In Thursday’s class we learned about the different portrayals of Madonna over time. It was interesting to see what had changed and what had stayed the same. It was also interesting to get a look into the change that occurred in type of painting that artists did, going from using gold and being extravagant to being more realistic. This also led to the idea that some aspects of painting had turned competitive as artists started to try and one up one another. It was also very interesting to see just how artists have always been able to direct they eyes of the viewer in order for them to get the full experience the artist created and meant for them to have.
Author: Grace Yang (Page 3 of 3)
Today we talked about altarpieces. Altarpieces were pieces that were used during religious services and were images that you would pray to. In other words, they were religious images. Even so, the style of altarpieces changed over time. It started with polyptychs which were altarpieces made using several panels. These pieces often combined multiple scenes. Over time, this transformed into doing less scenes, or placing a focus on a single scene. In addition to this change in structure and subject matter, there was also a shift in the way these paintings were approached, meaning a shift from using a lot of gold to be grand to drawing something more realistic. It was with these more realistic drawings that altarpieces also started to get a better sense of depth and perspective.
The Coronation of the Virgin is an altarpiece that is good to examine or analyze because of the circumstances that surround it. In fact, it was known for having a long contract in terms of what the patron wanted for the piece. It was because of this that it was also known as a piece that incorporated many new/unique ideas such as making the father and son of the trinity looking the same and including images of purgatory.
In Thursday’s class we learned about names. People are attracted to well known names because the popularity of them give off the sense that they are somehow worth more or are better than lesser known names. This in combination with the rarity of the piece often influences the minds of the people to think that a piece is more important, or better, than than others. In addition to taking away from lesser known artists, it also takes away value from pieces that have anonymous creators. This name bias prevents people from appreciating the art itself and just leave them chasing after name value.
We also talked about the issues with the word art itself. These pieces that we call art were things that served a purpose but we took away their functions and placed them as things to admire. This in turn brought us onto the question of museums as they have taken art that were sometimes meant to be studio tools or public structures, in other words, things that were not meant to be in museums.
After visiting the museum with the idea of craftsmanship in mind, my eyes were first drawn to the sculptures that stood at the center of the rooms. Seeing all the little details on the bronze statues left me in awe as I thought about the amount of time and work that must have gone into making them. The paintings were also subject to my questions. I saw how the colors blended together and how well they worked with their environment. I saw how the grass and trees were painted as if you could see some of the individual leaves. The little faces of the people in the paintings also just held so much detail along with the buildings that surrounded them. Seeing all these things just made me wonder how long they must have spent to create such an image and the difficulty of the work they did to make it.
When visiting the museum to see the way the pieces are displayed, the first thing that stood out were the frames. Often times, the frames on a wall would either stay the same or get grander and larger as it gets towards the center of the wall as people generally understand the center to be the central piece, or the piece that gets a lot of attention. There were also instances where a room would be separated by subject matter where different walls would have different subjects whether that be male or female portraits, landscapes with or without people, people in moments of rest, or children. If an entire room was of one theme or subject matter and one was not, then that wall was also painted a different color to denote the difference in subject matter. Unique paintings were also separated as a way of showing how different they were from the rest. I also noticed that the size of the room in relation to the pieces was also very important. Larger pieces get placed more spaced apart and in a large room where you can step back and look at it completely. Abstract pieces were also separated from pieces with known shapes and images. Ultimately, each section was set up in a way to draw the viewers attention in certain directions depending on where they enter from.
The first thing that was mentioned in the class was the bias that was present in Vasari’s words. This biased view became a springboard into a whole conversation on how names generalize an entire period, for example, the Middle Ages and Gothic. Compared to the negative connotation that those two words have, Vasari’s “Renaissance” has a purely positive connotation and already places the works produced during that time on a pedestal. It was also arrogant to be calling it the Renaissance or a revival of art because Vasari is basically acting as if art hadn’t existed before that point. It was definitely interesting to learn about this bias of his and put it in relation to what progress really is. This is because, as discussed today, progress in art is hard to define because progress would mean that something is getting better over time but art is not such a linear process. Rather it is a process in which everything is good but things are simply changing because you cannot judge history based on the context we have now. It has to be put into the perspective of their time. I feel as if this will be an important point to keep in mind, that we cannot simply judge these pieces based on the knowledge we have of present day art but rather try to place ourselves in that time where art was more practical than it was for aesthetic reasons.