Art History Comparcomparisons - Assignment Example

Art History Exam 3 Comparison #1 Kallikrates and Iktinos, Parthenon, Athens, 447 B.C., Doric Unknown, Altar of Zeus, Pergamon, 180 B.C., Hellenistic Images of the Parthenon and the Altar of Zeus immediately present viewers with similar impressions of grand scale, carefully measured proportions and awe-inspiring statuary. With each having been built to celebrate the prosperity and power of their rulers, the history behind the construction of each building is quite similar. While the Parthenon was built during the height of Athens’ prosperity, celebrating the recent signing of a peace treaty and therefore the beginning of an era of peace, the Altar of Zeus was built to celebrate recent victories in the war against Gaul and the anticipation of another period of peace to follow. To achieve this inspiring affect, each building makes heavy use of stairs to gain entry and tall columns representing the measurements of the Golden Rule to express both their impressive size and their perfection of form. Despite the fact that the Altar of Zeus was built with the Parthenon in mind, builders opted to use Ionic columns that were considered more modern than the Doric style used in the earlier building. In addition to the actual construction, both structures use life-sized or taller statues to celebrate the greatness of the civilization that constructed it while also telling the story of the gods as a means of honoring the power and wisdom of the ruler of the day. The Parthenon’s friezes depicted scenes of battles between the gods and mythological races such as the giants and the centaurs, as well as the defeat of the Amazons and what is believed to be the citizens of Troy, images that are repeated by obvious Parthenon inspiration in the Altar of Zeus. However, the Altar of Zeus concentrates on depicting scenes from battles between the gods and the giants, rather than illustrating scenes with the other races. The buildings might have been used in different ways as well. While the use of the Parthenon is in some debate, definitely used as a treasury and possibly also as a temple, the Altar to Zeus was built specifically to be a temple. Comparison #2 Anthemios of Tralles and Isidoros of Miletos, Church of Hagia Sophia, Istanbul, 537 AD, Byzantine Apollodorus of Damascus, The Pantheon, Rome, 125 AD, Roman Comparing these two images, there are several immediately obvious similarities, most prominent being the large domes of each, the vertical columns and the predominantly square base structure. There remain some significant differences as well. Even though the dome of the Church of Hagia Sophia seems to be larger, thanks to the emphasis it receives by the vertically reinforcing influence of the tall windows along its sides, the dome of the Pantheon is actually somewhat larger, having been considered the largest dome in architecture until the completion of Brunelleschi’s Duomo. The dome of the Church of Sophia Hagia also seems taller because of the external soaring and tapering vertical spires placed at the outside corners of the church as opposed to the somewhat truncated Corinthian columns of the Pantheon, which are further dwarfed by the oversized pediment obviously intended for taller supports. While the dome of the Church of Sophia Hagia remains prominent, the dome of the Pantheon seems to hide behind its front façade. Uses for each building remained significantly different as well as the Pantheon seems to have been intended as a temple to all the gods worshipped by Roman citizens, regardless of the names by which they were worshipped. By contrast, the Church of Sophia Hagia was the original seat of the Orthodox patriarch of Constantinople, what would evolve to become the Holy Catholic Church, and was also the location for many of the imperial functions of the day. Despite this difference in use, in both cases, the dome itself was intended to mimic the heavens and bring a sense of the higher powers, of the one religion or of the many, to those using the building. Comparison #3 Krito, Kritian Boy, Acropolis, Athens, 480 BC, Late Archaic. Unknown artist, Augustus of Prima Porta, 15 BC, Imperial. Both the Kritian Boy and the Augustus of Prima Porta manage to make the cold, hard, unyielding and lifeless white of the marble take on a supple, almost lifelike flow thanks to the skill of the artist. In each form, the beauty of the human body can be discerned complete with muscular structure and a more natural body position than sculptures of the earlier periods denoted. One glaring difference between the two statues, though, is the use of clothing in the Augustus statue, which is completely missing in the Kritian Boy. This indicates the difference in focus in the creation of each statue – one being created as a means of exploring the expression of the human body in all its perfection and the other as a means of commemorating a great leader and as a piece of propaganda, reminding viewers of this man’s most accomplished deeds and connections. This is also evidenced by the inclusion of additional details in the Augustus statue, such as the small cupid riding a dolphin clinging to the robes of August as a reminder of his godly connection to Venus, and the absolute lack of additional adornments in the Kritian Boy. It can also be seen that a great many advances had been made in the techniques of sculpting between the time of the creation of the Kritian Boy and the making of Augustus of Prima Porta. The rather stiff carriage of the Kritian Boy, despite his accurate contra-posto positioning, is also expressed in the hollow eyes, expressionless arms and smaller scale. The statue of Augustus, however, not only conveys the accurate rendition of musculature, but also the sweeping, flowing movements of his clothing. His body position is placed in a pose of authority, placing the balance of the body upon the front foot rather than the back and his arms are raised in attitudes of address and power. Comparison #4 Unknown artist, Sarcophagus from Cerveteri, Guilia Rome, 520 BC, Etruscan Archaic Unknown artist, Sarcophagus of Junius Bassus, Rome, 359 AD, Byzantine (Early Christian) These two sarcophagi obviously each have a similar purpose, those of interring the dead with respect and dignity in a way that reinforces the position they held in life. In addition, they each differ significantly from the artistic traditions of the Greeks and Romans, who had held sway throughout much of history to this point. In the case of the Etruscan sarcophagus, it was unusual for the Greeks or the Romans to give much attention or focus upon the presence of the woman in a relationship, while the Etruscans obviously valued their female counterparts as an integral part of their lives, as evidenced by her presence in the burial practice. In addition, it is created in such a way as to give the impression that the couple is lounging upon a couch as they might have been seen together in life, rather than posed in a supine position as dead. In the case of the Junius Bassus sarcophagus, many tiny figures are carved to decorate as many surfaces as might be viewed. These figures represent both the early Christian ideals as well as the lingering Roman paganism that was prevalent at the time. While they are both carved somewhat in the Greek tradition in the sense of a presence of muscle mass and lifelike features, the figures used in both of these sarcophagi represent a significant shift away from the ideals of Greek art into a more expressive, abstract format. The dimensions of the Etruscan figures are purposely altered so as to fit more perfectly upon the lid of the sarcophagus, as well as to bring the focus of the viewer to bear more upon the faces of those figures, suggesting a more spiritual interpretation. Likewise, the figures placed on the Junius sarcophagus are carved with exaggerated heads to represent the spiritual as well as larger than normal hands, to focus upon the ideals of work that was a strong component of early Christian values as well as to properly hide the more blatant nakedness of some of these characters. Comparison #5 Unknown artist, Empress Theodora and her Attendants, Church of San Vitale Ravenna, 547 A.D., Byzantine. Unknown artist, Athena Battling Alkyoneos, Altar of Zeus Pergamon, 180 B.C., Hellenistic. Although both Empress Theodora and Athena are celebrating a victory of their deities, the two works are actually quite different. Athena is a frieze located on the Altar of Zeus that depicts a hard-fought battle between the goddess Athena and the giant Alkyoneos during the battle between the Olympians and the Giants for world domination. This depiction portrays all of the classic Greek traditions, including perfection of form, definition of musculature and attention to detail in the flowing forms of the garments worn and the expressive facial characteristics that clearly indicate the pain Alkyoneos is feeling as Athena drags him by his hair. A great deal of motion can be discerned as Athena’s figure balances toward the right, with weight seemingly being transferred to the right foot and Alkyoneos’ head moves to the right as well, in direct opposition to the motion of the rest of his body, which is straining to the left. By contrast, the Empress Theodora is shown in stiff Byzantine style, ensuring all figures are properly covered from head to toe and rendered in a stylistic rather than realistic format. The figures are stiff and static, showing much less indication of movement to either side. The only suggestions of motion occurring exists in the upraised arm of the left figure as it holds the curtain aside for the blessing of the Christ child, the slightly rightward leaning figure next to Theodora and the action of Theodora’s hands holding the chalice that will bless the ceremony. Read More