Consider the art and architecture of the Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians, and the Persians: What did these major civilizations of Mesopotamia have in common? What were their differences? What is the relationship between art and survival? If life depended on the art that was created, what form of art would be most appropriate?
Art History Question for SMART People?
While i am in no way a "smart" person, and despise the tag, I think there is a somewhat obvious link between all civilisations and art.
In the abstract that link is inspiration and purpose.
In the concrete (oh look at the post-modernists shudder) that's god and women (with most famous artists unfortunately male and all).
Most of the civilisations you mention where polytheistic (the exception being the Persians to a degree), and the link between art and gods (re: pleasing them) is pretty established - indeed the Western world's most famous art period - the Italian renaissance is almost exclusively religious.
From here the link with survival is obvious. Particularly in polytheistic, but also monotheistic, societies, the act of pleasing gods related directly to you crops, fertility, survival and whether or not your local sports team won. So ignore you gods at your peril.
As for your final question, i think the above explanation answers it. These societies lives depended on their organisation, and their gods, so the art they created necessarily was the most appropriate for their survival - from the great 5 legged Assyrian winged horses (so they had appropriate amounts of legs from front and side on) to the Stone of Hammurabi, which set out "an eye for an eye" on a glorious stone obelisk - both can be seen in the Louvre - it all served that purpose.
buck teeth
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment