Sculpting is a popular form of art. The Seated Statue of Gudea and Statue of Memi and Sabu are two examples of sculpted work. The two statues are different but have similar levels of detail, with the Seated Statue of Gudea being more detailed. While both statues look rather serene and peaceful, the intentions for them appear to be completely different. The Seated Statue of Gudea can possibly be interpreted as a form of propaganda while the Statue of Memi and Sabu can be interpreted as a sign of partnership in a marriage. A big reason why the Statue of Memi and Sabu might represent a marriage is because it is a pair statue and a relationship is recorded (Anonymous, 2006). According to the Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History, pair statues usually represent a husband and wife, especially when the relationship between the husband and …show more content…
Gudea ruled the city-state of Lagash from 2150-2125 B.C. (Anonymous, 2006). According, once again, to Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History, the Akkadian empire had just recently collapsed and Gudea was one of the rulers to take over during the following 50 years (2006). It makes sense, because of the likely uncertainty in the empire during that time, that Gudea would want images of himself as a serene and reserved ruler spread throughout his lands. This statue is one of the statues commissioned during that time. Gudea is shown as seated peacefully with his hands clasped over his knees. There is fine detail on his headpiece and what appears to be some kind of ancient script inscribed on his clothing. Does the statue actually indicate how Gudea ruled? Not really. It is something he commissioned, which means he paid for it to be made. This gives him a lot of say in how he would be depicted. So, the only thing someone could conclude from the statue is that it looks very well-made and Gudea certainly does look peaceful and kingly in
Gudea is the other ruler whose legacy can be defined through art work. He ruled the Sumerian City state of Lagash and had his statue, architectural masterpieces in the form of temples and carvings in the region. The new temples that he erected had his paintings and drawings as a show of his authority in
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 Guanyin sculpture depicts a male, interpretable by his male chest, seating in a royal-ease pose. He has a crown, which has a person in the meditative position carved on it. That person could be Buddha. Underneath the crown, the hair looks as though it is nicely braided along the edges of the crown. The eyes are partially closed. There are two pieces of objects, perhaps used to depict jewelry, attached to
The Ancient Egyptian sculpture, “Statue of Nykara and His Family”, was sculpted during the late fifth dynasty. The sculpture is a depiction of Nykara, his wife, Nubkau, and son, Ankhma-Re. The statue is in poor condition with pieces of limestone missing and chips on the three subject’s faces and bodies. The painted limestone shows the conventional colors for the male and female subjects. There is a clear discoloration among Nykara and his son’s bodies. The brownish red color they once were has eroded to a light yellowish color, which resembles the purposeful color of Nykara’s wife. The hieroglyphs on Nykara’s seat insinuate that the sculpture is meant to be viewed from the front view. This is also evident by the way the three subjects are facing forward in frontal view. There are hieroglyphs on both the chair and base of the statue near Nykara’s wife and son’s feet.
The process by which this particular statue was created involved using a method developed by Kaikei, a Japanese sculptor. It was a groundbreaking process that involved carving different pieces of wood separately and then joining them together (“Amida”). Instead of using a single object for creating a sculpture, multiple parts could be used to make the statue easier to construct and put together. After the parts were all joined together, the statue was covered in a lacquer finish and gilt was added to the face to give it the golden look.
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 this paper I am exploring “Portrait of Augustus as general” and “Khafre enthroned”. From exploring and getting to know the Statues in my Art History Book I have compared these statues (Kleiner, 2013). The first and most obvious similarity between the two is in the artists’ idealization and immortalization of their subjects. Both Khafre and Augustus are portrayed in an idealized manner, designed to give the impression of nobility, timelessness, and divinity. The two statues were the political advertisements of their times that showed the public images of reliable leaders who one
Viewing the Lansdowne Hermes with a naked eye and what you will see is a larger than life-size statue depicting a man with an ideal body leaning with the majority of his weight on his right foot. His right arm is resting on his right buttock in an almost effortless pose. The left side of his body tells a different story. His left foot has barely any weight on it, and his left arm is supporting a pretty large portion of cloth wrapped so it perfectly wraps around the shoulder and rests just above the wrist. It appears that he was at one time holding some sort of sword or stick. To the naked eye that is what this sculpture seems to be, accepting a sculpture as a piece of art. Glancing at the Lansdowne Hermes you can appreciate beauty of art for beauty of art. However the sculptor had much more in mind when he created this figure from a large unscathed piece of marble.
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
The Egyptians created Ramesses’ statue 1279-1212 B.C. using granodiorite. The statue is currently being exhibited at the Museum of Fine Arts Houston. Its dimensions withouts a base are 59 3/4 x 23 1/2 x 30 inches (seems bigger than life-size). One must look at the statue from various sides in order to see its entirety. Ramesses II, known also as Ramesses the Great, ruled Egypt for over sixty years. there are thousands of statues made in his honor to proclaim his power and divinity.
Egyptian art is infamous across the world - classified by the monumental pyramids, and the Sphinx. Although these are both valid forms of Egyptian art, they do not make up the entire artistic history of the country. On the contrary, perhaps the most replicated example of classic Egyptian art, from the Old Kingdom, can be found in their rendering of the human form. An interest in portraiture developed early in Egypt. (Gardner, 75) Whether painted on pottery, or cut into rock, the figures all had notably Egyptian characteristics. "The seated statue is one of only a very small number of basic formulaic types employed by the sculptors of the Old Kingdom." (Gardner, 75)
Both of these pieces of art have much in common. Their functions are almost identical. Both were used to mark burial sites and to honor the deceased buried there. The body language of both the pieces’ figures are similar, with one seated and several others standing around them. Neither has color, but unlike the grave stele, the funerary banquet does show some degree of emotion. The figures in the banquet scene have slight smiles. These pieces played an important role in their times, honoring those who had passed on to the afterlife. For both of these people, it was important to memorialize them very similar to our practices today.
Carved from alabaster the over-life-sized statue shows a idealized depiction of ruler Khafre sitting eloquently in his throne. Riddled with indicative symbols and motifs the written language of the ancient Egyptians allows for historian to interoperate the meanings and purpose of the sculpture, and decipher the statements of divinity and the king power left behind by this ancient people. This funerary statue represents Khafre’s eternity a well as utilizing the expensive material as a testament of his importance and
Given as a gift by the French people, the Statue of Liberty is a national monument of the U.S. Standing on her pedestal in the New York harbor in Liberty Island. At first, she was just a thought by a French sculptor, who was visiting New York, he thought of this as a place for liberty and justice. Then, a few years later, the major project between the two countries began. The French shall build the sculpture, while us American’s built the pedestal. This agreement started it all.