s obvious that’s what they’re supposed to be.

The entire has a plump like nature to in which it suggests that it’s a larger female, not your average female from this era. The thighs on the sculpture are also suggestive because not only are they round but they have a bit of an outline suggesting that they are extra-large which coincides with the rest of the sculpture. The sculptor gave this piece some very distinct features. In fact the most significant piece to this particular sculpture would be the buttocks. The buttocks literally are the largest feature on the sculpture and protrude the rest of the body. The thin yet round abdominal like structure gives the idea of a hin female but definitely a thick one. In contrast, the figure’s upper torso is flat in profile with the arms typically framing V-shaped, pendant breasts. The pudgy, evidently idealized thighs narrow to tiny, stump like feet. However on the feet there are no toes and they don’t stretch out like they would on a regular human body. The body proportions are accurate in which you can tell that this sculpture is a very developed female with a very mature body. Looking at the sculpture there’s also a lot of age because its proportioned so well and has a lot of femininity.

WEEK 1 PREHISTORIC

Hybrid figure, mammoth ivory, ca. 40,000-28,000 BCE – To make: split dry mammoth tusk, scarpe into shape (using sharp blad) – half human, half animal= human dressed as animal for hunting purpose Bear, Chauvet Cave, ca. 30,000-28,000 BCE – hand paintings, hand silhouettes depict animals – took advantage of walls – eg. bump creates bear’s shoulder – discovered in 1994 So-called “Venus of Willendorf,” limestone, ca. 28,000-25,000 BCE – no naturalism- stress fertility emphasizing reproductive features= fertility object Spotted horses and human hands, Pech-Merle Cave, ca. 16,000-15,000 BCE – shamanism- belief in spirit world accessed through alternative states of consciousness – hand dots- can find how many artists painted in one cave – saliva, water, blood- MIXED- applied with brush, finger, moss, chewed stick, feather Rhinoceros, wounded man, and bison, Lascaux Cave, ca. 15,000-13,000 BCE – sense of power – pathetic, no power – powerful Hall of the bulls, Lascaux Cave, ca. 5,000-10,000 BCE – human never lived in Lascaux cave (no objects, remains ; instead; bear bones, torches) – not optical images; instead;

COMPOSITE- many details of animal Stonehenge, ca. 2,100 BCE, Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire, England – marked passing of time/seasons – megalith(stone forming prehistoric monument) in circles= CROMLECHS – simple structure= post and lintel Babylonian deed of sale, clay with cuneiform writing, ca. 1,750 BCE – refined pictogram pressed in series of wedge-shaped signs= CUNEIFORM – used for dministrative accounts ; poetry – invention of writing WEEK 2 SUMERIA;EGYPT Remains of the “White Temple” on its ziggurat, ca. 3500-3000 BCE Uruk, Iraq – Tripartite layout – from 3sides- can see ceremonial ascent of priest ; leaders – stairs- counter clockwise around mound= indirect approach= Mesopotamian temple archietecture Cylinder seal of priest-king feeding sacred sheep, ca. 3300 – cylindrical made of stone with hole running through centre – design carved into surface of seal- when pressed in soft clay= reverse image unfold

Statues from Abu Temple, Tell Asmar, ca. 2700-2500BCE – maybe worshipers – exaggerated eyes- responding to God’s awe, warding off evil Relief Panel of Hesy-ra, ca. 2660 BC – wooden stele nonnaturalistic – 3000 years of same system of showing body – same composite artificial way of showin g body – SHOWS that it was much more important to follow tradition – instead of realism, point is not that they cannot make naturalistic art – this convention was chosen on purpose Imhotep, Step Pyramid and Necropolis of King Djoser, ca. 681-2662 BCE – made for King Djoser-ruled 2630-2611- king djoser@Saqqara- was NECROPOLIS-cemetery -encircling entire complex is rectangular stone wall stretchign over mile in length and 33ft high -DOMINANT FEATURE= STEPPED PYRAMID-oriented to cardinal points of compass – zygarat- elevate temple in mesopotamia- this is not a temple but a grave – this is only image of palace meant for eternity – there was a statue of king in center – believed that soul could live in a staute of king – statue enclosed in a room in center with windows and look out rest of complex so king could live eternily – monumental archeitecture

Royal Standard of Ur, ca. 2600 BCE – bottom= charioteers pulled bu oagers. Riding over enemies – middle= prisoners stripped of clothing ; armor are escorted – top= prisoners brought to central figure- head is off canvas – banquet= top= seated for banquet, cups raised to music played by harp – PANELS represent Kingship Prince Rahotep and Nofret, 2580 BCE – carved from limeston- softer than diorite- painted skin tones, hair, garments, jewelry – rahotep is government official and wife is dependent of king- ritualized gesture in full frontality – rigid frontality norm for royal and elite sculptures

Pyramids of Menkaure, 2533-2515 BCE, Kafra, 2570-2544 BCE, and Khufu, 2601-2528 BCE, Giza pyramid only a part of necropolis- city of dead – King djoser had a mudbrick palace made of wood, mud brick, reeds – has archeitect which suggest how important buildling is – stones cut precicly so that they can interlock together and create smooth surface – pyramid 440ft tall- 45 stories Menkaure and Queen Khamerernebty II, 2515 BCE – carved in one piece with an upright back slab, rigid frontality – almost identical height, left foot forward King is more muscular and half nude and queen draped in thin dress hemmed at ankles= smooth surfaces and high polishestablish appearance of unity – man both arms down and woman arms around man- dependent Seated Scribe, ca 2400 BCE, limestone -frontal, stiff in traditional poses – in earlier society- fat and marks of age could be signs of honour- experience – sallow cheeks, sagging jaw, loose stomach= social status: succeed in career, eats well, relies on subordinates to do physical work on his behalf Head of an Akkadian ruler, ca.

2250-2200 BCE naram-sin (sargan’s grandson) – stretched Akkadian empires – explited art to reflect and establish power= abstract hair and beard= strong symmetry= contrl and order – damage done maybe by Medes- who invaded Nineveh= gaughe eyes, ears and nose hacked= as if really attacking person Great Ziggurat of King Urnammu, Ur, ca. 2100 BCE – Mud bricks: clay mixed with vegetable and straw to prevent clay cracking when dry – mud mixture put into wodden frames- knocked out and backed under sun – joined wall with wet clay – not durable so sealed with BITUMEN buttresses= articulate walls= impression of strength, lines= add dynamic energy, 100 steps Stele with the Law Code of Hammurabi, ca. 1760 BCE – TOP- hammurabi appears in relief- standing with arm raised in greeting before the enthroned sun-god Shamash- god’s shoulders emanate sun rays- god extends hand, holding rope ring and the measuring rod of kingship= THIS GESTURE unifies scene’s composition and purpose of the two leading characters – smaller scale of Hammurabi compared to seated god= “shepherd” rather than god himself

Female figurine, 12th-13th dynasties (ca. 1650 BCE), faience – object placed in tombs along with dead – from tomb in Thebes, represents a schematized woman- legs stop at knees, restrict her mobility/ or legs maybe not essential to her function – painted cowrie-shell girdle to emphasize belly and hips, delineate breats and pubic area= function may have been as fertility objects, enhance family continuity – blue-green color of faience associated with fertility, regeneration and goddess hathor Temple of Hatshepsut, ca. 478-1458 BCE – New Kingdom funerary temple= Hatshepsut- female king – crowning pyramid- mastaba and terraces extending into cliff face – ascending white limestone courts, linked by wide ramps on a central axis – trees lined entrance way and paired sphinxes faced each other Queen Hatshepsut kneeling, ca. 1473-1458 BCE – Hatshepsut kneeling as she makes offering – because kingship is male office, she wears regalia of a male king(kilt, false beard and nemes headdress(striped cloth worn by kings))

Akhenaten and his family, 1355 BCE – akhenaten with family- consort Nefertiti and 3 oldest daughters – sun life-giving beams radiate downward with hands at their terminals- reed columns suggest scene is within garden pavilion stocked with wine jars – king and wife sit facing each othe on stools- hold daughters, on laps, in arms, uniting composition with animated gestures- contrast to STATIC quality of scenes of other times – emphasis on daughters’ childishness marks change

Akhenaten, 1353-1335 BCE – break dramatically long-established conventions for depicting royal subjects- different proportions- narrow shoulders, lacking musculature, marked potbelly, wide hips, generous thighs, large lips, distinctive nose, chin, narrow eyes make face recognizable. Queen Tiy, 1352 BCE Akhenaten’s mother- used dark wood of yes tree with precious metls and semiprecious stones for details – downturned mouth and modeled lines running from sides of nose to mouth= advancing years – initially queen wore gold jewlry and silver headdress decorated with golden cobras= identify her with funerary goddesses Isis and Nepthys – wig embellished with glass beads topped with plumed crown Queen Nefertiti, 1348-1335 BCE – Nefertiti’s bust- plastered over limestone core and painted – left eye not inished- bust remained unfinished but elegance still derives from sculptor’s command of geometry The weighing of the heart and judgment of Osiris The Book of the Dead of Hunefer, 1285 BCE books of dead – instructions on how to escape the great beast and make it through afte rlife – needed to go ceremony and weight their heart with ostrich feather- if free from sin- heart should be lighter than ostrich feather Temple of Ramses II, Abu Simbel, ca. 1279-1213 BCE Ramesses commissioned most architectural projects- including monumental temple – king marked his claim to the land of Kush in Lower Nubia(origin of old, viroy and enimal pelts) – between statues’ legs- small figures represent member of royal family.

INTERIOR- colossal figures of Ramesses- 32ft Fugitives crossing a river, ca. 883-859 BCE – walls covered with large scale stone reliefs – narrative images- painted in places for emphasis- glorified king with detailed depictions – archer and two women look on with hands raised NO RELATIVE SCALE, primary purpose of scenes to recount specific enemy conquests Gate of Citadel of Sargon II, with lamassu, 742-706 BCE (photo taken during excavation) – lamassu- great guaridian figures – powerful and terrifying deities to anyone who might enter – embody king’s fearful authority- tall horned headdresses, deep-set eyes, powerful muscularity of legs and bodies Reconstruction of Citadel of Sargon II, Dur Sharrukin, ca. 21-705 BCE – Sargon II had plan for city of Dur Sharrukin where he had royal residence – unexcavated but estimate to cover a square mile – enclosed within an imposing mud-brick wall – 30 court yards- 200 rooms Lion hunt, ca. 645 BCE – king slay lion – way of demonstrating power over beast – EGYPT- royal lion hunts were events that took place in palace grounds – roal attendants released animals from cages into a square formed by troops with shields – ritual symbolic showcasing king’s strength and serving as metaphor for military skills

Palette of King Narner, ca. 310-3125 BCE – TOP CENTER: hieroglyphs spell out narmer’s name – BESIDE hieroglyphs= cow heads represent sky goddess – LEFT= King Narmer holds enemy by hair and raises mace- sign of kingship – KING- wears white crown of Upper Egypt and belt of kilt hangs tail of bull- symbole of power kings wear as part of ceremonial dress-larger scale establish authority – BOTTOM-enemy stripped of clothing- humiliateion – BEHIND king attendant carries king’s sandals RIGHT of Narmer appears falcon holding rope – OTHER SIDE- king wears red crown of LOWER egypt- by sandal carrier and long-hared figure= FOLOWS FOUR people holding something to inspect bodies of prisoners with their heads between their legs – CENTRAL register= 2 animals roped by male figure- twist long necks to frame a circle in composition – symmetrical, balanced= ma’at – LOWER- bull rep. king attack city and tramples down enemy – COMMUNICATE BY!!!! ombine several diff types of signs on one object – some literal representations and symbolic representations- bull=strength – MESSAGE: king embodied unified UPPER and LOWER EGYPT- though human, he occupied divine office shown by placement of name in sky WEEK 3 GREEK Amphora with meander pattern and funeral, ca. 750 BCE – vase from cemetery- known as Dipylon Vase- one of a group of large vessels Athenians used as funerary markers over burials- holes in its base allowed mourners to pour liquid offerings during funerary rituals- ashes of dead inside vases placed

Black-figured amphora Exekias, Achilles and Ajax Playing Dice, ca. 540-530 BCE – black-figured technique- painted design in black silhouette against reddish clay- incised details into design with needls, painted white and purple over black to make chosen areas stand out – Athenian amphora- signed by Exekias- both potter and painter- painting shows Homeric heroes Achilles and Ajax playing dice- episode not exist in surviving literary sources- two figures lean on their spears; shields stacked behind them – black silhouettes create rhythmical composition, symmetrical around table in center

Kouros, ca. 540-525 BCE (means youth) – male- slim, broad-shouldered, left leg forward, arms by side, clenched fists, shoulders, hips and knees are level Kore, ca. 530 BCE (wearing a peplos) (means maiden) – female- -BOTH HAVE stylized wig-like hair, show techniques and proportional systems used by Egyptian sculptors- rigid, frontal, four distinct sides, no backslab, (GREEK: space between forms, public nudity acceptable for males/not females. EGYPT: figures embedded in stone. forced nudity on slaves) Red-figured amphora: Euthymides, Dancing revelers, ca. 510-500 BCE – black-fig. imit artist to incision for detail- develop red-figured tech- scence not dependent on profiles- freedom with brush translates into freedom of movement in dancing- range of poses, twisting bodies, age of intensive and self-conscious experimentation Red-figured kylix (wine cup) Douris painter, Eos and Memnon, ca.

490-480 BCE – Eos, goddess of dawn lifts limp body of her dead son, Memnon whom Achilles killed- Douris(maker)- traces contours of limbs beneath drapery and balances vigorous outlines with more delicate strokes- dead weight of memnon’s body contrats with lift of Eos’ wings Kritios Boy’, ca. 480 BCE (marble) – contrapposto – weight shifted creating asymmetry in two sides of his body. Knee of forward leg is lower than the other, right hip is thrust down and in, left hip up and out, axis of body not straight vertical line, reversed S-curve – stands at ease- CHIASTIC POSE (balanced asymmetry of relaxed natural stance) – muscles suggest motion Temple of Hera II at Paestum, ca. 460 BCE building made of DORIC order simple capital, no base, columns sit directl on step platform – columns look massive, little space between them – archeitects worried about rooms falling down Zeus or Poseidon, ca. 460-450 BCE, bronze – nude bronze from sea near Greek coast- 7ft tall- depicts spread-eagled male figure in act of throwing- Zeus casting thunderbolt or Poseidon throwing his trident. -sculptor catures and contrasts vigorous action and firm stability- express god’s awe-inspiring power.

Shows artist’s understand of bodies in motion and also knowledge of strength of bronze= allow god’s arms to stretch out without support. Warrior, ca. 450 BCE, found in the sea off of Riace, Italy – over-life-size figure found in sea near Riace- used lost-wax technique- not just cutting away stone- artist build clay model- where marble absorb light, bronze surface reflect= explore surface texture for hair and skin Roman copy after a bronze original by Myron, Diskobolos, ca. 50 BCE – bronze, Myron condensed a sequence of movements into single pose, achieved through violent twist of torso that brings the arms into same place as legs -Pose conveys essence of action by presenting coiled figure in perfect balance Iktinos and Kallikrates, Parthenon, 447-432 BCE – building made when athens was at war- created by money in military- dominant temple on Akropolis- Perikles conceived it to play focal role in cult of Athena- chief center of cult practice remained on Erechtheion(north f Parthenon)- built of gleaming white marble- Architects Iktinor and Kallikrates – OCTASTYLE(eight-column arrangement)- continuous sculpted frieze runs around all sides in variation of Ionic style- depicts procession moving from west-east- horsemen jostle with musicians,water carriers, sacrificial beasts- figures overlap to create illusion of crowd- encircling colonnade gave impression that visitor can approach temple from all sides.

– appears less massive than TEMPLE OF HERA II at PAESTUM= columns more slender, capitals smaller and less flaring-cornice projects less. East freize of the Parthenon, ca. 440 BCE part of festival held to honor Athena- exalts mortal Greeks by deicting them in space reserved for divine and mythological scenes. – cloth is a new robe for Athena(woven by Athenian girls and depicting Athen’as triumph against giants in gigantomachy) Model of Pheidias, Athena Parthenos, ca. 438 BCE – enormous statue of Athena by sculptor PHEIDIAS- stood with one hand supporting a personification of Victory, and shield resting against her side. Figure out of ivory and gold(combo known as CHRYSTELEPHANTINE)- supported by wooden armature- valuable Three goddesses, from the east pediment of the Parthenon, ca. 38-432 BCE – Hestia, Dione and Aphrodite (recent, Leto, Artemis, Aphrodite)- pediment figures embedded in building- forms are strong and solid- masterpiece of swirling drapery, garments cling to bodies beneath as if wet- drapery not follow lines of body- there is twisting around legs(struggle with them) Temple of Athena Nike, 427-424 BCE, Akropolis, Athens (ionic order) – has a bas- thinner columns- taller- fluting on columns is like womens robe or skirt- base is like shoes- more feminin and elegant- tiny temple of athena nike- godess of wisdom and war- nike= Victoria

Akropolis, Athens, 421-405 BCE – dedicated to goddess Athena Erechtheion, 421-405 BCE, Akropolis, Athens – Mnesikles’ project-architext had to deal with difficult terrain- built to serve several religious functions- included four rooms and basement on western side- two porches attached to its flanks- one dedicated to Poseidon face north and is main entrance- smaller one juts out toward Parthenon

Erechtheion, Porch of the Maidens 421-405 BCE, Akropolis, Athens – 6 caryatids of columns support roof- represent women of Caryae (city-state in Peloponnese that formed alliance with Persians in Persian wars)- when war over, Greeks took women as slaves- architects THUS designed images of these women to bear the burden of their state’s dishonor in perpetuity Nike, from the balustrade of the Temple of Athena Nike, ca. 10-407 BCE – Nike taking off sandles-about to step on holy ground-wings keep her stable so she performs awkward act with elegance and ease- Pheidian style evident in deeply cut folds of her “wet look” garments clinging to her body and fall in deep swags between her legs. Grave stele of Hegeso, ca. 410-400 BCE – Pheidian style recognizable in drapery and also in smooth planes of faces- delicacy of carving clear in forms fathest away from viewer- servant’s left arm, veil behind Hegeso’s right hsoulder= relief merges with background strengthening illusion that background is empty space rather than solid surface.

Roman copy after an original by Praxiteles, Aphrodite of Knidos original from ca. 340-330 BCE – first nude monumental statue of godess in Greek world- about to bathe, or rising from bath- right hand, she covers nudity in gesture of modesty, grasping for robe with her left- head slightly turned so does not engage viewer’s gaze directly Roman copy after an original by Praxiteles, Hermes and the infant Dionysius original from ca. 320-310 BCE – Hermes holding infant Dionysos- sandals=roman in style- chiastic pose is exaggerated and creates fuly relaxed curve of torso- youthful more than athletic

WEEK 4 ROMAN & ITALY Ara Pacis Augustae, 13-9 BCE – Republican practice of commissioning narrative reliefs to record specific events- reliefs mounted on public buildings and monuments(ara pacias augustae) Imperial procession, Ara Pacis Augustae, 13-9 BCE below: Parthenon frieze, ca. 440 BCE – inclusion of women and small children= denote importance of dynasty as well as referring to moral legislation Augustus enacted to promote child-birth among the elite. Roman copies of a Greek original by Lysippos, Portrait of Alexander the Great, original late 4th C.

BCE – to have idealized quality- planes are smooth especially around brow and individuality emerge in unruly hair, raised at fron (cowlick) and twist of head- does not engage with a viewer- has distant gaze The Abduction of Persephone, wall painting in Tomb 1, Vergina, ca. 340-330 BCE – from small tomb at Vergina- subject=abduction of Persephone- appropriate to funeral setting-Pluto-carries away Persephone to be queen-pluto seizes Persephone into speeding chariot-her handmaiden rearing back in fright The Battle of Alexander and the Persians mosaic copy of ca. 00 BCE of a Hellenistic painting of ca. 315 BCE – roman copies of Greek wall painting- may be copy of Philoxenos’ painting- depicts Darius and the fleeing Persians on right and damaged left-hand portiong depict figure of Alexander- mosaic- follows four—color scheme(yellow,red,black,white)- widely used in late 4th century Portrait, called “Brutus,” ca. 300 BCE rome- develop upon greek style-form art that became popular in this period= REALISTIC PORTRAIT lips thin, lips one over the other, overbite= similar notion of greek emphasis on individual = maybe a republican ideal, showing elf as god, flaws, suggest philosophical stance Epigonos of Pergamon (? ), Dying Gaul trumpeter, perhaps a Roman copy of a bronze original of ca.

230-220 BCE – found in Sanctuary of Athena on Akropolis of Pergamon- sculptor identifies enemy as Gaul through his bushy hair and moustache and by torque around his neck(braided gold band)- dies sinking quietly to ground/struggling to prop imself up as blood pours from wound in chest. Drunken old woman and market woman, Roman copies of originals of ca. 00 BCE – depict unidealized and realistic everyday life- genre=Hellenistic realism- Roman- crouches on ground, clasping wine bottle, head flung far back-wrinkles cover face, skin on her exposed shoulder and chest sags with age- wears buckled tunic= identify as member of wealthy social class- (other sculptures of this kind focus on rustic life on poor) Nike of Samothrace, ca. 190 BCE – celebrates naval victories-nike-means victory- of Eudamos- Rhodian marble of sculpture’s base suggest sculpture comes from Rhodes.

Victory goddess seems to be landing on prow of ship as if to bestow crown of victory upon Eudamos- maybe about to take flight, massive wings soar out behind her, wings make statue appear weightless despite mass of stone- neither leg holds the body’s full weight. Great Altar of Zeus at Pergamon, ca. 166-156 BCE – Eumenes II or Attalos II built it to commemorate territorial victories over Pontos and Bithynia and establishment of a grand victory festival(Nikephoria). Altar stood high on a podium with large rectangular encloser defined by Ionic colonnade. wide staircase at fron provided access. Stood on Pergamene Akropolis- reconstructed in Berlin-frieze encircle base-extends 400ft in length and 7ft in height-subject is battle of Gods and Giants Athena and the giants, from the frieze of the Great Altar of Zeus at Pergamon, ca. 166-156 BCE – muscular bodies rush at each other, overlapping, entwining, wings beat and barments blow in wind or twist around those they robe, texture contrasts with smoothness of giants’ flesh. -giants’ emotion – agonize in torment of defeat- brows creased in pain

Sanctuary of Fortuna Primigenia, Praeneste, early 1st C. BCE -in italy- made to celebrate military victory of sola- oracular center where priests interpreted divine will- architec used concrete to mold structures over entire surface of hillside and to craft spaces- sanctuary ascend in 7 levels- BOTTOM=basilica&senate house- UPPOER TERRACE=rose in grand crescendo-4TH=colonnaded exedrae framed altars Wall paintings from the villa of Publius Fannius Synistor at Boscoreale, mid 1st.

Century BCE – second style- employed architectural vistas to open wall into a fantasy realm suggest another world beyond room Portrait of a man, early 1st century BCE – wrinkles cover face, etching deep crags into cheeks and brows- depicted distinguishing marks=warts,hooked nose, receding hairline Temple of Portunus, Rome, ca. 80-70 BCE – borrow Greek forms- in Italic style- stands on podium and engaged lateral columns emphasize frontal approach- Ionic coluns have slender proportions of Classical Greek temples Scenes of Dionysiac mystery cult, Villa of the Mysteries, Pompei, ca. 0-50 BCE – 1st of MAU’S FOUR STYLES OF PAINTING-(4 styles of roman wall painting=: used paint and stucco to imitate expensive colored marble paneling- lower part of walla(the dado) and upper section above the cornice level are painted in rich mottled colors to resemble exotic stone

Wall painting of a garden, Villa of Livia at , ca. 20 BCE fresco -dining room- painted on all of the walls and ceiling so it looks like you are in a garden- frescos on all sides- light hitting different kinds of leaves- birds- leaves move in the wind- moving sensation , possibly a later copy of an original of ca. 0 CE – depicted as ageless youth- appears in battledress with arm raised in gesture of address- – romans clothe sculptures, relaxed gesture- armor- pictures of his family, battles- represent life in armor- showing status- romans show specificperson- more political purpose, leading war with hand, armor, heigh preist, leader-CUPID=rides dolphin- acts as strut to strengthen marble- dolphin eoked sea Wall paintings, Ixion room, House of the Vettii, Pompei, 63-79 CE – fourth style- united aspects of all three preceding styles tocreate extravagant effect- combine imitationmarble paneling, framed mythological scenes resembling panel pictures set into wall Atrium of the House of the Vettii, Pompei, 2nd century BCE-79 CE – eilte Roman house-distinct feature=atrium-square of oblong central hall lit by opening in roof with shallow pool(impluvium) in ground to collect rainwater-airy quality=grandeur upon house, romans kept portraits of ancestors

WEEK 5ROMAN & BYZANTINE Icon of the Madonna Enthroned, late 13th c. CE, tempera Interior, Cathedral of Monreale, Italy, 1180-1190 CE Interior, St. Mark’s, Venice, begun 1063 CE Dome with mosaic of the Pantocrator, 11th c. CE Church of the Dormition, Daphni, Greece Crucifixion, mosaic, 11th c. CE Church of the Dormition, Daphni, Greece Emperor Justinian and his attendants, 547 CE mosaic, San Vitale, Ravenna Empress Theodora and her attendants, 547 CE mosaic, San Vitale, Ravenna Anthemius of Tralles and Isidorus of Miletus, Hagia Sophia, Istanbul (previously Constantinople), 532-7 CE San Vitale, Ravenna, 526-47 CE Interior, San Vitale, Ravenna, 526-47 CE

Icon of Christ, 6th c. CE, encaustic Iconoclasm Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, Ravenna, 425-50 CE Good Shepherd, mosaic, Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, Ravenna, 425-50 CE The Good Shepherd and Stories of Jonah, 4th c. CE Catacomb of Ss. Pietro e Marcellino, Rome Constantine the Great, early 4th century CE – large and deeply carved eyes- see something beyond this world-soft modeling to cheeks and mouth-more natural than tetrach-full cap of hair and absense of beard it reference to Trajan and Augustus Santa Costanza, Rome, ca. 350 CE Interior of Old St. Peter’s, Rome, built 324-400 CE (drawing by Jacopo Grimaldi, 1619) – Arch of Constantine, Rome, 312-315 CE people of rome dedicated triple-bayed arch to Constantine near colosseum to celebrate 10 year anniversary- largest imperial arches- little of sculptural relief on its surface was specifically designed for this monument- – free-standing Dacian capties on attic originated in Trajan’s Forum as did Trajanic Frieze on ends of attic and inside central bay- Arch of Constantine, 312-315 CE detail of Hadrianic rondels and Constantinian relief Constantine addressing a crowd, Arch of Constantine, 312-15 CE – figures crowd the scene- heads are disproportionatel large- bodies stocky- poses unnaturally rigid- lines cared on flat surface render anatomical details- second row of heards arranged above first indicates recession- The Tetrarchs, 305 CE, porphyry during tetrachy-portraiture took radically abstract quality- two porphyry sculptural groups mounted on columns- each group shows two tetrachs in elaborate military dress with bird-headed sword hilts and flat pannonian caps=represent powerful Illyrian officer class-proportions are squat and nonnaturalistic, facial features abstract rather than individualized.

=portrait suggest authority resides in office of emperor not in who holds office. =sameness of portraits underlines the tetrachs equality-porphyry-hard Egyptian stone reserved for imperial use Hadrian’s Villa, Tivoli, 130-138 CE – emperor built magnificient residence for self- built on site of Republican villa- villa’s form follo natural line of landscape but massive earthworks rearranged terrain to accommodate architecture – water is a common feature- in pools, running channels=adding sound,motion,reflecting light, offering coolness in summer heat-canal has been known as CANOPUS Pantheon, Rome, 117-125 CE Augustus’ right-han dman=Agrippa built first Pantheon-name intended it as temple to gods- fire destroyed this temple and Domitian built reconstruction- Pantheon now work of Trajan’s architect=APOLLODORUS- completed in Hadrian’s reign-

In roman times pantheon stood raised on a podium at south end of large rectangular court-octastyle facade- dome pierced with 27ft hole(OCULUS open to sky)- 143ft(total interior height is also dome’s diameter=sphere=eternity and perfection Trajan’s Column, Rome, 106-113 CE (height 38 m) – support gilded statue of emperor- winding through interior of shaft is a spiral staircase leading to a viewing platform- credited as work of Apollodorus-role as velvedere(viewing station) Titus riding in triumph, Arch of Titus, 81 CE rides triumphal chariot, high above a teeming crowd- horses appear in profile but chariot is frontal=illusion that procession is approaching viwer before turning sharply- behind emperor-personification of victory crowns him for his success Procession of spoils from the Temple in Jerusalem, Arch of Titus, 81 CE – soldiers carry booty through the streets including seven-branched menorah and other sacred furniture looted from Temple- panel marks important move toward spatial illusionism Colosseum, Rome, 72-80 CE – held over 50 000 spectators-concrete-faced with travertine- 80 arched entrances led into building framed with tuscan columns- second story, Ionic columns framed second set of arches, third engaged Corinthian columns. WEEK 6

Sinan, Mosque of Selim II, 1569-74, Edirne, Turkey Sultan-Muhammed, Allegory of Heavenly and Earthly Drunkenness, from a manuscript of the Divan of Hafiz, 1529 Detail of a carpet from Iran, ca. 1575-1600 Behzad, Poor man refused admittance to a mosque, from a manuscript of the Bostan of Sa’di, 1486 CE Court of the Lions, Alhambra, 14th c. CE, Granada, Spain Dome, Hall of the Abencerrajes, Alhambra, 14th c. CE, Granada, Spain Cloak of Roger II of Sicily, 12th c. CE The Temptation and Fall, Doors of Bishop Bernward, Hildesheim Cathedral, ca. 1015 CE Detail of qibla wall, Great Mosque, Cordoba, 10th c. CE Interior of Prayer Hall, Great Mosque, Cordoba, 8th-10th c.

CE St. Matthew, from the Gospel Book of Archbishop Ebbo of Reims, 816-835 CE St. Matthew, from the Gospel Book of Charlemagne, ca. 800-810 CE Equestrian Statue of a Carolingian Ruler, 9th C Kufic script from a Qu’ran, 9th c. Chi Rho Iota Page, Book of Kells, ca. 800 CE St. Matthew, Lindisfarne Gospels, tempera on vellum, ca. 700 CE Cross Page, Lindisfarne Gospels, tempera on vellum, ca. 700 CE Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem, ca. 690 and later Interior, Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem, ca. 690 CE and later Belt buckle, Sutton Hoo Ship Burial, ca. 600-650 CE Purse cover, Sutton Hoo Ship Burial, ca. 600-650 CE Clasp, Sutton Hoo Ship Burial, ca. 600-650 CE