In chapter 8, the "Grand Odalisque" by Ingres is compared to "Olympia" by Manet. I like that the author has compared these two pieces. (All of this is shown on pg. 186 and 187 in the book). Both figures appear to be prostitutes but portrayed in a very different manner. The "Grand Odalisque" is an inviting painting where the woman is luring us in with a sort of inviting gaze. She is turned just enough to hide herself from the viewer but there is also just enough showing to intrigue a male viewer. This painting has almost a seducing quality to it. The woman in the painting is also portrayed in a very "ideal woman" sort of way. Her body has obviously been altered to fit unachievable standards. It is interesting how Ingres makes her look so soft and curvy. This provides a stark contrast to "Olympia" by Manet. In this painting the woman is harsh and not very sensual at all. She faces forward, showing her body to the viewer, as almost to say, "So is it a deal, or what?”. She has a very business-like expression on her face, as compared to the soft inviting gaze of the other painting. "Olympia" strikes me as a “you get what you see”, type of painting. There is no allure to it as a viewer. Overall I think the two paintings make a wonderful discussion of differences in the style of nude paintings.
In chapter 8 the style and sculpture are mostly nude. What caught my eye was (fig.8.15 -Made in heaven). Jeff Koons is a very interesting artist he not only makes sculptures but he sells sex. Jeff K also does live performances. Which he and his partner pose in sexual position in front of a live audience. Which is kind of odd, but its art. I never would think of pornography as a type of art until now. Even know the subject is controversial its still art. What is the difference of looking at nude male and females on a canvas vs real life.
Todays class was really interesting. I find that, yes its true our culture today is not as it was yesterday. Its crazy when you think about how much we have changed. How much ideas of a body can change. But what has on on this past of change, i know that we as people, ideas, and beliefs are always and will always change. But what about sex and the human body has made its change? Is it because of all the births that has happened over time could take something once a thing of everyday scenery and art, to a bad thing to look at.
The painting, Initiation Rites of Dionysos, really portrays sex as nothing more than a duty and not necessarily pleasurefule. In the painting, I could not help but notice the faces of the individuals. The god Dionysos, who is the guy sitting, has his face turned away from the woman he is about to mate with hence giving the impression that he really has little interest in mating with her. She, likewise, has her face turned away from him and they both seem to view having sex as only their duty to each other and not an action of proof of their romatic relationship. Even though there are other nude women around, Dionysos shows disinterest and seems like he does not even want to mate. The actual line that the stick makes seems to be pulling the girl towards Dionysos. The fact that the stick ends right over Dionysos could mean that no matter how much they resist their paths will ultimately lead them to each other so they can unite and become one. Even the clothes left on the girl looks like they are being pulled to Dionysos and they over power her will to try to resist. The fact that Dionysos is still fully dressed shows us how much he really wants to mate with this girl. When this painting was made, we can assume that some viewed sex as not pleasureful but rather part of the duties of either a king or god and manditory to do so.
The picture A Pair of Lovers by Kitagawa Utamaro caught my attention because it is a very intimate picture as well as secretive. I like he way the artist made it hard to tell whose body part was whose. It makes the couple seem as if they are one body. Also it is interesting that the faces are hidden which makes their identities hidden which make them able to show intimacy without shame or guilt.
I think chapter 8 is really interesting because it is about sexuality. The figure 8.18 caught my eye. In a way it looks tesing and inviting at the same time. You can tell she is inviting by the look on her face. It also look like she is tried to high her body and temt you because she is looking back. I can tell she is high class becuase of the settings she is in. If you look at her back it is a little extended.
What I found most interesting in this chapter was the Paleolithic sculpture Venus of Willendorf. Its pretty amazing that people carried this figure around as a fertility charm. Considering that peoples health back in 25,000-20,000 BCE wasn't up to todays standards, I can clearly see as to why people would carry such a charm. The figure portrays this idealized female body that apparently is pregnant. I know this was already discussed in class but its astonishing that people viewed this extremely exaggerated plump figure as an idealized body. The faceless figure intrigues me even more, it leaves me questioning. Does this idealized female have no face? Its leave me thinking that the face is not an important feature that needs to be displayed. This fertility goddess needs no face to bear the fruit of humanity.
ON this weeks topic about reproduction and sexuality the piece of the guriella girls or something like that came up. I didnt fully agree with what they were trying to get at. For one I agree yes its true most art of women are done naked. But what they dont realize is that it is not done in a vulgar manner. Porn on the other hand is not really art in certain ways. Also not only women are justified, men also are on portraits in the nude. they should focus more on arguing on having more women artist rather than how many or who is in a museum.
The one painting that really caught my eye is our discussion in class and reading the chapter was Wedding Portrait by Jan Van Eyck (pg.181). I first saw this painting in an Art History class in high school and it has always intrigued me. I love how the painting is so different for its time period that it is a wedding certificate and yet it is not in a church, which is normal. The mystery of if the wife is pregnant or not and all the hidden symbols that point toward the fact she may be such as how the way she pulls her dress up looking like she is, along with the drapes to the bed open, and the statuette of the Patron of Childbirth are all hidden within the portrait. Also the quote on the wall that says "Van Eyck was here" and his large signature is not common for those times and gives the painting even more mystery on why he would do it. I have to say the part of the painting that caught my attention most was the vanishing point in the mirror and the reflection painted within it along with the narrative in the medallions around it. The fact that he painted it with a single horse hair and to have that much detail is extraordinary. The fact Van Eyck put himself in that reflection probably without the couple even knowing is very interesting. I would love to find out why he does all these odd things in the paintings an this will be one piece that will definitely always catch my eye.
The Wedding Portrait by Jan Van Euck is an interesting painting. I really like the naturalism of this painting. The visual texture of this painting makes it come to life. My interpretation of this piece is that I believe the reason they are getting married in their room is because she looks like she is pregnant, and maybe that's why they didn't get married in a church. The dog in the painting also is an interpretation of marriage because it represents fidelity. Also the color he chooses are really dark except the colors he used on the women in the painting. As soon as you look at the painting your eyes are drawn to her and her stomach. Also her arm is an implied line that points you to her stomach as well.
Reading through this chapter, "Reproduction & Sexuality", only one image kept popping into my mind and that was of Jeff Koons and Cicciolina "Made in Heaven". The reason I'm writing about this image is because when I think about it, I think of everyone's views on sex. There are some people in the world that can speak freely about it and there are some that feel it's inappropiate to even mention the word. At first glance at this image, your eyes draw to the center of the picture and it seems that the woman's breast are pointing you up to the man's gaze. He knows you're watching him with his lover, and holds a blank stare with no emotion. Some people could consider this inappropiate for youth to see, however, the picture is causing no harm to anyone. I compare this image to the "Relief Carving from the Kandarya Mahadeva Temple" in India. In our society, many people cant speak, mention, or ask about sex without having an awkward silence. Though, when I look at these sculptures of people having sex where the public can see, I wonder why its so easy for them to show sex in public, yet people get offended if they mention the 'S' word...
One of the most interesting pieces in Chapter 8 is Venus of Willendorf. The little four inches stone figure gives an insight of how 25,000-20,000 B.C. was like. The small sculpture shows that the civilization greatly believe that these small stone cravings will raise the chances of fertility. Based on that information, the stone is considered an good luck charm; to promise fertile females, a safe child delivery and healthy new-borns. Also the small sculpture shows what was considered the ideal body at the time, wide and big woman, not because it was some type of fetish but rather it means that the women is very healthy enough to bear children and which contributes to the growth of the group into the next generation. I don't think in our current era that we need such good luck charm as the Venus of Willendorf, due to the fact that some countries are over populated like China which had to limit each family into having only 1 child. Also another factor that we probably don't need a stone fertility sculpture is that many families are encouraging their children both male and female to not have children until they are at a certain age, since its known that children take alot of responsibility, money and time to raise and care for. The encouragement of fertility has faded throughout the centuries because in time humanization became more advance and healthy.
I was quite intrigued with the art piece, Grey Line with Lavender and Yellow, by Georgia O'Keeffe. When I saw this art piece, I thought it was some sort of draping, but when I read more into the piece, I was informed of its intentions of portraying a large flower. After taking a second glance at the painting, I noticed the faint or light colors of the pedals and the sensual or smoothness in the outlining of the flower. My thoughts were immediately directed towards the female body. As I read more into the art piece, I discovered that O'Keeffe tried to display heightened colors to portray a sense of beauty, the beauty seen in women. The image of the flower is also to have some sort of correlation to the female genitalia, in which I started to figure out after looking at the painting several more times. It's quite amazing how a flower such as the Grey Line with Lavender and Yellow can have a representation of the beauty of the female sexuality.
The piece of work that comes to mind is Manet's "Olympia," which ironically appeared on today's exam. At first, I overlooked the painting, but when I was forced to stare at it for thirty minutes I grew accustom to it. I found it somewhat odd because of how the female woman was the center of attention, but her expression did not correlate with the set up of the room. Unlike other paintings with similar interior set ups, the nude female does not give off an inviting vibe.
The piece that I found interesting this week was the silk painting "A Pair of Lovers" which to me, at first glance, you really don't know what you are looking at because their is not much atmospheric perspective to the piece giving it a flat appearance. Upon further gaze, however, what we see and discover is intriguing almost, like a movie who's plot is slowly revealed. We find that this anonymous couple could be having a non-traditional relationship, even spontaneous as they are fully clothed and appear to be on a balcony outside. The long flowing lines that entertwine and overlap are very sensual as was intended, I think, by the artist, Kitagawa Utamaro. The identity of the male could have been exposed but, since it was blank, the couple could represent any couple.
I first saw a copy of van Eyck's "The Marriage of Giovanni Arnolfini and his Bride" in an Art Appreciation Day in grade school. That 'strange' scene (to a 5th grader) stayed with me all these years. Now revisiting it and having all the symbolism decoded has allowed me a different and expanded view. In the book 'Writing About Art', I came across a discussion about criticism referring to this piece. Two critical essays, written decades apart, with very different points of view were shown. One was the classical formal analysis, in which much of the symbolism was discussed. I read it and agreed. Yes, that's the way it is. Then I read the piece Feminist criticism (which seemed a bit angry) but came out agreeing with many of her points. She was disputing much of this symbolism and it made sense. Until I read the 2nd essay, however, I never questioned that there was another point of view. After all, the author was an art historian, an expert! It reminded me ,once again, not to take everything I read as truth; rather, to read and take in as much information as I possibly can, and then formulate my own ideas.
we also talked about this in class but in this chapter the thing that caught my eye the most was the venus of willendorf. Having known that it was a sacred gift for the pregnant was very intresting. the sculpture looks very swollen not looking like a normal average pregnant person. maybe signifying good luck in having a healthy baby?the shapes of this sculpture looks very intresting. the hairstyle was probably the first thing that caught my eye the first. usually curly hair arnt really equally balanced,usually messy. wonder why they did that.
The picture in which really caught my eye for this discussion was "Wedding Portrait" by Jan Van Eyck. My reason being that it portrays several things will as the undercut of sexuality and reproduction. This theme is automatically seen when one sees how her dress is already lifted up and she appears to be pregnant. But the for lack of better saying is the fact that shes positioned in front of the bed and him in front of the window just puts the icing on the cake.i say this because it is clear that this serves to show each genders role within a marriage. one would never think that the beliefs in which came about in or parents time or parents parents times are actually older than them themselves. This reminds me the husbands the bread bringer and the wife the house keeper.
The group that did their presentation on the Venus of Willendorf sculpture intrigued me in a way of visualizing and understanding the female body to a deeper extent. Discovering that this tiny piece of sculpture was meant to be carried around, with its main intent to be luck, made me think it may have been to help prevent miscarriages perhaps, and to also maintain a healthy body during pregnancy, despite the image of this sculpture. By emphasizing her reproductive organs and deemphasizing her nonsexual features, the person who created this tiny piece of art is obviously trying to portray it as a representation of the entire female community. In saying this, he/she did a admirable job in doing so, because by presenting the fertility of a women, it shows the importance of our gender as opposed to the male always being the dominant of the male-female population.
In chapter 8 it talks about reproduction and sexuality.And in this chapter it compares diffent art of body and other sources, some of the picture appear to be prostitutes. They show very different aspects in this chapter, They are some elicint women in some of theis painting,some servants, queens and just plain out royality prostitues. I also like the Wedding Portrait by Jan Van Eyck (pg.181). You can see Van Eyck name in the wall, and it is a different kind of wedding and the wife appears to be pregant. and the colors make the women stand out
I think the most provocative piece of art we looked at this week was the work done by the Guerrilla Girls. The poster-esque messages they made cannot be ignored, simply because of the raw, uncensored message. The almost extreme feminist viewpoint they represent is something that many people in the established sector of society fear. Women, for a large portion of history, have had a severely limited and select role in society. The Guerilla Girls are overly aware of this, and wish to make sure everyone else is as well. They fit well in the aspect of the theme of the week, as they question the way in which the art world views sexuality.
In regards to the first exam, I think that I had misinterpreted the paintings of "Venus of Urbino" and "Olympia". I felt that in Venus of Urbino, the woman was not a high class prostitute, but rather, a prostitute who enjoyed her job. To me, her gaze was inviting and seductive. Her posture seemed very relaxed and the texture of her skin seemed very soft. I felt that the upper class was shown through "Olympia", because she had a business-like gaze and had a stern, serious face. The implied motion of the servant seemed hurried and rushed. The woman in "Olympia" seems to be surprised by the viewer's entrance into her room, and is uninvited. This surprise is evident in her slightly upright position, as normally someone would not lie in this position on a bed.
I feel that chapter 8 is a very interesting topic because when u look at today society it is way diffrent from back then society the reason why i say that is because of the image we look at in class with the woman that was a prostute layin in the bed and just had all the people looking at her now as of rigth now u wouldnt see a image like that around us because it is more popular then it was before and also this image really help me undestand the kind of picture that are sexual and also how do u tell the feeling of the person and things like that i also notice in the image is that who u can tell what she was doing by the way she was laying in the bed and also her uprigth position and the place of her hands just really explains her feelings.....
In chapter 8, the "Grand Odalisque" by Ingres is compared to "Olympia" by Manet. I like that the author has compared these two pieces. (All of this is shown on pg. 186 and 187 in the book). Both figures appear to be prostitutes but portrayed in a very different manner. The "Grand Odalisque" is an inviting painting where the woman is luring us in with a sort of inviting gaze. She is turned just enough to hide herself from the viewer but there is also just enough showing to intrigue a male viewer. This painting has almost a seducing quality to it. The woman in the painting is also portrayed in a very "ideal woman" sort of way. Her body has obviously been altered to fit unachievable standards. It is interesting how Ingres makes her look so soft and curvy. This provides a stark contrast to "Olympia" by Manet. In this painting the woman is harsh and not very sensual at all. She faces forward, showing her body to the viewer, as almost to say, "So is it a deal, or what?”. She has a very business-like expression on her face, as compared to the soft inviting gaze of the other painting. "Olympia" strikes me as a “you get what you see”, type of painting. There is no allure to it as a viewer. Overall I think the two paintings make a wonderful discussion of differences in the style of nude paintings.
ReplyDeleteKatie Chappell
In chapter 8 the style and sculpture are mostly nude. What caught my eye was (fig.8.15 -Made in heaven). Jeff Koons is a very interesting artist he not only makes sculptures but he sells sex. Jeff K also does live performances. Which he and his partner pose in sexual position in front of a live audience. Which is kind of odd, but its art. I never would think of pornography as a type of art until now. Even know the subject is controversial its still art. What is the difference of looking at nude male and females on a canvas vs real life.
ReplyDeleteTodays class was really interesting. I find that, yes its true our culture today is not as it was yesterday. Its crazy when you think about how much we have changed. How much ideas of a body can change. But what has on on this past of change, i know that we as people, ideas, and beliefs are always and will always change. But what about sex and the human body has made its change? Is it because of all the births that has happened over time could take something once a thing of everyday scenery and art, to a bad thing to look at.
ReplyDeleteThe painting, Initiation Rites of Dionysos, really portrays sex as nothing more than a duty and not necessarily pleasurefule. In the painting, I could not help but notice the faces of the individuals. The god Dionysos, who is the guy sitting, has his face turned away from the woman he is about to mate with hence giving the impression that he really has little interest in mating with her. She, likewise, has her face turned away from him and they both seem to view having sex as only their duty to each other and not an action of proof of their romatic relationship. Even though there are other nude women around, Dionysos shows disinterest and seems like he does not even want to mate. The actual line that the stick makes seems to be pulling the girl towards Dionysos. The fact that the stick ends right over Dionysos could mean that no matter how much they resist their paths will ultimately lead them to each other so they can unite and become one. Even the clothes left on the girl looks like they are being pulled to Dionysos and they over power her will to try to resist. The fact that Dionysos is still fully dressed shows us how much he really wants to mate with this girl. When this painting was made, we can assume that some viewed sex as not pleasureful but rather part of the duties of either a king or god and manditory to do so.
ReplyDeleteThe picture A Pair of Lovers by Kitagawa Utamaro caught my attention because it is a very intimate picture as well as secretive. I like he way the artist made it hard to tell whose body part was whose. It makes the couple seem as if they are one body. Also it is interesting that the faces are hidden which makes their identities hidden which make them able to show intimacy without shame or guilt.
ReplyDeleteShavette W.
I think chapter 8 is really interesting because it is about sexuality. The figure 8.18 caught my eye. In a way it looks tesing and inviting at the same time. You can tell she is inviting by the look on her face. It also look like she is tried to high her body and temt you because she is looking back. I can tell she is high class becuase of the settings she is in. If you look at her back it is a little extended.
ReplyDeleteWhat I found most interesting in this chapter was the Paleolithic sculpture Venus of Willendorf. Its pretty amazing that people carried this figure around as a fertility charm. Considering that peoples health back in 25,000-20,000 BCE wasn't up to todays standards, I can clearly see as to why people would carry such a charm. The figure portrays this idealized female body that apparently is pregnant. I know this was already discussed in class but its astonishing that people viewed this extremely exaggerated plump figure as an idealized body. The faceless figure intrigues me even more, it leaves me questioning. Does this idealized female have no face? Its leave me thinking that the face is not an important feature that needs to be displayed. This fertility goddess needs no face to bear the fruit of humanity.
ReplyDeleteON this weeks topic about reproduction and sexuality the piece of the guriella girls or something like that came up. I didnt fully agree with what they were trying to get at. For one I agree yes its true most art of women are done naked. But what they dont realize is that it is not done in a vulgar manner. Porn on the other hand is not really art in certain ways. Also not only women are justified, men also are on portraits in the nude. they should focus more on arguing on having more women artist rather than how many or who is in a museum.
ReplyDeleteFERNANDO BUENROSTRO
The one painting that really caught my eye is our discussion in class and reading the chapter was Wedding Portrait by Jan Van Eyck (pg.181). I first saw this painting in an Art History class in high school and it has always intrigued me. I love how the painting is so different for its time period that it is a wedding certificate and yet it is not in a church, which is normal. The mystery of if the wife is pregnant or not and all the hidden symbols that point toward the fact she may be such as how the way she pulls her dress up looking like she is, along with the drapes to the bed open, and the statuette of the Patron of Childbirth are all hidden within the portrait. Also the quote on the wall that says "Van Eyck was here" and his large signature is not common for those times and gives the painting even more mystery on why he would do it.
ReplyDeleteI have to say the part of the painting that caught my attention most was the vanishing point in the mirror and the reflection painted within it along with the narrative in the medallions around it. The fact that he painted it with a single horse hair and to have that much detail is extraordinary. The fact Van Eyck put himself in that reflection probably without the couple even knowing is very interesting. I would love to find out why he does all these odd things in the paintings an this will be one piece that will definitely always catch my eye.
Erika Bonksy
The Wedding Portrait by Jan Van Euck is an interesting painting. I really like the naturalism of this painting. The visual texture of this painting makes it come to life. My interpretation of this piece is that I believe the reason they are getting married in their room is because she looks like she is pregnant, and maybe that's why they didn't get married in a church. The dog in the painting also is an interpretation of marriage because it represents fidelity. Also the color he chooses are really dark except the colors he used on the women in the painting. As soon as you look at the painting your eyes are drawn to her and her stomach. Also her arm is an implied line that points you to her stomach as well.
ReplyDeleteGina V.
Reading through this chapter, "Reproduction & Sexuality", only one image kept popping into my mind and that was of Jeff Koons and Cicciolina "Made in Heaven". The reason I'm writing about this image is because when I think about it, I think of everyone's views on sex. There are some people in the world that can speak freely about it and there are some that feel it's inappropiate to even mention the word.
ReplyDeleteAt first glance at this image, your eyes draw to the center of the picture and it seems that the woman's breast are pointing you up to the man's gaze. He knows you're watching him with his lover, and holds a blank stare with no emotion. Some people could consider this inappropiate for youth to see, however, the picture is causing no harm to anyone.
I compare this image to the "Relief Carving from the Kandarya Mahadeva Temple" in India. In our society, many people cant speak, mention, or ask about sex without having an awkward silence. Though, when I look at these sculptures of people having sex where the public can see, I wonder why its so easy for them to show sex in public, yet people get offended if they mention the 'S' word...
Rebecca Ziegler
One of the most interesting pieces in Chapter 8 is Venus of Willendorf. The little four inches stone figure gives an insight of how 25,000-20,000 B.C. was like. The small sculpture shows that the civilization greatly believe that these small stone cravings will raise the chances of fertility. Based on that information, the stone is considered an good luck charm; to promise fertile females, a safe child delivery and healthy new-borns. Also the small sculpture shows what was considered the ideal body at the time, wide and big woman, not because it was some type of fetish but rather it means that the women is very healthy enough to bear children and which contributes to the growth of the group into the next generation. I don't think in our current era that we need such good luck charm as the Venus of Willendorf, due to the fact that some countries are over populated like China which had to limit each family into having only 1 child. Also another factor that we probably don't need a stone fertility sculpture is that many families are encouraging their children both male and female to not have children until they are at a certain age, since its known that children take alot of responsibility, money and time to raise and care for. The encouragement of fertility has faded throughout the centuries because in time humanization became more advance and healthy.
ReplyDeleteI was quite intrigued with the art piece, Grey Line with Lavender and Yellow, by Georgia O'Keeffe. When I saw this art piece, I thought it was some sort of draping, but when I read more into the piece, I was informed of its intentions of portraying a large flower. After taking a second glance at the painting, I noticed the faint or light colors of the pedals and the sensual or smoothness in the outlining of the flower. My thoughts were immediately directed towards the female body. As I read more into the art piece, I discovered that O'Keeffe tried to display heightened colors to portray a sense of beauty, the beauty seen in women. The image of the flower is also to have some sort of correlation to the female genitalia, in which I started to figure out after looking at the painting several more times. It's quite amazing how a flower such as the Grey Line with Lavender and Yellow can have a representation of the beauty of the female sexuality.
ReplyDeleteThe piece of work that comes to mind is Manet's "Olympia," which ironically appeared on today's exam. At first, I overlooked the painting, but when I was forced to stare at it for thirty minutes I grew accustom to it. I found it somewhat odd because of how the female woman was the center of attention, but her expression did not correlate with the set up of the room. Unlike other paintings with similar interior set ups, the nude female does not give off an inviting vibe.
ReplyDeleteThe piece that I found interesting this week was the silk painting "A Pair of Lovers" which to me, at first glance, you really don't know what you are looking at because their is not much atmospheric perspective to the piece giving it a flat appearance. Upon further gaze, however, what we see and discover is intriguing almost, like a movie who's plot is slowly revealed. We find that this anonymous couple could be having a non-traditional relationship, even spontaneous as they are fully clothed and appear to be on a balcony outside. The long flowing lines that entertwine and overlap are very sensual as was intended, I think, by the artist, Kitagawa Utamaro. The identity of the male could have been exposed but, since it was blank, the couple could represent any couple.
ReplyDeleteI first saw a copy of van Eyck's "The Marriage of Giovanni Arnolfini and his Bride" in an Art Appreciation Day in grade school. That 'strange' scene (to a 5th grader) stayed with me all these years. Now revisiting it and having all the symbolism decoded has allowed me a different and expanded view. In the book 'Writing About Art', I came across a discussion about criticism referring to this piece. Two critical essays, written decades apart, with very different points of view were shown. One was the classical formal analysis, in which much of the symbolism was discussed. I read it and agreed. Yes, that's the way it is. Then I read the piece Feminist criticism (which seemed a bit angry) but came out agreeing with many of her points. She was disputing much of this symbolism and it made sense. Until I read the 2nd essay, however, I never questioned that there was another point of view. After all, the author was an art historian, an expert! It reminded me ,once again, not to take everything I read as truth; rather, to read and take in as much information as I possibly can, and then formulate my own ideas.
ReplyDeletewe also talked about this in class but in this chapter the thing that caught my eye the most was the venus of willendorf. Having known that it was a sacred gift for the pregnant was very intresting. the sculpture looks very swollen not looking like a normal average pregnant person. maybe signifying good luck in having a healthy baby?the shapes of this sculpture looks very intresting. the hairstyle was probably the first thing that caught my eye the first. usually curly hair arnt really equally balanced,usually messy. wonder why they did that.
ReplyDelete-kenneth Oh
The picture in which really caught my eye for this discussion was "Wedding Portrait" by Jan Van Eyck. My reason being that it portrays several things will as the undercut of sexuality and reproduction. This theme is automatically seen when one sees how her dress is already lifted up and she appears to be pregnant. But the for lack of better saying is the fact that shes positioned in front of the bed and him in front of the window just puts the icing on the cake.i say this because it is clear that this serves to show each genders role within a marriage. one would never think that the beliefs in which came about in or parents time or parents parents times are actually older than them themselves. This reminds me the husbands the bread bringer and the wife the house keeper.
ReplyDeleteThe group that did their presentation on the Venus of Willendorf sculpture intrigued me in a way of visualizing and understanding the female body to a deeper extent. Discovering that this tiny piece of sculpture was meant to be carried around, with its main intent to be luck, made me think it may have been to help prevent miscarriages perhaps, and to also maintain a healthy body during pregnancy, despite the image of this sculpture. By emphasizing her reproductive organs and deemphasizing her nonsexual features, the person who created this tiny piece of art is obviously trying to portray it as a representation of the entire female community. In saying this, he/she did a admirable job in doing so, because by presenting the fertility of a women, it shows the importance of our gender as opposed to the male always being the dominant of the male-female population.
ReplyDelete-Liza Cena
In chapter 8 it talks about reproduction and sexuality.And in this chapter it compares diffent art of body and other sources, some of the picture appear to be prostitutes. They show very different aspects in this chapter, They are some elicint women in some of theis painting,some servants, queens and just plain out royality prostitues. I also like the Wedding Portrait by Jan Van Eyck (pg.181). You can see Van Eyck name in the wall, and it is a different kind of wedding and the wife appears to be pregant. and the colors make the women stand out
ReplyDeleteI think the most provocative piece of art we looked at this week was the work done by the Guerrilla Girls. The poster-esque messages they made cannot be ignored, simply because of the raw, uncensored message. The almost extreme feminist viewpoint they represent is something that many people in the established sector of society fear. Women, for a large portion of history, have had a severely limited and select role in society. The Guerilla Girls are overly aware of this, and wish to make sure everyone else is as well. They fit well in the aspect of the theme of the week, as they question the way in which the art world views sexuality.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the first exam, I think that I had misinterpreted the paintings of "Venus of Urbino" and "Olympia". I felt that in Venus of Urbino, the woman was not a high class prostitute, but rather, a prostitute who enjoyed her job. To me, her gaze was inviting and seductive. Her posture seemed very relaxed and the texture of her skin seemed very soft. I felt that the upper class was shown through "Olympia", because she had a business-like gaze and had a stern, serious face. The implied motion of the servant seemed hurried and rushed. The woman in "Olympia" seems to be surprised by the viewer's entrance into her room, and is uninvited. This surprise is evident in her slightly upright position, as normally someone would not lie in this position on a bed.
ReplyDeleteDaniel Park
I feel that chapter 8 is a very interesting topic because when u look at today society it is way diffrent from back then society the reason why i say that is because of the image we look at in class with the woman that was a prostute layin in the bed and just had all the people looking at her now as of rigth now u wouldnt see a image like that around us because it is more popular then it was before and also this image really help me undestand the kind of picture that are sexual and also how do u tell the feeling of the person and things like that i also notice in the image is that who u can tell what she was doing by the way she was laying in the bed and also her uprigth position and the place of her hands just really explains her feelings.....
ReplyDeleteraynard westbrook