Truth and Beauty

Eassy 3b

Truth And Beauty

THE QUESTION: Using specific art references, why did Greeks concider "beauty" to be the same as "truth" and how different was this philosophy from that of the Romans.

Part One

SUMMARY: in selecting this topic question i already had envisions of the differences in Greek and Roman artwork. I also had a very good idea of what greek artwork was and what it meant to the culture. unfortunately i did not have that same mentality towards the Romans.

REASON: personally it's a comparison of the greeks and romans. Artwork isnt just something fancy that is displayed ( well for some it is ) it is a means of showing a particular truth ( whether is is truthful or not is another question). It was a nice way to see that Romans didn't exactly take everything from the Greeks but branched off of their ideas, they did not continue along the same path but another.

PURPOSE: same as the reason in this case? I mean it seems it was to understand the culture through their artwork and why they used it.

DIRECTION: I gained a new opinion on Roman artwork. It may have the same characteristics of the Greeks but that is where it ends in many of the cases.

IMPRESSIONS: my aha was remembering that i had to write this in the span of a few days. But really I find art interesting and it says alot about the history of a culture. I think many people seem to look back at Greek and Roman as the "true" realism.

Part Two

       Realism is typically valued on how life-like a piece of art work is. Much of realism people first think of are Greek and Roman artwork. Ironic because for one, it truely was as if a bit of life is being stored within the piece, where as the other, wished there was.
       In Greek artwork for one they show us, humanism, rationalism and idealism (Stokstad 117). Since their early classical age, there seemed to be an incredible spread of these "ism's". They are even more apparant in their art work.
       As a young artist myself I look to thses not just as splendid pieces of art, but as an inspiration on how style. Greeks werent trying to just recreate what they may or maynot have seen in front of them. A teacher once told me "draw what you see." Those were the greatest arrangement of words that had ever ventured through my ears. It was a freedom to develop a syle in which reality could then be produced from it. realism was not just how accurately the lines fell on the page, but how well you could depict what it meant to everything around it. That is what the Greeks identified as beauty.
       Their works of art aren't just a beautiful representation or recreation of them. They were the appriecatation of the subject. They seemed to be able to reveal the beauty in the subject and inject a life into their art work instead of trying to find life in it.
       An example would be "Warrior", (Stokstad 126).


"Warrior"
Bronze Statue with bone and glass eyes, silver teeth, and copper lips and nipples. 460-450BCE
http://culturedart.blogspot.com
 

       "The Warrior reveals a striking balance between the idealized smoothness of "perfected" anatomy conforming to Early Classical standards and the reproduction of details observed from nature (Stokstad 125)." Beauty was around the Greeks. Beauty could be defined as a pebble, because it may play a role in their life. The Warrior above may represent many things in terms of power and stature of the Greek military but, it shows beauty. Taking this ordinary figure and emblishing it; with the addition of the bone and glass it is as if the man is staring out through time. But that doesn't mean every scupture with those eyes are all the same. In seeing the beauty in this man and figure, he or she found it adamante to portray the facial features in different materials. It is interesting that so many things may be communicated through a few muscles in the face alone before anyone even speaks a word.
      Whereas the same piece from Rome shows something completely different.

Head of A Man (Traditionally Known as "Brutus")
Bronze, eyes of painted ivory 300BCE
http://www.bluffton.edu

       Although the same style is achieved here, Romans beauty in death. Almost in the same sence of the Egyptians. The character may not have been a good or ruler but they were created to have a likeness (Stokstad 171). It wasn't nessecarily the beauty in the figure anymore but what they represented in the past. It showed who they were in life. It wasn't about the beauty about the subject but to inform people of the subject.
       This also can be seen in their pottery as well.


Dionysos With Maenads
Black figure on amphora. Ceramic. 540BCE
http://www.dipity.com
 

        This Greek Amphora displays maenads, worshippers of Dionysos, interacting with the greek god of wine. "The encounter between humans and a god appear to be a joyful, celebratory occasion (Stokstad 117)." Even though this piece curves it shows such perfect perspective on the human body; although taken from any other angle they would appear deformed and stretched. The artist didn't care though, because they seemed to have the picture show an embodiment of life.
       whereas the Romans displayed stories.

The Ficoroni Cista
Bronze, etched figures. 350-300BCE
http://www.emforster.info

This is an artistic piece, telling a Greek story. There was no essence of life to be shown in this piece.
       Amazingly over the course of time and the change from Greek to Romans in power in the mediterranian shows a large difference in thinking. Greeks drew what they saw, whereas Romans drew what should be. It may have been truth but it was an ugly realism that didn't display life but told that once a life.