Anticipated similarities exist between the Roman copy of Doryphorus and Donatello’s David, for the former replicates a product of Classical Greece while the latter is reminiscent of this artistic epoch (The Renaissance was a “re-birth” of this classical form). However, David’s structural presence is atypical regarding Classical Antiquity; therefore, major degrees of difference emerge in terms of characterization and narrative. Doryphorus is a conventional example of reconciling idealism and naturalism. Polykleitos creates a prototypical male physique, yet this ideal athletic figure lacks individualism. Conversely, Donatello overtly characterizes David through his effeminate if not androgynous form. This expressive portrayal inspires several …show more content…
Beautiful? Yes. But does is inspire inquisition or curiosity? Not so much. Polykleitos’s focus on proportion was mathematical in its exactness and thus Doryphorus appears manikin–like with the sharp separations between his appendages (obvious in the exaggerated indentation between the upper thighs, groin and waste region). This artificial rectangular presence leaves Doryphorus appearing rigid and fixed in space. Some say Polykleitos designed his work with a “charm beyond [the] truth” by exceeding the limits of possible physical form (Linfert). However, by placing a high degree of artificiality within his work, it lacks the narrative that comes forth when presenting an alternate to the ideal. Donatello combines naturalism with his mental representation of David’s persona and inspires inquisition into the sculpture’s narrative and Donatello’s own intentions. Donatello utterly embodies narrative art through his less rigid, more youthful and effeminate rendering of …show more content…
Because marble is fragile and quite susceptible to damage, these are in place to keep the statue standing. However, aside from needing structural support, marble does not allow for certain freedoms that bronze permits. If a finger was individually pointed or wrapped around a sword as seen with David, it would not endure. This is not to say that every stylistic difference is due to the material limitations; however, it does play a role in the degree of separation that is feasible between appendages (as seen by the closeness of the arms to the torso on Polykleitos). Moreover, marble could not sustain luscious and wavy hair, providing a physical justification for the closeness of Doryphorus’s hair to his scalp (as compared to David). However, other than material capability, why would Donatello choose such a stark contrast to the male ideal when portraying a heroic figure? This contrast has been referenced yet the vital explanations for difference come to fruition through an analysis of narrative. What story is Donatello
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.
Anticipated similarities exist between the Roman copy of Doryphorus and Donatello’s David, for the former replicates a product of Classical Greece while the latter is reminiscent of this artistic epoch (The Renaissance was a “re-birth” of this classical form). However, though formal qualities of Classical Greece may be present in David, they are uncharacteristically fashioned; therefore, major degrees of difference are established in terms of characterization. While Doryphorus is a typical example of reconciling idealism and naturalism, Polykleitos does not provide a depth of narrative subtext to this figure. On the other hand, Donatello overtly characterizes David through his effeminate if not androgynous form to deliver a powerful narrative (Duro). From the stance and posture of each sculpture to the use of nudity, Polykleitos’s Doryphorus and Donatello’s David present similarities accountable for in a historical context; however, the obvious structural differences must be
The Statue of a kouros represents a Greek male. With one foot forward, the statue at the same time, represents movement and is able to stand on it own. This also gives the over life size figure, visible weight. In this early figure, geometric forms seem to predominate, and anatomical details, such as the chest muscles and pelvic arch, are presented with somewhat of exaggerated lines. Although the exaggerated lines show where these muscles belong, the detail is still missing. Looking up and down this nude body, at this miss proportioned and lacking of detail body, the hair is what grabs my attention. The hair is carved with detail not noticeable in the rest of the body. As well, although the fists are clinched and still bonded to the body, the legs and elbows are separated. The ability to move around and inspect the statue makes a big difference than if it was up against a wall, or just looking at its picture. The legs, which support the weight of the statue, have a visible strength which is seen in the knees. The head is what carried the most detail, the ears although to far back, are intricately designed. It is the ability to walk around the entire statue that allows me to see the different aspects and places where attention to detail was placed. However, he does not expand into three dimensional space; he has a closed-off, column-like appearance
Sculpture is a medium that artists in ancient Greek commonly used to express spoken truths in an unspoken form. Every piece of ancient Greek sculpture has more than what the eye sees to explain the story behind the [in this case] marble.
Most men enlisted in the military not only seem more appealing to father’s with daughters needing a husband, but also to those who wish to live the luxurious life in the military because of the funding of companies for the military. Another characteristic of the ideal man is excellent social skills and the ability to have strong business, personal, and romantic relationships. Along with being married into elevated status, Christian contained the beauty most didn’t possess, making him an ideal renaissance man. However, besides physical beauty, another characteristic held in high esteem was poetic eloquence, intelligence and knowledge. These qualities could and often did lead to a life full of luxury; for example, Cyrano didn’t exactly have the physical beauty but contained the beauty of the mind and ability to express his emotions, which is partially why he had a big name and elevated status.
The statue is made of marble, instead of the bronze statue. This statue is one of the earliest marble statues of a human figure carved in Attica. The statue is a kind of symbol; he does not in any way a likeness. This is my first expression when I saw the statue: the statue is showing me a simple, clear action that was used by Greek youth sculptures throughout this period. Looking at this statue, he expanded into 3D space, because he is standing straight and facing forward without any exaggerated movements, thus the post makes him look closed-off and a column his limbs are locked in space. Therefore, the standing posture, the decorations on his body, his hair and knee’s texture and how the Egyptians impact Greek art, is what makes me interested in it. A question that has always been in my mind is
Where one is a bronze statue with a singular figure, the other is a painting with a central figure, from which the story is built. However, their contrasts go beyond what they are made of, to their different subjects and their complexity. Donatello’s David shows youthful beauty and strength, which he confidently exudes through his body language. Standing with one foot atop Goliath’s severed head while turning his body to balance his weight to the other leg, this statue is a clear example of Contrapposto, which the Greeks invented and introduced into their sculptures. Donatello’s statue of David stands triumphant and proudly atop his trophy, while telling the audience I am the conqueror of Giants. His expression is stern to match his
Painted in Rome in the style of Neo-Classicism, Jacques Louis David’s Oath of the Horatii is one of the better-known examples of art produced by this artist of eclectic styles. This painting was hailed as the manifesto of a new school based on the fervent study of the antique and a return to classical techniques in the late 18th century. In this painting, completed in 1785 as an oil on canvas, David (DA-VEED) successfully coalesces the nascent and confused ideology of the Neo-Classical movement in a dramatic portrayal of the Horatii brothers swearing their allegiance to the state as their father stands with swords held high for them to grasp. An analysis of the painting’s historical background, and an evaluation of the lines, colors, and subject matter, will illustrate why Oath of the Horatii represents the defining characteristics of the Neo-Classical period.
A good deal is known about Donatello's life and career, but little is known about his character. Donatello was born in Florence, Italy in 1386 and died in 1466; he was never married and had no children. He was a master of sculpture in bronze and marble and is considered to be one of the greatest Italian Renaissance artists of his time. The first sculpture is of Donatello?s David, 1425-1430. Its material is bronze and stands 5? 2 ¼? and is currently located at Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence. The sculpture is a nude and is contrapposto. The scene being depicted is after the clash with Goliath. Donatello?s statue of David was the first large scale, free-standing nude statue of the Renaissance. The sculpture helps to strike a balance between classicism and the realism by presenting a very real image of a boy in the form of a classical nude figure. Although Donatello was inspir...
Throughout Antigone, Electra, and Medea, many double standards between men and women surface. These become obvious when one selects a hero from these plays, for upon choosing, then one must rationalize his or her choice. The question then arises as to what characteristics make up the hero. How does the character win fame? What exactly is excellent about that character? These questions must be answered in order to choose a hero in these Greek tragedies.
Learning is best when it is hands on training, and the same also apply to seeing arts in person. In 1986, Minneapolis Institute of Art adopted the sixth version of “The Doryphoros” which is the “Spear Bearer” by Polykleitos. The sculpture dates 120-50 BCE. The original medium is bronze, but the Roman made it out of marble because it is less expensive. Also, it is also easy to recast the figure. They were intrigued with this sculpture so they stole the art, and made numerous copies of the statue all over Rome. Even though the sculpture is a marble copy, the sculptor did an excellent job on emulating and modeling this monument for people to look, examine and compare it with the original one. It is a pleasure to see the sculpture standing tall in front of me. The sculpture looks as beautiful as a model who is about to pose for a picture
The primary function of monumental portraits in Ancient Rome was to honor political figures of power through repeating social and political themes. The Romans expressed these themes through a form of “realism”. Relics of this era were found depicting the elderly conservative nobility that lived through civil disruptions and war, elaborately individualized through detail of the face expression. Through the features of grimacing heaviness, wrinkles, and effects of old age, the Romans were able to express the reality of their political situation felt by the people whose faces were sculptured into stone. Furthermore, Nodelman discusses the use of sculpture portraits to depict the ideology behind Roman conservative aristocracy. Artists would portray the virtues of gravitas, dignities, and fides, through the use to physical expression and symbolic meaning, rather than through words. A statue of Augustus, for instance, displays the militaristic, powerful, godly perception of the conservative ideology through the use of symbolic detail. The decorative, rich, military outfit on Augustus, represents the power of the military and Augustus’s role as imperator in it. The freely held masculine arm and pointing gesture towards the horizon are Rome’s expanding dreams, clashing with the overall powerful and sturdy stance of the body. The bare feet bring about the impression
Michelangelo’s David does not react with the surroundings but it stands alone with the little movements disguised behind it. The sculpture brings out David as a soldier preparing for war and not a person engaged in a battle (Miller, Vandome, & McBrewster, 2010). The hands are larger than normal and the arms are longer than his body. This is meant to illustrate the renaissance period. In contrast, the Bernini’s David has aspects of motion, showing that he was already engaged in the battle with Goliath. The idea of movement is enhanced by the loosely flowing robes. In addition, the sculpture demonstrates that unlike Michelangelo’s David that has longer hands, Bernini’s David has contracted muscles. The Michelangelo’s sculpture was created during Renascence period while the Bernini’s sculpture was done during the Baroque period.
Plutarch described this readily enough. “He had also a noble dignity of form; and a shapely beard, a broad forehead, and an aquiline nose were thought to show the virile qualities peculiar to the portraits and statues of Hercules.” It is challenging to envision higher acclaim, but easy to see how such influence touches the masses and sets the table in our vision of
The sculpture is a Roman copy of the original Greek bronze made by artist Polykleitos in 450BC. It is recorded that he made the Doryphoros as an example of perfect proportion. He wrote a book to accompany the statue called, "The Cannon of Proportion, " and countless artists copied the statue because of its perfection. This regal figure was named Doryphoros (Greek for "spearbearer") because it originally held a long spear in its left hand.