It wasn't always like that, though. Mycenaean artifacts, whether painted, sculpted or carved, are quite different. In some cases they're gorgeous, but their perspective is quite naive. Case in point:
What caused the change? Maybe it was a foreign influence. Maybe some people just had more leisure time. The only obvious conclusion is that things were in flux.
2 comments:
I love looking at images of Mycenaean and Minoan artworks but I can't say I've thought much about how the styles developed over time. It's certain that the Golden Mean was a great discovery that would never have arrived without the appreciation of beauty and form in nature.
The Minoans preceeded the Mycenaean. When I indulged in a little Minoan art history, saddened as always that so little is left to us to study, I came across a quote from R. Higgins, an art historian:
Perhaps the greatest contribution of the Bronze Age to Classical Greece was something less tangible; but quite possibly inherited: an attitude of mind which could borrow the formal and hieratic arts of the East and transform them into something spontaneous and cheerful; a divine discontent which led the Greek ever to develop and improve his inheritance.
The cultures did produce gorgeous artworks. You're right that Greek--and related--art shows the influence of close observation of nature, and what must have been a love of the beauty found in nature.
Some Minoan art looks kind of Egyptian, although it may have just been a common practice to draw people in full profile before they figured out 3/4 profile. Nonetheless, it is fascinating to see how they put things togehter.
That's an interesting observation from Reynold Higgins. There are some works where the creator's excitement is palpable even thousands of years later.
Post a Comment