Oedipus and the Sphinx Painting Differences Two paintings, both depicting the same scene with Oedipus and the Sphinx. Both depict Oedipus answering a riddle on the path to Thebes. The Sphinx that lived along that path stopped travelers and would give them a riddle, If the travelers could not solve the riddle, they would be killed. The paintings, one created by Gustave Moreau and another by Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres were created in the same century, but carry many differences. Each painting is based on the same scene, so similarities are there. The first painting is by Gustave Moreau, and it was painted in 1864. The second painting is the older of the two and it was painted in 1808 by Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres. The first and second painting show many similarities such as they both show the Sphinx attempting to assert her power over Oedipus. Both paintings are set in a rocky and dangerous area, both have an abundance of bones of those who have failed to solve the riddle. Finally, both show Oedipus holding a weapon, probably because he is …show more content…
Firstly, the painting by Gustave Moreau is set on a cliff whereas the other painting by Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres is set in a small and treacherous cave. In Ingres’ painting, the Sphinx is in a small cutout in the cave slightly higher than Oedipus. In the background of the second painting, a man is seen running away looking terrified as Oedipus stares into the Sphinx. The first painting shows the Sphinx with larger wings and darker hair than the second painting. It seems like in Ingres’ painting Oedipus found the Sphinx himself without the Sphinx finding him. He almost has her cornered in the hole the Sphinx was in. Moreau’s painting looks like the Sphinx found Oedipus as he was walking on the road to Thebes. The Sphinx tries to assert power over Oedipus by climbing onto his chest and backing him into the rock wall while staring into Oedipus’
The difference between an archaic statue such as Kroisos (fig. 5-11) and a classical statue such as Doryphoros (fig. 5-42) may not seem very great in a single glance. In fact, you may not notice any differences in that one glance. Yet, if you were to look at them closely, you can see that these two statues actually have very little in common.
We find that, in conclusion, that these pieces are very similar in many ways. They are both originally created in the same style and time period. They are Hellenistic and dramatic, although in their own, individualistic way. Each sculpture was created in different mediums and have different stories. These are both very individualistic pieces of Greco/Roman sculpture that has influenced many artists throughout time and will
The Statue of a kouros and the Portrait statue of a boy both depict similar subjects, however are greatly different in how they accomplish this task. Through detail, or lack there of, the Greeks and Romans are able to display a certain value they have in its members. These two statues were made about 500 years apart and approach the sculpting process quit differently. The Greek statue seems to use geometric exaggerated lines to form the body while the Romans use a more realistic approach and sculpt the body with a more rounded finish. Statue of a kouros, from about 590 B.C and Portrait of a boy, from about the first century, do not share any great technical aspects and are basically nothing alike.
In Sophocles’ play, Oedipus, the King, there are various instances where Oedipus tries to escape his destiny—enlightenment—only to discover the truth that he cannot. Similarly, in Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” the prisoner travails to understand and adjust to his newly visited environment. In both works, the men first had to realize their ignorance before they could begin to acquire knowledge and true understanding of the complexities of the human condition. Specifically, in Oedipus, the King, it was Oedipus’ illusion of himself as a man unequaled in leadership whereas in “Allegory of the Cave” it was the prisoner’s initial refutations of enlightenment being shown him until he realizes its intellectual, spiritual, and social significance.
The trip to the metropolitan museum was a great trip to learn and to study art. What is art you may ask, well art is an expression you use to show a visual picture. It can be through painting or through sculptures. Some other example of art is music, literature and dancing. For today 's paper we will be talking about art as a sculpture. The two sculptures in this photo are King Sahure and a Nome God and Marble Statue of Dionysos leaning on archaistic female figure (Hope Dionysos). You can find these statues in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. King Sahure and a Nome God is an Egyptian art that was made in 2458-2446 BCE. The artist is unknown. It was during the 5th dynasty and it also belong to the old kingdom. The Marble statue of Dionysos Leaning in the archaistic female figure is a Greco-Roman art. Belonging to the Roman imperial period of the late first century A.D. Augustan or Julio-Claudian period 27 B.C., to 68 AD. It is classified as a stone sculpture and it is made out of marble. The height of the statues is 82 ¾ inches. There is no evidence who was the original artist.
One is that they both have the princess in it. Even though the painting is called” the maids of honor” the princess is in both of the paintings. Second they do both have a maid of honor, at least the left one. The maid of honor is touching the princess’s hand. The way the princess’s hair is done is the same in both paintings. she has a kinda of a flower oh her hair. The princess does stand out in both paintings, i noticed that Velazquez's painting had a brighter light on the princess then the others. And Piacco had the princess 3 times larger than the maid of honor. From both paintings we can tell that they were in a room. Velazquez's we can obviously tell, but if u hadn’t noticed Pisco's painting has a brown flooring and a black wall. The last one is that the princess has a dress on. Even though it doesn’t look alike, but still it is a
If someone who had no prior knowledge about art, or the elements and principles of design, were given five seconds to look at these two paintings, they’d probably say they had almost nothing in common, other than the fact that they both feature mountains, and it’d be true for those people. But, if you are someone that does know a lot of information
To conclude, both sculptures do not have much in common, but it is obvious that the artists had knowledge in human anatomy and was able to sculpt them spectacularly. It is also obvious the break from somewhat idealistic to realistic human nature. The change is so drastic that one might not believe that both sculptures come from the same Greece because it is so well-known for its astonishing artworks found in temples, building, etc.
In conclusion, although Mycerinus and Kha-merer-nebty II and Augustus of Primaporta, do appear very different, come from entirely different geographic regions and were separated by thousands of years, they do have many things in common. When we consider subject, style, and function; perhaps other works of art have more in common than they appear to have.
Set ages apart, Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman and Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex provide different perspectives on the topic of tragedy and what is defined as a tragic hero. Although Oedipus would be thought of as better representing the tragic hero archetype due to tradition and time period, the modern tragic hero of Oedipus Rex is more of a dismal one. Through analysis of their respective hamartias, it is exemplified that the New York businessman with his humble story proves to be more thought provoking than the King of Thebes and his melancholic tale. **By incorporating a more relatable character and plot, Arthur Miller lends help to making Willy Lowman spiral toward his own downfall while building more emotion and response from the audience than with Oedipus. When Oedipus learns of his awful actions, this invokes shock and desperation. With Willy Lowman, the audience goes for a bumpy ride until the eventual, but expected, crash. ** (NEEDS WORK)
Now that there is an understanding of the paintings and their history we will compare and contrast the elements of design of each painting. The first element of design that will be looked at is line. Line has two characteristics, one is direction and the other is linear quality. Direction of line is “related to our experience of gravity” (Notes). These lines can be either horizontal or vertical. Horizontal lines are calm and balanced lines as seen in “The Death of Socrates”. Vertical lines “defy gravity” (Notes) and contain dynamic lines. Dynamic lines are diagonal lines that give art work a sense of movement, implied action. They use of vertical lines is best seen in “The Death of Sardanapalus” because of the dynamic use of lines in the painting
The painting are from two different time periods. Abaporu dates from 1928. The name of the artist is Tarsila do Amaral from Brazil. The painting is oil on canvas. Portrait of a Lady dates from 1490 by Domenico Ghirlandaio from Italy. Portrait of a Lady is tempera and oil on panel.
Sophocles' trilogy of Oedipus the King, Oedipus at Colonus, and Antigone is a powerful, tragic tale that examines the nature of human guilt, fate and punishment. Creon, Oedipus' uncle and brother-in-law, is the story's most dynamic character. His character experiences a drastic metamorphosis through the span of the three dramas. Creon's vision of a monarch's proper role, his concept of and respect for justice, as well as his respect for the design evolve considerably by the trilogy's tragic conclusion.
Oedipus Rex (the King), written by Sophocles, is the tragic play depicting the disastrous existence to which Oedipus, an Athenian, is 'fated' to endure. With a little help from the gods and the 'fated' actions and decisions of Oedipus, an almost unthinkable misfortune unfolds. Athenian perfection can consist of intelligence, self-confidence, and a strong will. Oedipus, the embodiment of such perfection, and his tragedy are common place to Athenians. Ironically, the very same exact characteristics that bring about the ominous discovery of Oedipus' fate: to kill his father and marry his mother. Oedipus' 'fated' decisions entangle everyone whom is of any significance to him within a quagmire of spiraling tragedy. Sophocles uses the riddle of the Sphinx as a metaphor for the three phases of Oedipus' entangled life, the three phases of human life, and to describe how every life-changing action or decision can influence other lives.
Oedipus' destruction was foretold to his father and mother, Laius and Jocasta, when he was born. It was told to him again when he was a young Corinthian prince, to which he ran from home ("I heard all that and ran" 876). Tiresias tells it to him again during the passage of the Oedipus Rex. The destiny of Oedipus has been laid down, unalterable from the moment he was created. He was fated to marry his mother and kill his father. Phaedra is not controlled by fate. She is possessed by a frivolous deity ("the goddess' anger has landed on your head" p142), stung by her lack of praise and with a grudge against Phaedra's stepson Hippolytus. Thus it is the goddess, Aphrodite, that causes Phaedra to fall in love with the young Athenian prince. The suicide of Phaedra, and her lying words on the note she writes before she dies, brings destruction on the blasphemous Hippolytus, as his father Theseus curses his son. Both characters undeniably have supernatural powers acting upon their destiny. However, it is important to remember that her suicide and the destruction of Hippolytus are not on account of fate. She is under control of the goddess Artemis. Therefore her actions are not directly under her control. Oedipus on the hand has a path laid out by fate ("you were born for pain" 1305). It is a path that has been destined for him all of his life and he is aware of what the gods have set in motion. He is a "man of agony". However, it is Oedipus' fighting of the gods' judgement which brings the destruction. The path might have been laid out but it was Oedipus that walked down it. Oedipus' own innate character flaw (hamartia) of hubris (pride) is his own undoing and without it his fate could not have come to pass. His pride forced him to k...