When I was a junior and senior in high school I studied art history, junior year was an AP art history class then senior year I did an independent study of art history. I, wrongly, felt like I learned everything already and that art history in college was going to be a repeat of the same material I had already covered. I was pleasantly surprised to learn that even though I had been exposed to the material before there were certain aspects that I never saw. The material in a college level art history class was covered in a much different way than it was in high school. It was more about why the pieces were being created in the first place rather than just taking the art at face value. The cultural importance of the areas where the work was created had more of an impact on the style and pieces being created than I had ever known. The Egyptian culture especially interested me. Our unit on Egyptian art definitely left a lasting impression on me.

            Ever since around the third grade I knew whom the Egyptians were. I knew about King Tut and Cleopatra and mummies, basically the same information about the culture that everyone knows. It wasn’t until art history that I learned just how intricate and interesting the culture was and how it specifically influenced the art works. Instead of assuming that techiniques hadn’t advanced far enough to produce a different style statue I learned that the way art was created was completely on purpose. Materials and poses were chosen to represent the core value of the Egyptian society, the afterlife. Almost every piece of artwork that was created during this time reflected that value. Statues were made to be durable. The Egyptians believed in the Ka or the soul of a person needed a body to inhabit to live on. Statues were erected to hold the Ka of the deceased for the afterlife. This cultural concept played a vital part in shaping the art that would be made by the Egyptians. Learning this important concept freed me from ignorance about art and ushered in a new perspective on art.

            Statues weren’t the only art influenced by Egyptian culture. Paintings also reflected the importance of religion in the culture. The Egyptians included religious symbolism throughout the frescos that were painted. Rulers wore different crowns that had religious symbolism and were associated with different gods and goddesses. My presentation for the class was on the Egyptian gods and goddesses so I was fortunate enough to have an even greater opportunity to learn about the culture of the Egyptians. They truly believed that there was a god or goddess for everything and terrible natural disasters were the effect of making a particular god unhappy. At first glance Egyptian paintings seem to be an arrangement of figures and strange animals surrounded by meaningless shapes and symbols. However, a greater understanding of the culture reveals that these animals and symbols are representative of gods and goddesses and was meant to pay a sort of homage to the divine beings.

            The idea that living was just a period of time leading up to your actual life, the afterlife, somewhat has always bewildered me. How could you possibly feel that there was something better out there besides enjoying and living your live life to the fullest? Art history gave me the much-needed chance to explore cultures that are different from my own. This appreciation for different societies and the way that it influenced their art is something I found very interesting and am thankful that I had to opportunity to study something so interesting. In many ways the idea of learning about other cultures challenged me. I feel as though people get caught up in their lives so much that they forget that other cultures have existed and continue to exist. You cannot truly understand art that is created without fully understanding the culture from which it comes from. 

The Alhambra in Granada, Spain. 14th century. 

Photo from world’s best travel destinations

When we were watching the movie about the great Mosques throughout the world I started to worry that I wouldn’t know which mosques was the most interesting to me. I found each of the buildings to have something that caught my eye. Whether it was the pretty blue color, or the beautiful Arabic script, or even the towering minarets there was a captivating feature unique to each mosque. However, one in particular, seemingly out of nowhere, captured my attention. The Alhambra in Granada, Spain stood out and proved to be different than the others.

            Personally, whenever I hear the word mosques I have a mental picture of bright blue building. Whether this is accurate or not didn’t seem relevant to my brain. This idea was the reasoning behind why the Alhambra initially stood out to me. Instead of a blue color, the walls are more of a reddish color. The name Alhambra in Arabic translates to the red castle. Taking a look at the history of the building shows that this is title is a spot on name. Not only is the building red but it also has a rich history of being used for more than worship.

 During the mid-fourteenth century Christian forces were attacking cities that were under the control of the Muslims. Granada, the city where the Alhambra is located, is a mountain city and was one of the last to be controlled by the Muslims. The Alhambra was originally an insignificant fortress on the top of the hill.  However, the Alhambra went through many changes. Muhammad ibn Nasr was the person responsible for enlarging and strengthening the fortress transforming it into a palace complex. When Isabelle the Catholic and her husband Ferdinand, King of Aragon took the city in a siege in the 16^th century they found the castle to be luxurious enough for them to live in. The palace that Isabelle and Ferdinand were living in was quite different from Muhammad ibn Nasr’s Alhambra. On the premises there were also schools, barracks, public baths, a royal cemetery and many other features that disappeared. Like the chameleon that the Alhambra is proving to be there was even more change to the original site. The grandson of Isabelle and Ferdinand added a Renaissance palace to the grounds. After this there was a period where the Alhambra was forgotten about. That is until Napoleon and his troops quartered in the building. When the troops were fleeing from the city the attempted to bomb the complex and destroy it. The Alhambra finally got its protection from destruction and change in 1870 when it became recognized at a national monument.

            After researching the history I am even more intrigued about the mosque that caught my eye. I’m having trouble comprehending how a building could go through so much change and destruction yet still be considered one of the great mosques in the world. That amazes me. And although the history behind the mosque is extraordinary, to me it isn’t the most inspiring aspect of the Alhambra. The movie pointed out a strong connection between the Quran and the Alhambra. Incorporated into the structure are metaphors for a Paradise on Earth. The gardens that are located on the site even resemble an actual paradise. This has a strong correlation to the Islamic religion. As mentioned in the movie, there are 22 separate references to Paradise in the Quran. This illustrates that there was an importance stressed on this so-called Paradise. Creating a place of worship that resembles an “Eden” like space surrounds the worshipper in the place that they hope to go to when they die. This reiterates the point that you have to be faithful to the Islamic religion in order to spend eternity in such a lush and peaceful environment.

            This is most fascinating to me simply because of the idea of Paradise. Whenever I study religion there always seems to be the common idea that you must be faithful to your God to go to such a magnificent place. To me find similarities in religion unites the world together under something so strong. Religious differences can cause turmoil between countries. Finding a shared trait among religions reminds us that we are all people and that we all have the same goals in life, to life a good life and spend whatever time we have after death in the most inviting and rewarding place we can.

            The Alhambra at first glance just looks like another mosque erected to hold some of the millions of people who practice the Islamic faith. However; its history, design, and religious symbolism makes it one of the more fascinating mosques created. It has withstood centuries of change and destruction only to remain one of the most prominent mosques in the world.

Empress Theodora and Her Attendants. San Vitale, 547. Mosaic. Photo from Janson’s History of Art

The early byzantine period in history was a time of monumental change. Before the 6^th century it was nearly impossible to tell the difference in traits from the western roman empire and the eastern roman empire. However, during this time the western empire began to decline. This led to a cultural shift to the eastern empire. At the center of the newly powerful and culturally rich eastern empire was the emperor Justinian and his empress Theodora. Justinian’s reign aided in the completion of this cultural shift. His reign lasted from 527 to 565 CE and during this period many important buildings and artworks were created helping to develop the Byzantine style.

One of the most important buildings constructed during Justinian’s time period was San Vitale. San Vitale was a new kind of church building that fit perfectly in the new artistic climate. The east began to favor domed churches over the basilica. As important as San Vitale is culturally to the eastern empire the artwork inside provides a different outlook on society during the 6^th century. Inside the perish near the altar two mosaics were constructed. On the right of the altar, the right side of Christ, is a mosaic that depicts the emperor Justinian. To the left of the altar there is a mosaic that depicts empress Theodora.  These mosaics are representative of the power that the rulers had and also they show how the emperors would have been viewed in theor contemporary society. The mosaics show the close ties that San Vitale and the Byzantine court had to religion.

One of the mosaics in San Vitale, Empress Theodora and Her Attendants, is a perfect example of how the rulers saw themselves within the community. In the mosaic Theodora is the central figure and is flanked by ladies-in-waiting and local clergy men. The placement of the empress in the mosaic shows the power that she holds.  She is slightly off center but still captures the viewers eye as the most important figure in the mosaic. Her placement isnt the only clue to how important she was, another element that embodies the power of the empress is the color of her dress. Typically only royalty was able to afford clothing dyed in purple because of the expensive dye that was needed to create the purple color. So placing Theodora in a purple robe instantly shows the viewer she holds status within the society. The symbolism behind the color purple isn’t the only aspect of the color that helps to define Theodora as the central figure. The dark, saturated purple is set against a green foreground. This use of complimentary colors makes Theodora pop out in the viewers eye.

Once it is established that Theodora is the most important figure in the mosaic it is interesting to look at the rest of the composition. The next thing the viewer may notice is that he figures appear to have no movement at all. They are standing in an everlasting posisition watching over the church. It is as if their prescence will be in the church for eternity. This lack of motion creates an absense of time in the work.  It is as if the figures are suspended in a celestrial purgatory. The thought of Theodora being positioned next to Christ’s left and staying there for eternity is power religious symbolism. However, a closer look at the mosaic reveals that this work is riddleded with religious symbolism.

The most obvious of the symbols within Empress Theodora and Her Attendants is the Chalice that Theodora is holding hand. It appears that she is about to give the Holy Eucharist.  The symbolism behind her giving the blood of Christ shows that she has both political power and a divine power.  In the historical context that this mosaic was made it would have been unheard of for a woman to give the Eucharist. But, because of her status as empress she would have had a direct connection to Christ. Or so the rulers during this period thought. Justinian and Theodora’s mosaics show that they believed that Justinian was a reincarnation of Christ on Earth. The couple were dilberately aligning themselves with Christ. This was justified through the idea of Divine kingship which meant that rulers were Earthly representations of religious beings. Further symbolism that would have the viewer believing that Theodora was considered a holy figure is the halo around her head. In other Early Christian and Byzantine works the halo is found around figures such as Christ, Madonna, and Saints. This is a bold statement made by the rulers.

The mixture of religious symbolism with a political figure gives the work an interesting subject. However, the religious undertones are not the only intriguing aspects of the mosaic. One noticed right away by the viewer is the way the eye moves along the people. The figures on the right are wearing bright colors which draws the viewers eye to them first. Next your eye follows the line that is created by the heads of the four figures on the right. They are organized in a descending order so each head is a bit lower than the one before. The height of the figures continues to decline until you reach Theodora. This creates a natural line for your eye to follow throughout the mosaic.  

It is important to see that the religious symbolism is not the only extraordinary aspect of Empress Theodora and Her Attendants. There is an astetically pleasing quality to it as well. One of the most eye catching parts of the work is the geometric border that surrounds the entire space. The colors are beautiful and the border helps to define the space. It also has a variety in the pattern so it helps to add visual interest to the entire mosaic.

Justinian’s reign in the eastern empire was described as a golden age. It was a time of political and cultural change and power was shifting to his empire. This would give some explanation as to why the empress and emperor had mosaics made depicting them as supreme rulers. Overall, the work depicts the empress. But a more careful look shows that there is a second, more hidden meaning behind the mosaic. It was meant to show that the court had a direct link to God. During this time there was a general belief in divine kingship. It was thought that rulers had actual, direct connections to the spiritual world and that they were able to rule the country because they had such a link. 

deadpaint:

Edgar Degas, Les Pointes

It seems that no matter where you look in history there has always been an unobtainable idea of what the human body should look like. In modern culture we idolize fashion models that all are tall and very slender. In ancient Greek society citizens envied the athletic build. And during the Paleolithic age images woman with exaggerated features were produced. The video confirms the idea that each culture creates art based on what they view to be beautiful. It also goes on to explain that realistic images depicting the body have rarely been produced. The puzzling part of the idealized body is why do humans have a need to produce art depicting bodies that we could never have? The movie provides some scientific background that could explain why but personally I just think humans always want what they can’t have.

 In the movie the narrator explains how the human response to exaggerated human features is hardwired into our brain. Innately, humans are attracted to the images of idealized bodies because we respond to odd and exciting features. This phenomenon has a name, the Principle of Exaggeration. This states that exaggeration is a universal idea throughout cultures. We as humans are just made to appreciate unobtainable beauty through art.

In Greek society the idea of near worshipping perfect bodies is especially present. To the Greeks there was nothing better than an athletic body. The movie described their mentality as “if you looked good you were good”.  This attitude prompted artists to create statues that went above and beyond life-like. They began to produce statues of men who could never have existed in real life. To me, this is similar to our modern culture. Magazines and photographers use Photoshop to enhance some features or models while eliminating attributes that are unfavorable. We are just as guilty as the Greeks of creating images of humans that we idolize but could never actually look like. Perhaps the science in the video was right and all humans are programmed to admire these exaggerated humans. 

Aphrodite, Pan, and Eros. ca. 100 BCE. Marble, height 51”. Photo from Janson’s History of Art.

Aphrodite of Knidos, Roman copy after an original of ca. 340-330 BCE by Praxiteles. Marble, height 6’8”. Photo from Janson’s History of Art

When looking through the chapter on Greek art it was nearly impossible to choose only two images to look at more closely for this blog assignment. The ancient Greeks had a way of making nearly every piece of art into something remarkably beautiful. Whether its their perfected technique and idealized proportions or their choice of handsome men as subject matter that makes the art beautiful the one thing that goes without argument is that the Greek art is stunning.

Two pieces that stuck out amongst the perfect human bodies were Aphrodite of Knidos and Aphrodite, Pan, and Eros. The first Aphrodite work is from the Late Classical period of Ancient Greece. The statue is made of marble but is a Roman copy of the original Greek work. It is known that the original work was commissioned to be a cult statue that would be used for devotional purposes. It was placed inside a circular temple and could be worshipped from all sides.  The Late Classical period features works that were beginning to shift away from tradition. This new and artistically challenging environment was perfect for producing Aphrodite of Knidos. This statue was the first monumental statue of a goddess in the nude. Creating the first nude goddess was a groundbreaking and hugely pivotal moment in Greek art. Because of this development Aphrodite, Pan, and Eros was made possible. In other words, if it wasn’t for Praxiteles sensual and youthful take on Aphrodite later works portraying the goddess wouldn’t have been created.

The second Aphrodite statue was created in the Hellenistic period of Greece. One of the rare and exciting characteristics of this work is that this marble statue is an original Greek work. Although this is an original it is unknown whether it was used as a devotional piece or simply as a decorational piece. It could be that the two statues not only both focus on Aphrodite but were both important relics in her worship. The Hellenistic period of Greek art was known for drama and active viewer participation. This change in art is visible in the playful quality of second statue of Aphrodite.

As their titles suggest, both statues depict Aphrodite. However, the goddess is entirely different in the two works. Aphrodite of Knidos portrays the goddess as she is getting out of the bath alone. She is the only figure represented in the statue. It seems as though there is a sense of surprise in Aphrodite’s face. She isn’t expecting the viewer to be witnessing this private moment. Aphrodite tries to hide her figure from the viewer intentionally as she grabs for a drape to cover up. The sense of surprise in her pose suggests that the viewer is naughty for seeing her in the nude.

In contrast, Aphrodite, Pan, and Eros portrays the goddess in the company of others. In this work, Aphrodite is fighting off the half-man half-goat forest god Pan with a slipper while Eros is nearby. The attitude towards Aphrodite has shifted. It’s no longer that Aphrodite is sheepishly reaching for a drape to cover herself. Instead, a slipper that she is using to fend Pan off covers Aphrodite coincidentally. The viewer doesn’t have to feel bad about seeing her nude since she doesn’t seem to mind that the viewer is watching this moment. The use of self-defense is a way to rid the work of erotic connotations.

The same subject matter isn’t the only commonality in the two statues. Both Aphrodite’s share the same formal elements and principles that seem to work in different ways to create the statues. The shape of Aphrodite is remarkably similar. She is standing tall but in a relaxed pose. Her hand is gently covering herself from the viewer in both works. However, the emphasis in the first work bears no resemblance to the emphasis in the second statue. In the first work, the emphasis lies in erotic factor of the work. The pose and the idea that you are interrupting the goddess are the major themes in this statue. Dissimilarly, the second work focuses on the self-defense of the goddess and all eroticism has been taken out of the work.

Both works also feature what looks to be a similar set of proportions. Nothing is too exaggerated and she seems to be idealized. A goddess would have a perfect human form so it makes sense that she would be perfected using idealized proportions. Another formal principle of design that the two statues share is a sense of balance. Although the sculpture is balanced by a vessel and drapery in the first one and by a second figure in  Aphrodite, Pan, and Eros there is still the same concept of symmetry in the work. The work is spread evenly in the viewer’s eye. Neither of the elements of the work seems to be taking up more space than the others.

Using the same pose in the statues may make Aphrodite look the same to the viewer but the difference in the iconography of the works is also prominent through using the same pose. By keeping the layout of the sculpture similar the viewer is able to focus on the subtle differences in the attitude of Aphrodite. You can pick up on the changing emotion of the goddess from one work to the other.

The artist of Aphrodite, Pan, and Eros may have been inspirered by the first nude statue of a goddess created by Praxiteles but the works are not the same. Their similarities lie in the basic makeup of the work, i.e. the subject matter, the pose, the material, and the elements and principles of design. Although they share these common features they are tweaked in just the right manner to create different attitudes. The two works also hail from time periods in ancient Greece. This helps to explain the difference in the iconography of the works. Ultimately, both works are beautiful representations of the goddess of beauty herself.